Living Foundries Advanced Tools and Capabilities for | Apply Online

Living Foundries Advanced Tools and Capabilities (ATCG) - DARPA BAA 11-60: FAQs

1) What is the name of this funding opportunity?

The opportunity is DARPA's Living Foundries Advanced Tools and Capabilities, often referenced as Living Foundries ATCG, posted under Funding Opportunity Number DARPA BAA 11-60 through DARPA's Microsystems Technology Office (MTO).

2) What is DARPA trying to achieve with Living Foundries ATCG?

The program aims to push biology toward a true engineering discipline by developing practical tools, technologies, and methods that make designing and building biological systems faster, more predictable, and more scalable. A central theme is shrinking the "design-build-test" loop in synthetic biology so more complex biological functions can be engineered reliably.

3) Is DARPA looking for a single end-product or something else?

The announcement emphasizes enabling capabilities rather than single end-products. The focus is on building foundational toolchains and methods that make engineering biology more routine and dependable, with long-term defense relevance (for example, new materials, capabilities, fuels, and medicines on demand).

4) What is meant by shrinking the "design-build-test" loop?

Based on the announcement framing, it means reducing the time, friction, and uncertainty required to specify biological designs, physically build them, test performance, troubleshoot issues, and iterate. The goal is faster cycles and more predictable outcomes when engineering biological systems.

5) What kinds of defense problems does DARPA connect to this work?

DARPA highlights corrosion and materials degradation as an example of a large, persistent Department of Defense problem, cited as costing roughly $23 billion per year. The Living Foundries vision suggests engineered biology could potentially help prevent corrosion, detect it early, identify where and why it is occurring, and repair or mitigate damage dynamically. This is presented as an illustrative example, not the only target.

6) What technical areas are explicitly called out as examples?

Example topics include:

• Software and automation tools for biological design
• Modular, reusable genetic parts and devices
• Standardized test platforms and biological "chassis" to improve comparability and reproducibility
• Faster methods for physical construction, editing, and manipulation of genetic designs
• Improved characterization and debugging tools for synthetic genetic networks

7) What is the common thread across the technical scope?

The common thread is strengthening the synthetic biology engineering pipeline by reducing friction and uncertainty: making biological systems easier to specify, build, test, troubleshoot, and iterate, while expanding the sophistication and reliability of what can be engineered.

8) Which DARPA office is associated with this BAA?

The opportunity is posted through DARPA's Microsystems Technology Office (MTO).

9) What is the Funding Opportunity Number?

The Funding Opportunity Number is DARPA BAA 11-60.

10) What is the CFDA number for this opportunity?

The CFDA number listed is 12.910 (Research and Technology Development).

11) Who can apply (eligibility)?

Eligibility is described as unrestricted (open to any entity type), subject to any clarifications contained in the full announcement (the complete BAA package).

12) Is cost sharing or matching required?

No. The listing notes no cost sharing or matching requirement.

13) What award mechanisms might DARPA use for this program?

The opportunity lists multiple instrument types: cooperative agreements, grants, other transactions, and procurement contracts. This reflects DARPA's flexibility in funding research and development depending on the proposal and the intended performer relationship.

14) Does the synopsis specify a minimum or maximum award size?

The public summary fields show an award ceiling and floor of $0, which typically indicates the synopsis does not publish standardized per-award bounds. Funding levels would be governed by the detailed BAA and negotiations, as described in the full package.

15) When was the opportunity originally posted?

The original posting date is September 2, 2011.

16) Was there an Industry Day?

Yes. An Industry Day is referenced as having occurred on June 28, 2011 (DARPA SN 11-44).

17) When were proposal abstracts due?

Proposal abstracts were due on or before 4:00 PM Eastern on September 26, 2011.

18) When were full proposals due, and did the date change?

The original full proposal deadline was November 17, 2011, and it was later extended. The closing date listed is December 2, 2011, by 4:00 PM Eastern.

19) Has this opportunity been archived?

Yes. The opportunity was later archived on June 4, 2012.

20) What amendments were issued, and what did they change?

Multiple amendments are described, primarily adjusting submission logistics and timing:

• Amendment 01: Announces the creation of a Living Foundries Twitter account (@LivingFoundries) and incorporates administrative edits reflected in the conformed BAA copy.
• Amendment 02: Revises the proposal due date and makes additional administrative changes.
• Amendment 03: Updates Grants.gov-related submission guidance by replacing a longer instructions document with a revised short-form version dated 20 October 2011, and revises the BAA's Grants.gov submission instructions (including required application package forms) noted on page 25 of the BAA.

21) How can applicants identify what changed in the conformed BAA?

DARPA indicates that changes in the conformed BAA are highlighted in yellow to help proposers track updates.

22) What is the role of Grants.gov in this solicitation?

Grants.gov submission guidance is specifically addressed in the amendments. Amendment 03, in particular, revises the Grants.gov instructions and references required application package forms as noted on page 25 of the BAA, and it replaces a longer instructions document with a revised short-form version dated 20 October 2011.

23) Where should applicants look for the full instructions and complete package?

The announcement points applicants to the MTO solicitations page for additional information and access to the full BAA package, which contains the complete technical and administrative instructions DARPA expects proposers to follow.

24) Who is the point of contact for access issues?

The main point of contact listed for access issues is Dr. Alicia Jackson, Program Manager and MTO BAA Coordinator.

25) What does DARPA mean by "enabling capabilities" in this context?

In this announcement, "enabling capabilities" refers to tools, technologies, standards, platforms, and methods that make synthetic biology engineering more reliable and scalable overall, rather than funding a single narrow application or one-off deliverable.

26) What kinds of research outputs appear aligned with the BAA's intent?

Based on the stated examples and framing, outputs aligned with the intent would include improved software/automation for biological design, standardized and reusable biological components, comparable test platforms and chassis, accelerated build/edit methods, and better measurement, characterization, and debugging approaches for synthetic genetic networks.

27) Is the corrosion example the only area DARPA is interested in?

No. The corrosion/materials degradation discussion is presented as an illustrative, high-impact defense example of why advanced synthetic biology toolsets could matter, but the opportunity indicates that it is not the only target.

28) Why does DARPA describe this as making biology more like an engineering discipline?

The solicitation frames current synthetic biology as constrained by slow iteration and limited predictability. The goal is to create a practical engineering toolchain so biological design and construction can be executed more like other complex engineering fields: faster cycles, better repeatability, clearer specifications, and improved debugging and validation.