Notice

Small, Lightweight Trace Explosives Detector: Competition Document

Updated 18 March 2024

© Crown copyright 2024

This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected].

Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

This publication is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/competition-small-lightweight-trace-explosives-detector/small-lightweight-trace-explosives-detector-competition-document

1. Introduction:

This Defence and Security Accelerator (DASA) competition is seeking proposals for the development of novel, lightweight, bioassay systems for the detection of trace explosives. Systems to be considered for this competition will encompass novel transduction platforms, consumables and swab-based sample inputs for the trace detection of three specified explosives targets. Systems should have the potential to be developed in the future to detect additional (ideally up to 10) substances of relevance to Defence and Security, e.g. additional explosives and other small molecule targets.

1.1 Details

The market for explosives detection equipment provides the end-user with the ability to detect and identify visible and non-visible (trace) explosives threats. Samples are collected from the surface of the item in question by using a generic sample collection material (e.g. a swab), and analysed by the detection system; an example of this is an airport trace explosives detection system. However, current trace detection equipment has a significant size, weight and power (SWaP) footprint.

Biological assays lend themselves to a low SWaP and can be used in some applications for sensing molecular explosives, however to date they have not been optimised for trace detection of explosives. The purpose of this competition is therefore to develop innovative platforms for the trace detection of explosives using biological assays. To this end, existing antibody reagents will be made available to successful bidders (subject to necessary approval and on a case by case basis[footnote 1] and supplied as government furnished equipment (GFE) and government furnished information (GFI) to be used specifically for the project. Proposals for systems using other types of biological reagents will be considered, providing they meet the requirements of the competition.

The output from this competition will be a small, lightweight platform that can be used for the detection of trace explosives or as a confirmation assay that could be used with other trace explosives detection methods. The SWaP and logistic burden of the desired platform will be similar to that of a pocket-sized presumptive test kit.

For successful, funded proposals, three antibodies and corresponding hapten-protein conjugates based on the target materials, will be made available under contract (as GFE), subject to necessary approvals and on a case-by-case basis[footnote 1] Details of the binding profiles using a competitive ELISA format will be provided to all successful suppliers in receipt of GFE[footnote 1] to inform experimental design.

Proposals for platforms that use other suitably specific biological recognition elements and / or other biologically driven recognition approaches will also be accepted and the GFE antibodies can also be made available under contract to these suppliers, if successful (subject to necessary approval and on a case by case basis[footnote 1], as a benchmark. If the use of alternate biological elements is proposed the use of the supplied antibody reagents is highly desirable as a cross-platform performance benchmark, if applicable to the transduction methodology. Explosives solution standards will not be provided, but details of suitable suppliers will be made available to successful bidders. 

Delivery from the competition will be a small, lightweight system, encompassing a novel transduction platform, consumables and swab-based sample input as part of the system at a minimum technology readiness level of 4 (TRL 4), target of TRL 6, which could be rapidly exploited (i.e. reach TRL 9 within two years of project completion). The platform must be capable of multiplex detection of at least three specified targets initially, although the platform should be expandable to detect a wider range of targets (ideally up to 10) in one test in the future.

It is required that two prototypes of the platform will be delivered, along with details of the testing methodology and sufficient information, including training materials, and consumables to perform a total of 200 tests. These prototypes will be used by the UK and US after project completion to verify the platform’s performance (detection performance and mobile usability). If any part of the system is reusable, this must be clearly detailed and fewer items may be submitted as deliverables, provided this is clearly justified in the proposal and sufficient consumables are provided for the UK and US to perform a total of 200 tests.    

The project should be completed within a maximum of 12 months.

MOD and / or DOD may wish to source additional consumables and / or platforms for further testing, and as such the final deliverable must include a scalable costing and detail the time required for the supply of future materials. This should not be considered a route to procurement or manufacture.

1.2 This competition is funded by UK MOD and US DOD

This competition is jointly funded by the UK Ministry of Defence (MOD) and the US Department of Defense (DOD), the relationship will operate under and be governed by an extant memorandum of understanding (MOU) between both nations. Both the MOD and DOD will have access to proposals submitted under this competition in order to jointly assess which proposals to fund.

2. Competition key information

2.1 Submission deadline

12:00 Midday on 9 April 2024 (BST)

2.2 Where do I submit my proposal?

Via the DASA Online Submission Service for which you will require an account. Only proposals submitted through the DASA Online Submission Service will be accepted.

2.3 Total funding available

The total possible funding available for this competition is £600,000 (exc. VAT) for project(s) of a maximum duration of 12 months. One to two proposals will be funded in this competition.

We expect to fund two proposals of up to £300,000 (exc. VAT) each in value. However, DASA reserves the right to fund one outstanding bid up to £600,000 (exc. VAT) that exceeds the requirements of the competition, for example offering one or more of the following:

  • demonstration of significant sensitivity to materials of interest (exceeding the sub-nanogram (sub-ng) detection performance of current immunodiagnostic devices); proposals demonstrating very high sensitivity will be favoured;

  • rapid expansion of additional targets through multiplexing while maintaining sensitivity / specificity;

  • optimised and ergonomic surface sampling swab from which the sample can be extracted using a minimal amount of buffer;

  • adaptable in the future to collect other sample types e.g. vapours and aerosols.

Proposals are invited for platforms that can be developed through one phase of funding. It is not anticipated that there will be a follow-on phase for this competition.

3. Supporting events

3.1 Dial-in session

Thursday 8 February 2024 – A dial-in session providing further detail on the problem space and a chance to ask questions in an open forum. If you would like to participate, please register on the Eventbrite page.

3.2 One-to-one teleconference sessions

Thursday 15 & Tuesday 20 February 2024 – A series of 15 minute one-to-one teleconference sessions, giving you the opportunity to ask specific questions. If you would like to participate, please register on the Eventbrite page. Booking is on a first come first served basis.

4. Competition Scope

4.1 Background: Innovative trace detection system providing the end-user with small, lightweight trace detection capability

Trace detection systems allow end-users to detect and identify non-visible (trace) levels of materials from surfaces and / or items relating to Defence and Security, e.g. resulting from a suspected improvised explosive device. There are existing technologies that provide this capability, however they tend to have a large SWaP footprint. Pocket-sized systems such as chemical test kits that are used for presumptive identification have a much lower SWaP, but perform less well than larger systems. Kits based on biological reagents have the potential to offer greater assurance and performance than chemical test kits while requiring much less SWaP than current electronic systems.

We are looking for innovative solutions that will incorporate modern sampling and reader formats into a platform that is capable of the trace detection of at least three specified target explosives materials (future iterations of the platform should be able to detect ideally up to 10 explosives and / or other small molecule threats). Such platforms should ideally exploit existing antibody reagents; three antibodies, anti-TNT, anti-RDX, anti-PETN and their corresponding hapten-protein conjugates will be supplied as government furnished equipment (GFE) to successful bidders (subject to necessary approval and on a case by case basis[footnote 1]. Details of the binding profiles of these reagents as single reagents and in combination using a competition ELISA format will be provided to all successful suppliers in receipt of the GFE, as government furnished information (GFI) to inform experimental design.

Proposals for platforms that aim to demonstrate the potential benefits of other suitably specific biological recognition elements and / or other biologically driven recognition approaches will also be accepted. If the use of alternate biological elements is proposed the use of the supplied antibody reagents is highly desirable as a cross-platform performance benchmark, if applicable to the transduction methodology. Explosives solution standards will not be supplied but details of suppliers will be made available to successful bidders. See Competition Challenge section for details of what will be provided.

Platforms should be easily expandable in the future to incorporate a broader multiplexed capability for the detection of additional explosives and / or other small molecule threats, ideally up to 10. Proposals should explain how and to what extent platforms could be customised, e.g. sample introduction, readout, maximum number of multiplexed channels. Where possible they should also describe any impacts / considerations of the overall platform performance e.g. change to sensitivity upon multiplexing, increase in SWaP. The process for modifying target ranges should also be described, e.g. whether customising the selection of targets that are multiplexed is achieved through a straightforward swap of reagents e.g. through consumables, customisation during production, or a more involved developmental process.

Novel transduction and readout is expected, to either enhance performance or provide additional information on targets detected. Prior technology performance data, ideally demonstrating the sensitivity of the proposed approach for the detection of small single epitope molecules, should be included where possible.

Examples of improvements we are seeking through this competition are:

  • Usability: Development of an easy to use, trace detection system that is of a similar burden to a colorimetric test kit. Systems will require minimal intervention from the end user, for example the kit will process one sample to analyse against multiple antibody based assays, specific to different targets of interest, providing an unambiguous result on substances present.

  • Performance: Maximise the efficiency of the system produced, from surface sampling and sample extraction efficiency to the signal transduction leading to the assay result. One example is for innovations that provide a positive response assay rather than the more common, less intuitive response seen in competitive antibody assays for small molecules, where signal outputs are inversely proportional to the analyte concentration.

  • Sensitivity: Dynamic range to detect / identify from visible (~milligrams (mg)) to non-visible (sub-ng) quantities of material sampled from a range of surfaces.

  • Format: A pocket size up to small handheld (up to 20x20x10 cm) platform maintaining the SWaP / usability benefits of antibody assays, but optimised for highly sensitive detection of trace level contaminants from surfaces.

  • Sampling: Ability to sample trace particle contamination from a wide range of surfaces and efficiently analyse this using the small, lightweight detection system. Details of suitable swabs will be provided to successful bidders.

  • Logistics: Ensure a low price point for platforms / consumables and ease of sourcing spares and consumables. Engineering of packaging and reagents to enable them to be stored and used in a wide range of environments and temperatures, easily transported without the risk of damage to the system or consumables. Minimisation of requirement for maintenance and calibration.

Further detail is provided in the Competition Challenge section.

4.2 Scope

The scope of this competition is for the development of an innovative, low-burden / SWaP footprint detection system that can collect trace levels of explosive material from surfaces around areas of interest (e.g. rooms, items etc.) and then process the collected trace on a platform using a biological assay. This will provide rapid and easy to understand output information in-situ such as detect / no detect and identification of the detected substance. An example of this could be a trace detector with a similar weight and logistic burden to a colorimetric test kit up to the size of a small handheld device. The system developed through this competition will demonstrate multiplex detection of at least three targets, a narrow range of targets compared to that of a standard trace detector system. However, it will have the ability to multiplex to provide detection of a wider range of targets (ideally up to 10) in the future.

For those planning to develop an antibody approach, three antibodies, anti-TNT, anti-RDX, anti-PETN, and corresponding hapten-protein conjugates that have been used as targets in competitive assays for sensing explosives in solution will be made available to successful bidders (subject to necessary approval and on a case by case basis[footnote 1]. The reagents will be made available as government-furnished equipment (GFE), along with the relevant government furnished information (GFI) regarding their use.

For those using other specific biological reagents, these should be towards the targets as described in this competition document (TNT, RDX and PETN). Details must also be provided in the proposal about how the reagent set can be expanded to include other small molecule targets. In addition, where possible, use of the supplied antibody reagents is strongly encouraged in order to provide performance comparison across platforms.

Whichever approach is taken it should be possible to demonstrate that the system can detect sub-ng amounts of molecular organic explosives; TNT, RDX and PETN as a minimum. For any non-antibody based biological approaches, the performance (selectivity, sensitivity) should at least match, if not exceed, the sub-ng detection performance of current immunodiagnostic devices.

In this competition, all aspects of the system (provided in more detail in the Competition Challenge section) are important, from sample collection to the assay, to high sensitivity transduction of the material-specific detect / no detect result. The ability to indicate the approximate amount of material detected is also of interest but lower priority. The competition is particularly interested in:

  • development of a low SWaP, molecular explosives trace detection platform based on biological reagents;

  • innovative methods to maximise the signal transduction output in the presence of a target molecule;

  • a system that is easy to operate and which generates results that are straightforward to interpret by a non-scientific user.

Innovations can either be unpowered or powered, or a hybrid e.g. a modular approach with a small unpowered reader and a powered module providing increased functionality and detection performance. In all solutions the SWaP burden should be justified by the additional performance / usability provided. Sensitivity performance of the proposed solutions is prioritised over ultimate low SWaP.

Proposals should include a clear exploitation plan, which details the optimisation of the platform performance, usability, ergonomics of use, safety or training considerations for use in presence of explosives, and hardening that would be required for a final exploitable product. Areas of hardening include suitably long storage for consumables, ability to tolerate indoors and outdoors usage and robustness against dropping / crushing. The exploitation plan should demonstrate how the system will be developed to be easily usable in operational environments with respect to ease of sampling and the introduction of sample into the platform.

Innovations must be primarily relevant to the Defence and Security-relevant requirement, but do not have to be exclusive to Defence and Security. Civil applications can be identified as potential exploitation pathways where appropriate e.g. detection of drugs of abuse.

5. Competition Challenge

This competition has one challenge.

5.1 Challenge 1

This challenge is for the development of a small, lightweight trace detection platform, which together with the consumables and swab-based sample input, will form part of a system that is capable of multiplex detection of at least three targets (TNT, RDX, PETN) from one sample, with the ability to expand the number of available targets (ideally up to 10) in the future. The system needs to be exploitable in military and security related applications.

It is anticipated that new trace detection platforms developed for this call will fulfil a significant number of the following requirements. While proposals should address the requirements as comprehensively as possible, mandatory requirements are denoted with an asterisk (*).

Usability:

  • *Simple to operate, providing unambiguous detection / identification results that can be interpreted by a non-scientific operator

  • *Test reagents will be safe for use, requiring no more than basic personal protective equipment (PPE) e.g. nitrile gloves

  • Where practicable the use of hazardous chemicals is avoided

  • Low training burden for operation; any materials required for training provided by manufacturer

  • Ability to record test information, i.e. if the system generates metadata then it must be available for retrospective analysis

  • *Device must be operable while wearing PPE e.g. nitrile gloves

  • *Internal performance verification (e.g. control line / indication to show the test has functioned correctly)

  • Can be used in poor lighting conditions

Performance:

  • *Sensitivity for trace particles; dynamic range to detect / identify from visible (~mg) to non-visible (sub-ng) quantities of material sampled from a range of surfaces

  • *Ability to add further Defence and Security targets following development of prototype

  • *Multiplexing of a minimum of three and ideally up to 10 targets for initial platform with demonstration of the three GFE targets as a minimum

  • *Minimal impact on sensitivity from multiplexing; any impact in sensitivity from multiplexing needs to be described in the proposal

  • *Non-specific binding rates of less than 2%

  • *Ability to produce correct results on samples collected from operational (e.g. dirty) surfaces

  • *Result within 2 minutes of starting the test, faster desirable

Format:

  • *Small hand-held system (maximum size 20x20x10 cm); smaller sizes are preferred and proposals should include considerations of trade-offs between performance and system size

  • Ergonomic design to enable easy handling and insertion of sample by one operator while in use, or exploitation plan describing refinement of design following delivery of the prototype platform

Sampling:

  • *Easy to handle packaging and sampling whilst wearing nitrile gloves, with low risk of cross contamination of consumables

  • *Generic sample collection material (e.g. fabric swab, cotton bud) for collection of trace particles from a variety of smooth and textured surfaces; details of suitable collection materials will be provided to successful bidders

  • The collection material should not be an integral part of the platform, unless it can be demonstrated that it does not impact the handling or flexibility during sampling

  • Optionally the swab can be retained for testing after sample collection, or, preservation of the assay consumable for testing by orthogonal method following analysis in laboratory

  • The process of taking the sample should be straightforward, i.e. users of current trace explosives detection systems that are familiar with swabbing should be capable of sample collection and introduction into the system without additional training

Logistics:

  • *If batteries are required, use of standard consumables e.g. AA, or swappable internal battery that can be easily charged using a universal charger such as USB-C

  • If batteries are required, operable on battery for an eight hour working day

  • *Long lifetime consumables, minimum one year shelf-life however significantly longer lifetime desirable

  • *Sub-ambient temperatures (fridge, freezer) should not be required for storage

  • *Operable at temperatures between -5 °C to 45 °C

Successful suppliers will be provided, subject to approvals and on a case-by-case basis, with up to a maximum of 10 mg of each of the three antibodies and 1 mg of each of the three corresponding hapten-protein conjugates for use in their project[footnote 1]. If additional antibody or conjugate is likely to be required, this will need to be stated with justification in the proposal.

Explosives solution standards will not be provided, but details of suitable suppliers will be made available to successful bidders.

We expect proposals to contain prior technology performance data, ideally demonstrating the sensitivity of the proposed approach for the detection of small, single epitope molecules.  

Proposals should also contain clear exploitation routes to market, including details of product development that will be expected following development of a working prototype platform.

Proposals should detail how the project will be completed within 12 months.

The primary aim of this competition is for the development of a small, lightweight detection platform; we expect proposals to provide innovative solutions that ensure the maximum performance (sensitivity) is achieved from biological assays.

Technologies will need to show consideration for development / deployment against the Defence Lines of Development (DLOD). The DLOD provide a mechanism for co-ordinating the parallel development of different aspects of capability that need to be brought together to create a real military capability namely: Training, Equipment, Personnel, Information, Concepts & Doctrine, Organisation, Infrastructure and Logistics (i.e. sustainability).

We expect there to be a clear application of the technology to both the military and security sectors.

For the purposes of this competition, limit of detection (LOD) is defined as the lowest mass (e.g. picogram (pg), nanogram (ng), microgram (µg)) of an analyte that can be reliably detected.

5.2 We are interested in…

We want novel ideas to benefit end-users working in UK and US Defence and Security. Your proposal should include evidence of:

  • innovation or a creative approach

  • prior technology performance data, ideally demonstrating the sensitivity of the proposed approach for the detection of small single epitope molecules

  • ability of supplier to produce a commercial end product

  • consideration of eventual scalability and translation

  • a clear system design, from sampling of trace from a surface to reporting of a clear unambiguous result

  • clear demonstration of how the proposed work applies to defence and security contexts

5.3 We are not interested in…

We are not interested in proposals that:

  • do not use biologically derived detection strategies

  • use short lifetime consumables e.g. live cells with a short shelf-life

  • have a biological hazard or that will need disposal through licensed disposal routes

  • are tests offering no additional functionality over a small molecule competitive assay

  • propose a system that can only be used in a laboratory environment, or requires significant dexterity / scientific expertise

  • require specialist pipettes or laboratory equipment

  • require bespoke tools to hold sampling swab

  • have high capital / consumables costs; proposal needs to explain value for money

  • are single target assays

  • constitute consultancy, paper-based studies or literature reviews which just summarise the existing literature without any view of future innovation

  • are an unsolicited resubmission of a previous DASA bid

  • offer demonstrations of off-the-shelf products requiring no experimental development

  • offer no real long-term prospect of integration into defence and security capabilities

  • offer no real prospect of out-competing existing technological solutions

6. Accelerating and exploiting your innovation

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 depend on the nature and starting point of the innovation.

6.1 A clear route for exploitation

For DASA to consider routes for exploitation, ensure your deliverables are designed with the aim of making it as easy as possible for collaborators / stakeholders to identify the innovative elements of your proposal.

Whilst DASA recognises that early identification and engagement with potential end users during the competition is essential to implementing an exploitation plan, during the competition phase there should be no correspondence between suppliers and DASA other than via the DASA helpdesk email at [email protected], or their local Innovation Partner.

All proposals to DASA should articulate the expected development in technology maturity of the potential solution over the lifetime of the contract and how this relates to improved capability against the current known (or presumed) baseline.

6.2 How to outline your exploitation plan

Include the following information to help the assessors understand your future exploitation and how the innovation will be rapidly exploited (i.e. reach TRL 9 within two years of project completion):

  • the intended defence or 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 in later stages of development

  • any specific legal, ethical, commercial or regulatory considerations for exploitation

6.3 Is your exploitation plan long term?

Long term studies may not be able to articulate exploitation in great detail, but it should be clear that there is credible advantage to be gained from the technology development.

Include project specific information which will help exploitation. This competition is being carried out as part of a wider MOD programme and with cognisance of cross-Government initiatives. We may collaborate with organisations outside of the UK Government and this may provide the opportunity to carry out international trials and demonstrations in the future.

7. How to apply

7.1 Submission deadline

12:00 Midday on 9 April 2024 (BST)

7.2 Where do I submit my proposal?

Via the DASA Online Submission Service for which you will be required to register.
Only proposals submitted through the DASA Online Submission Service will be accepted.

7.3 Total funding available

The total funding available for this competition £600,000 (Exc. VAT) for project(s) of up to 12 months.

7.4 How many proposals will DASA fund

One to two proposals will be funded in this competition. We expect to fund two proposals of up to £300,000 (Exc. VAT) each in value. However, DASA reserves the right to fund one outstanding bid of up to £600,000 (Exc. VAT) that exceeds the requirements of the competition, for example offering one or more of the following:

  • demonstrate significant sensitivity to materials of interest (minimum of sub-ng). Proposals demonstrating very high sensitivity will be favoured

  • rapid expansion of additional targets through multiplexing while maintaining sensitivity / specificity

  • optimised and ergonomic surface sampling swab that can be extracted using a minimal amount of buffer

  • adaptable in the future to other sample types e.g. vapour and aerosol

The intended output is a project that ends at TRL 4 to 6 that can be rapidly exploited into a marketable product without the need for a further DASA funded phase, i.e. that reaches TRL 9 within two years of project completion. Additional funding for further phases to increase TRL is not expected. If there are any further phases, they will be open to applications from all innovators and not just those that submitted bids into this competition.

7.5 For further guidance

Click here for more information on our competition process and how your proposal is assessed.

Queries should be sent to the DASA Help Centre – [email protected].

8. What your proposal must include

  • the proposal should focus on the competition requirements but must also include a brief (uncosted) outline of the next stages of work required for commercial exploitation

  • 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

  • completed proposals must comply with the financial rules set for this competition. The upper-limit for this competition is £600,000 (exc. VAT). Proposals will be rejected if the financial cost exceeds this capped level

  • you must include a list of other current or recent government funding you may have received in this area if appropriate, making it clear how this proposal differs from this work

  • a project plan with clear milestones and deliverables must be provided. Deliverables must be well defined and designed to provide evidence of progress against the project plan and the end-point for this competition; they must include a final report

  • you should also plan for attendance at a kick-off meeting at the start of the contract, a mid-project event and an end of project event at the end of the contract, as well as regular reviews with the appointed Technical Partner(s) and Project Manager; bidders should plan for all face-to-face meetings to be held in the UK. After successful bids are contracted, consideration may be given to overseas meetings, if appropriate. Meetings may also take place virtually.

  • your proposal must demonstrate how you will complete all activities / services and provide all deliverables within the competition timescales (12 months). Proposals with any deliverables (including final report) outside the competition timeline will be rejected as non-compliant

9. What your resourcing plan should include

Your resourcing plan must identify, where possible, the nationalities of proposed employees that you intend to work on this phase.

In the event of a proposal being recommended for funding, DASA reserves the right to undertake due diligence checks including the clearance of proposed employees. 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.

MODREC approvals can take up to 5 months therefore you should plan your work programme accordingly. If you are unsure if your proposal will need to apply for MODREC approval, then please refer to the MODREC Guidance for Suppliers or contact your Innovation Partner for further guidance.

All proposals submitted that contain animal work will be reviewed by a Dstl veterinary surgeon and will be considered non-compliant without inclusion of appropriate information. For UK locations that are proposing use of animals under ASPA (Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986) as part of work under DASA, the location must demonstrate that they hold a Project Licence that covers the work proposed, and Establishment Licence for the location and Personal Licences for anyone carrying out the regulated procedures. International innovators proposing animal work under AAALAC should provide the equivalent documentation. For locations outside of the UK that do not have AAALAC, proposal assessment will need to include a Dstl veterinary surgeon making custom assessment of the location’s applicable national regulations, any other accreditations held by the location and the local governance systems for the location.

In addition to the GFE and GFI that will be made available to successful bidders under contract (subject to necessary approval and on a case by case basis[footnote 1], requirements for access to additional Government Furnished Assets (GFA), for example, information, equipment, materials and facilities, may be included in your proposal. DASA cannot guarantee that this additional GFA will be available. If you apply for additional GFA, you should include an alternative plan in case it is not available.

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

10. Export control for overseas partners

All relevant export control regulations will apply if a company ultimately wants to sell a developed solution to a foreign entity. All innovators must ensure that they can obtain, if required, the necessary export licences for their proposals and developments, such that they can be supplied to the UK and other countries. If you cannot confirm that you can gain the requisite licences, your proposal will be sifted out of the competition.
Additionally, if we believe that you will not be able to obtain export clearance, additional checks may be conducted, which may also result in your proposal being sifted out of the competition.

11. Cyber risk assessment

11.1 Supplier Assurance Questionnaire (SAQ)

On receipt of a ‘Fund’ decision, successful suppliers must prove cyber resilience data before the contract is awarded. The start of this process is the submission of a Supplier Assurance Questionnaire (SAQ). The SAQ allows suppliers to demonstrate compliance with the specified risk level and the corresponding profile in Def Stan 05-138, and the level of control required will depend on this risk level.

To expedite the contracting time of successful suppliers we ask all suppliers to complete the SAQ before they submit their proposal.  The SAQ can be completed here using the DASA Risk Assessment RAR-393458060 and answer questions for risk level “Very Low”.

11.2 Defence Cyber Protection Partnership

The Defence Cyber Protection Partnership (DCPP) will review your SAQ submission and respond with a reference number within 2 working days. The resulting email response from DCPP should be attached (JPG or PNG format) and included within the DASA submission service portal when the proposal is submitted. You will also be asked to enter your SAQ reference number. Please allow enough time to receive the SAQ reference number prior to competition close at 12:00 Midday on 9 April 2024 (BST).
If the proposal is being funded, the SAQ will be evaluated against the CRA for the competition, and it will be put it into one of the following categories:

  1. compliant – no further action
  2. not compliant – if successful in competition and being funded, the innovator will be required to complete a Cyber Implementation Plan (CIP) before the contract is placed, which will need to be reviewed and agreed with the relevant project manager

Innovators can enter a proposal without all controls in place, but are expected to have all the cyber protection measures necessary to fulfil the requirements of the contract in place at the time of contract award, or have an agreed Cyber Implementation Plan (CIP).

The CIP provides evidence as to how and when potential innovators will achieve compliance. Provided the measures proposed in the Cyber Implementation Plan do not pose an unacceptable risk to the MOD, a submission with a Cyber Implementation Plan will be considered alongside those who can achieve the controls.

A final check will be made to ensure cyber resilience before the contract is placed.  Commercial staff cannot progress without it. This process does not replace any contract specific security requirements.

Further guidance for completing this process can be requested by emailing the DASA Help Centre: [email protected].

Additional information about cyber security can be found at: DCPP: Cyber Security Model industry buyer and supplier guide.

12. Public facing information

When submitting your proposal, you will be required to include a title, Proposal Value Proposition Statement (PVPS) and a short abstract. The title, PVPS and abstract you provide will be used by DASA, and other government departments, to describe your project and its intended outcomes and benefits. They may be included at DASA events in relation to this competition and in documentation such as brochures. The proposal title will be published in the DASA transparency data on GOV.UK, along with your company name, the amount of funding, and the start and end dates of your contract. As this information can be shared, it should not contain information that may compromise Intellectual property.

13. How your proposal will be assessed

At Stage 1, all proposals will be checked for compliance with the competition document and may be rejected before full assessment if they do not comply. Only those proposals that demonstrate compliance against the competition scope and DASA mandatory criteria will be taken forward to full assessment.

13.1 Mandatory Criteria

The proposal outlines how it meets the scope of the competition (Within scope - Pass / Out of scope - Fail) Pass / Fail
The proposal fully explains in all three 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 proposed Pass / Fail
The proposal contains a mandatory deliverable of 1) two prototypes of a platform capable of multiplex detection of at least three targets (TNT, RDX and PETN corresponding to GFE) as a minimum and ideally up to 10 targets in the future and 2) details of the testing methodology and sufficient information, including training material, and consumables, to perform a total of 200 multiplex tests in the UK and US. If any part of the system is reusable, this must be clearly explained in the proposal in order to justify fewer items being delivered. Pass / Fail
The final deliverable must include ‘a scalable costing and timeline for the supply of future materials’ (the quoted text to be included in the Description field for the deliverable on the DASA Submission Service). Pass / Fail
The proposal identifies the need (or not) for MODREC approval Pass / Fail
The proposal identifies any GFA required for the proposed work Pass / Fail
Maximum value of proposal is £600,000 Pass / Fail
The proposal demonstrates how all research and development activities / services (including delivery of the final report) will be completed within 12 months from award of contract (or less) Pass / Fail
The bidder has obtained the authority to provide unqualified acceptance of the terms and conditions of the Contract. Pass / Fail

Proposals that pass Stage 1 will then be assessed against the standard DASA assessment criteria (Desirability, Feasibility and Viability) by subject matter experts from the MOD (including Dstl), other government departments and the front-line military commands. You will not have the opportunity to view or comment on assessors’ recommendations.

DASA reserves the right to disclose on a confidential basis any information it receives from innovators during the procurement process, which includes the full proposal, to any third party engaged by DASA for the specific purpose of evaluating or assisting DASA in the evaluation of your proposal. 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.

Innovators are not permitted to attend the Decision Conference.

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

14. Things you should know about DASA contracts: DASA terms and conditions

Please read the DASA terms and conditions which contain important information for innovators. For this competition we will be using the Innovation Standard Contract (ISC), Terms and Conditions. We will require unqualified acceptance of the terms and conditions; if applicable, please ensure your commercial department has provided their acceptance.

More information on DEFCON 705 can be found by registering on the Knowledge in Defence site.

Funded projects will be allocated a Project Manager (to run the project) and a Technical Partner, either from the UK, US or both (as a technical point of contact). In addition, the DASA team will work with you to support delivery and exploitation including, when appropriate, introductions to end-users and business support to help develop their business.

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

For this competition, £600,000 (Exc. VAT) is currently available to fund proposals. Where a proposal meets the fundable requirements for a competition, but is not funded, DASA will continue to seek funding from partners across government and shall consider your proposal fundable for 12 months from the date of the decision release. We will share the abstract, PVPS and title of your proposal with any other UK government departments that may express an interest in funding the proposal through DASA, in accordance with the competition document. If a budget holder within the MOD wishes to read the full proposal to decide if they will fund it, we will share it with them under these circumstances. If it is within 60 days of the original NOT FUNDED decision release date, we will share the full proposal with them without seeking your permission. If it is over 60 days since the original NOT FUNDED decision we will seek your permission before sharing the full proposal with them.

For other potential funders, we will seek your permission before sharing the full proposal regardless of the number of days since the original NOT FUNDED decision release.

In the event that funding becomes available, DASA may ask whether you would still be prepared to undertake the work outlined in your proposal under the same terms. Your official DASA feedback will indicate if your proposal was deemed fundable, but not awarded funding at the time.

15. Key dates

Dial-in Thursday 8 February 2024
Pre bookable 1-1 telecom sessions Thursday 15 February 2024 & Tuesday 20 February 2024
Competition closes 12:00 Midday Tuesday 9 April 2024 (BST)
Feedback release Thursday 20 June 2024
Contracting Aim to start late May 2024 and end 2 months later in mid-July 2024

16. Help: Contact the DASA Help Centre

Competition queries including on process, application, commercial, technical and intellectual property aspects should be sent to the DASA Help Centre at [email protected], quoting the competition title. If you wish receive future updates on this competition, please email the DASA Help Centre.

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 innovators.

17. Launch Webinar Questions and Answers

From Launch Webinar Thursday 8 February 2024

17.1 General questions

Q: Are there certain collaborations that are not allowed within the project scope? Are teams that include India, France as well as the UK / USA acceptable?

A: We allow any collaboration, and sub-contracting within a bid. We do require there to be one main applicant, but aside from that there can be any amount of collaboration. Individuals from certain nationalities will need to go through additional screening / vetting if successful. Please contact your Innovation Partner who will be able to answer any questions you have on these points.

Q: Could you please provide a full list of the regional DASA Innovation Partners?

A: There is a link in the competition document to a list of the DASA Innovation Partners, or you can go directly onto the main DASA website on Gov.uk. Complete an enquiry form in the ‘Contact DASA’ sections and your query will be submitted to the correct regional Innovation Partner, based on your postcode / zip code.

Q: When do you anticipate the work to commence?

A: The aim is for projects to start in mid-July 2024. See Key Dates section of the competition document.

17.2 Scope questions

Q: Can you provide some examples of use for the trace explosives detector?

A: There are good examples in the competition document for the use cases, but there are two main things to think about:

  • the collection of nonvisible samples from surfaces, to determine whether there have been explosives in contact with that surface;

  • a trace detector able to identify visible materials.

Q: Is there a particular type of environment you are hoping to deploy the detector in, e.g. a lab or an airport security gate?

A: The idea is that the device would be used in an operational environment, e.g. collecting samples from surfaces in a hotel room to see whether trace explosives were handled there. There may also be a use case for the kit in a forward deployed lab, but not in a chemistry lab. The key thing to aim for is something that can be operated in a wide range of environmental conditions, including more challenging environments. The US Irregular Warfare Technical Support Directorate (IWTSD, US DOD) works with other federal partners who would potentially have use for the device, for example airport security and forward deployed military capabilities. There is a broad range of applications for this technology.

Q: Do the prototype readers supplied as deliverables need to be battery-operated? Could they be plug-in or powered by external battery source?

A: It is not expected that platforms would necessarily require power to operate. Please bear in mind that if power is required, it should not make the system burdensome, e.g. a platform that requires external power supply during operation, which would not be desirable for this competition. If batteries are required, examples (non-exhaustive) of the types of batteries that can be used, the desired run time and details on charging can all be found in the ‘Logistics’ section of the competition document.

Q: Are non-instrumented platforms (i.e. visual readouts) acceptable / within scope?

A: The method of read-out is less important than the performance of the platform. The examples provided in the ‘What we are interested in’ section of the competition document should help define the scope. The key thing we are looking for is innovation, and performance / reliability of the readout.

Q: Does the material has to be of biological origin or can it be synthesized material which is inspired by biomolecules?

A: It depends on the details of your proposal, as that could be a broad range of things. For this call, it would be worth having a conversation with your regional Innovation Partner who will be best placed to answer specific questions about what is in scope.

Q: Is 4,000 cubic cm an absolute size cut-off for a reader, or could it be slightly larger in one dimension?

A: The platform that is delivered at the end of the project must be no larger in height, width or breadth, than the dimensions outlined in the competition document: 20x20x10 cm.

Q: Are you expecting the same level of sensitivity as the airport explosives trace detectors?

A: The performance expected is outlined in the competition document; please refer to the Competition Challenge section, under the Performance heading. It is a fairly wide range, but we are expecting trace (non-visible) detection. The key thing to talk about in your bid is expected performance; we are expecting your detector to have good levels of sensitivity.

Q: Would there be involvement from the USA personnel during the project, for valuable feedback?

A: Yes, the IWTSD anticipates being involved throughout the process. The contract management will be carried out by DASA in the UK, but IWTSD will provide support to the project.

Q: Are you only accepting proposals using biological assay? Would you consider electrochemical sensor array?

A: Biological assay in the context of this competition refers to the use of biologically derived or biologically inspired reagents or methods that can be used to identify / detect a chemical. In this case, the assay would be used to achieve detection of trace / sub-visible quantities of molecular explosive targets collected from a surface.

If the sensor assay is not biological then it would be out of scope.

There are nuances detailed within the competition document, which should confirm whether or not your proposal would be in scope. We recommend you refer to the competition document and then contact your regional Innovation Partner to discuss specific questions.

18. Supplier 1-1 Session Questions and Answers

From supplier 1-1 sessions held on 15 and 20 February 2024

18.1 General Questions

Q: What is the role of a DASA Innovation Partner?

A: DASA’s Innovation Partners are regionally based and cover all of the UK, and international suppliers. They support suppliers with any questions and guidance until submission. Go to the Contact DASA page, complete the Contact DASA form and state the Innovation Partner you would like to speak to.

Q: How are DASA project costs paid, e.g. are payments made per month / per work package, are expenses reclaimed?

A: Payments are made after completion of deliverables; you will not get paid up front. Your project can be delivered in multiple deliverables, please contact your local Innovation Partner to discuss this in more detail. 

Q: Do I need to choose to submit a proposal for either £300,000 or £600,000, or can I use one proposal to bid for both levels of funding?

A: We would need two separate proposals, rather than two options in one proposal. The competition document specifies what a £600,000 bid would need to achieve to justify that level of funding.

Please note that we cannot accept multiple bids for the same technology – if you wanted to submit more than one bid, then each of these submissions would need to be distinct from one another. If you were planning on developing the same system, but with different work packages and costs, then you will need to decide which one would best fit the competition scope and your own capabilities and go with that one. Please contact your Innovation Partner for a more in-depth discussion about this.

Q: Are there restrictions on collaborative ventures?

A: You can work with any number of collaboration partners. If it benefits the project to collaborate, we encourage it. Please note that you can also sub-contract specific project tasks as required, if it would be more cost- or resource-efficient. Please note that existing antibody reagents (GFE) and supporting information (GFI) will be made available to successful bidders (subject to necessary approval and on a case by case basis[footnote 1]) to be used specifically for the project; we recommend that innovators who are not based in or carrying out their work in the UK or the US contact the DASA Help Centre at [email protected] or book a one-to-one supplier session to discuss this, prior to starting to draft their proposal.

Q: We would need to recruit someone to deliver the project. How do we address this in a proposal?

A: The competition documents states that the completion of your project must take place within 12 months. Applicants are welcome to plan in work packages that focus on recruitment or identification of subcontractors within that timeframe. If you have yet to recruit a particular project role, then you can include the generic job title / job description in place of a named individual within the proposal. As there is a risk that you may not be able to recruit to the role, then please also include the mitigating actions you will put in place within the Risk Register. Please contact your Innovation Partner for a more in-depth discussion about this.

Q: Are there any requirements for security clearance?

A: Security checks will be carried out on research workers involved in successful projects, but no checks are required prior to submission

18.2 Scope

Q: Would aptamers be considered a suitable alternative technology to antibodies?

A: Aptamers are acceptable as long as their sensitivity and selectivity can be demonstrated, as outlined in the competition document. For any non-antibody based biological approaches, the performance (selectivity, sensitivity) should at least match, if not exceed, the sub-ng detection performance of current immunodiagnostic devices. It is desirable that the antibodies are also used within a platform for comparison across platforms, unless there are specific reasons stipulated in the proposal as to why this would not be an appropriate route e.g. the transduction mechanism precludes it. Please refer to the competition document for more details.

Q: Would we be able to test the performance of aptamers and / against antibodies?

A: Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) will be provided to successful suppliers, subject to necessary approval and on a case-by-case basis[footnote 1]. If the GFE is not required for your technology, you will be able to use it to establish a benchmark, provided the methodology allows such a comparison. It is desirable that the antibodies are also used within a platform for comparison across platforms, unless there are specific reasons stipulated in the proposal as to why this would not be an appropriate route e.g. the transduction mechanism precludes it.

Q: Does the ‘result within 2 minutes’ include the sample preparation time?

A: Two minutes is the maximum amount of time for the assay to run. It is also important that sampling is not onerous or burdensome.

Q: Is the end goal to detect 10 targets from one consumable?

A: Yes, we want to know how the number of targets detected can be increased in the future, even though we are asking for a minimum of three now. We are looking for a simultaneous readout; this is what we mean by multiplex.

Q: What cost per-unit are you aiming for?

A:  There are no fixed price boundaries stipulated, but if your consumable costs are high, the running of the system would be costly, which would be viewed less favorably.

Q: What cost of platform are you aiming for?

A: We wouldn’t expect a simple device to be costly. More complex platforms might be more expensive, but we would also expect them to deliver greater capability.

Q: If powered by a battery, is 8 hours of operation required from the battery?

A: Although we ask for up to 8 hours of operation by battery, the device would not necessarily need to be running continuously throughout this time.

Q: The requested operating temperature range is from -5 °C to 45 °C, which could be quite challenging.

A: This is a typical range of environmental conditions that the device will need to be operable in. We need to know your system has mitigations for it to be able to operate within this temperature range. If the device cannot meet these then the range of environmental conditions that is possible should be provided in a proposal.

Q: Are you looking for something mobile phone sized or a technology the size of laptop?

A: The smaller the solution the better. A laptop size would be too bulky. Aim for solution to be size that would fit in a cargo pocket. Refer to the competition document for specific dimensions.

Q: Are you looking for a fluid bio-assay, or gas based?

A: We are interested in collecting trace particles which will be processed by the assay. This needs to be a biological assay which is placed into a low burden platform. It is up to you to choose which method is most suitable for your technology.

Q: How important is it that the technology is automated?

A: The more important part of the technology is how simple the device is to use and read the outputs. There should be minimal requirement for operators to interpret the results.

Q: The competition document states on possible use of the detector could be as a confirmation technology, ‘The output from this competition will be a small, lightweight platform that can be used for the detection of trace explosives or as a confirmation assay that could be used with other trace explosives detection methods. The SWaP and logistic burden of the desired platform will be similar to that of a pocket-sized presumptive test kit.’ If used in this way, do you want those technologies on the same platform?

A: No, would need to look at that on a case-by-case basis. The aim is to keep the burden low; if any complexity is added you should consider the burden that may add to the user.

Q: Would a kit that requires components to be added, qualify? For example would a lateral flow test, similar to those used for COVID-19 testing, be acceptable?

A: A lateral flow test is perfectly acceptable. For all innovations, the lower the complexity the better. Please refer to sections 5.2 and 5.3 of the competition document for what we are and are not interested in.

Q: What does ‘transduction’ mean in terms of the competition?

A: The mechanism underlying the binding event, which triggers a response to give a readout.

Q: Are you interested in knowing the quantities identified at the different concentrations specified?

A: We are primarily interested in detection, rather than quantification. Qualitative results are beneficial, as long as the device can cope with a wide dynamic range, however this is of lower priority to the competition.

Q: Do you have any further guidance on the specificity and sensitivity required?

A: Detail is provided in the competition document.

Q: Are there restrictions on the type of intervention you’re looking for?

A: We are looking for something that is a low burden to the end user, something simple. Read-outs of the system need to be intuitive.

Q: Are there any particular improvements you are seeking to lateral flow tests?

A: We are not primarily looking for improvements to existing lateral flow assays. The aim is for suppliers to use the GFA provided in a new way that improves trace detection. This does not limit the solution to a lateral flow test, or an adaptation of an existing lateral flow test. We would like to see a platform and the GFA consumables used with it. Please refer to the Competition Challenge section for further details about what is required.

Q: The competition document suggests that the desire is to move away from competitive assays seen in many current lateral flows. How important is it to move to a sandwich assay format? What benefits do you believe this would bring?

A: It is not a requirement to move away from competitive assays, it’s a suggested improvement; e.g. sandwich assays are more user friendly. The primary aim is to find a device that meets the requirements of the competition document.

18.3 GFA

Q: Will the GFE antibodies be available in complimentary pairs?

A: There is one type of monoclonal antibody per target available as GFE; these antibodies are not paired and have been used previously in competitive assays. Please see the Launch Webinar presentation slides for more information.

Q: Have the GFE antibodies been tested and validated?

A: The antibodies have been used in the past so are a mature technology, previously used in competitive assays. They will be provided to successful bidders, subject to approval and on a case-by-case basis, under contract, in conjunction with relevant GFI to inform experimental design.

Q: Is the use of the GFE antibodies preferred?

A: It is not mandated. The competition document states that if using a non-antibody approach, a comparison should be done against the GFE antibodies so there is a cross-platform performance benchmark.

Q: Is it preferred that the GFE protein conjugate should be used?

A: It does not matter; if you can make your own conjugates it would be acceptable for you to use these instead.

Q: What is the hapten used?

A: The haptens are the small molecule equivalents of the targets that the antibodies bind to. They are attached to proteins.

18.4 Other consumables and reagents

Q: In what form are explosives standards available from commercial suppliers, and what quantities would be needed?

A: A number of companies provide explosives in dilute solutions, in solvents. Technical Partners can work with you if there are any difficulties with sourcing the solutions.

Q: Would a licence be needed to handle the explosives standard solutions?

A: No licence is required for the purpose and the form that you would be using them for.

Q: Are the explosives standards inert, or simulants?

A: Commercially available standards are dilute solutions of the actual explosive material. They are inert to explosion. The main hazard is that of the solvent that they are dissolved in, however manufacturers should provide this information as standard in the SDS (safety data sheet).

18.5 Read-out of results

Q: Does the overall solution need to be visually read as well as having a reader?

A: Not necessarily. The most important thing is the ease of use and interpretation of results; it should be simple and straightforward for a non-scientific end user to use, and not burdensome.

Q: Would it be an advantage if the device could be used either with or without a reader?

A: It depends what additional advantage the reader brings to the assay; this needs to be weighed against any added burden it might bring.

Q: Would the use of a phone app be acceptable as a reader?

A: Yes, from UK and US side it would be acceptable as long as the device fits the parameters outlined in the competition document.

18.6 Exploitation

Q: What support will there be for exploitation and how could I commercially exploit my innovation internationally?

A: There are currently no plans for further phases of funding associated with this competition, and we expect applicants to propose plans for future exploitation and routes to market, either domestic or overseas. Please contact your Innovation Partner for a more in-depth discussion about this.

Q: Are there different manufacturing requirements in the UK compared to the US?

A: No, we are accepting bids from other countries so we are expecting some manufacturing to take place outside of UK. As long as the technology is for the benefit of the UK and US, there is no preference as to where it is manufactured.

Q: What would be the expected supply volumes for reagents after deployment?

A: It is not possible to give a firm answer to that for either the UK or the US. There will be a range of users for the technology and some examples given in the competition document to refer to.

18.7 Miscellaneous

A: We would need to assess this based on what information was available. If you do not have data on sensitivity then you should think about how you can demonstrate with evidence how the required sensitivity would be achieved.

Q: Can you indicate what a real world target material look like?

A: It could be small amounts of target material / particles to be collected from surfaces.

  1. We recommend that innovators who are not based in or carrying out their work in the UK or the US contact the DASA Help Centre at [email protected] or book a one-to-one supplier session to discuss this, prior to starting their proposal. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10

Back to top