DARPA SBIR DPA26BZ06-DV025: Noninvasive Detection and Localization of Occult Hemorrhage
Quick Answer
DPA26BZ06-DV025 is a DARPA SBIR topic under the DoW 2026 SBIR Broad Agency Announcement, Release 6, and it is one of only two topics in this release that accepts both Phase I and Direct to Phase II proposals. DARPA wants a capability that lets a combat medic with no surgical or imaging expertise find internal bleeding in the field: noninvasive or minimally invasive detection, anatomic localization, and rate estimation of occult non-compressible torso hemorrhage, outside a hospital. Phase I is $250,000 over 6 months. Direct to Phase II is $1,000,000 over 12 months with a $500,000 option over a further 12 months. The topic opens September 23, 2026 and closes October 21, 2026 through the Defense SBIR/STTR Innovation Portal.
The clinical problem is the leading cause of preventable death on the battlefield, and DARPA's two cited references are the Eastridge papers that established it. What makes this topic distinctive is that it does not stop at detection. The system must distinguish slow or self-limiting hemorrhage from rapidly expanding, exsanguinating hemorrhage, and it must support serial or continuous monitoring so changes in bleeding rate can be tracked and reported to the medic in near-real time. That is a triage and evacuation prioritization capability, not just a diagnostic.
Topic At a Glance
Topic number: DPA26BZ06-DV025
Title: Noninvasive Detection and Localization of Occult Hemorrhage
Agency: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)
Solicitation: DoW 2026 Small Business Innovation Research Broad Agency Announcement, Release 6, DARPA Proposal Submission Instructions
Program types accepted: both Phase I and Direct to Phase II
Phase I award: $250,000 over 6 months. Technical volume is a 10 page white paper plus a 5 page slide deck
Direct to Phase II award: $1,000,000 over 12 months, with an option of $500,000 over 12 months
Direct to Phase II technical volume format: White Paper and Slide Deck, 20 page white paper plus 15 slide deck
OUSD (R&E) Critical Technology Area: Applied Artificial Intelligence
Component Technology Priority Area: Biotechnology
Projected CMMC level requirement: Level 1
Export control status: no topic-level ITAR or EAR restriction paragraph appears on this topic
Technical and Business Assistance: up to $6,500 for Phase I awardees, up to $25,000 per Phase II project, in addition to the cost ceilings
Topic Q&A: DSIP Topic Q&A is not available for DARPA topics. Technical questions go to SBIR_BAA@darpa.mil by October 14, 2026
Topic open date: September 23, 2026
Proposal deadline: October 21, 2026. DARPA will not accept late proposals
Submission portal: DSIP at dodsbirsttr.mil
Keywords: hemorrhage detection, clinical decision support, medical device, austere environment
Two Entry Points, and How to Choose
This topic appears in two of DARPA's award structure tables, which means you have a genuine choice of entry point. Getting it right matters, because the formats and the evidence bars are different.
The Phase I path. $250,000 over 6 months. Technical volume is a 10 page white paper plus a 5 page slide deck. Phase I proposals shall present tasking and relevant milestones for a 6-month base period. This path is for a team with a sensing concept and supporting science but without an integrated system that already detects and localizes internal bleeding.
The Direct to Phase II path. $1,000,000 over 12 months plus a $500,000 option over 12 months. Technical volume is a 20 page white paper plus a 15 slide deck, within an overall 35 page limit that DARPA describes for the White Paper and Slide Deck format. This path requires documentation demonstrating you have already achieved the feasibility milestones expected at the conclusion of a Phase I effort, and DARPA lists four specific ones.
The choice is not strategic preference, it is evidence. If you can document the four DP2 feasibility elements below, take the DP2 path, because it is four times the money and it skips a phase. If you cannot document all four, a DP2 proposal will be found non-conforming and Phase I is the honest route.
Note that Phase I proposals shall present tasking and relevant milestones for a 6-month base period, while Phase II proposals shall present tasking and relevant milestones for a 12-month base period, and separate tasking and milestones for a subsequent single 12-month option period. Structure your schedule accordingly.
What DARPA Is Actually Looking For
The objective
Demonstrate a capability that noninvasively detects and localizes occult, meaning internal, non-compressible hemorrhage outside of a hospital.
The user, named precisely
The goal is to produce a noninvasive or minimally invasive capability that enables Role 1 medical personnel, specifically a combat medic with no surgical or pre-operative imaging expertise, to rapidly detect, localize, and characterize the rate of life-threatening, occult, or non-compressible torso hemorrhage that cannot be precisely identified through routine clinical assessments available in the field.
That parenthetical is the design constraint that matters most. Not a radiologist. Not a surgeon. A combat medic with no imaging expertise. Every interface decision, every acquisition-guidance decision, and every output format decision follows from it. A device that requires skilled sonographic window-finding does not meet this requirement no matter how good its physics.
What the system must do
The proposed solution should integrate advanced sensing technologies with artificial intelligence to provide accurate, real-time detection, anatomic localization, and quantitative or semi-quantitative estimation of bleeding rate, distinguishing slow or self-limiting hemorrhage from rapidly expanding, exsanguinating hemorrhage, and should function in austere and contested environments.
The capability should support serial or continuous monitoring such that changes in hemorrhage rate can be tracked to provide updates to the medic in near-real time.
Solutions should provide intuitive, actionable visualization of both hemorrhage location and rate to support timely medical decision-making, triage, and evacuation prioritization when definitive surgical care is delayed or denied.
Four distinct capabilities sit in those paragraphs: detection, anatomic localization, rate estimation, and change tracking over time. Rate estimation is the hardest and the most valuable, because it is what separates the casualty who needs the next helicopter from the one who can wait.
Phase I in detail
Demonstrate the technical feasibility of a noninvasive or minimally invasive capability for rapid detection, anatomical localization, and characterization of life-threatening occult or non-compressible hemorrhage. The performer shall develop a proof-of-concept sensing and artificial intelligence framework capable of accurately identifying the anatomical source of bleeding and estimating hemorrhage rate for a limited set of representative injury types.
Scanning may be performed manually or using an automated platform, for example robotic or assisted acquisition, and should provide clinically actionable results within a timeframe compatible with Role 1 medical decision-making.
Note the permission for a limited set of representative injury types in Phase I. You do not have to cover the whole torso. Choosing a defensible subset and justifying the choice is better than claiming breadth you cannot demonstrate.
Proposals shall describe the envisioned concept of operations, including sensor placement or access method for minimally invasive approaches, data acquisition, user workflow, system-guided adjustments to sensor positioning or data collection, data processing, reporting, and, where appropriate, serial or continuous monitoring.
That list is a checklist. Nine elements, and system-guided adjustments to sensor positioning is the one that speaks directly to the untrained-user constraint. If your device tells the medic where to move the probe, say how.
Proposals shall describe the sensing technologies to be employed, their anticipated technology maturity, the proposed AI algorithms and training strategy, available datasets, and any additional data collection planned during Phase I.
Representative testbeds may include retrospective clinical datasets, computational models, physical phantoms, ex vivo preparations, or controlled preclinical studies.
That is a permissive testbed list and it matters for schedule. Six months does not accommodate a new animal study from scratch, but retrospective clinical data, phantoms, and computational models are all explicitly acceptable.
Phase I efforts should establish the technical capabilities and limitations of the proposed approach, including the minimum and maximum resolvable hemorrhage rate, localization accuracy, anatomical applicability including challenging locations such as retroperitoneal hemorrhage or bleeding obscured by bone or bowel, and expected robustness across representative operational conditions.
Retroperitoneal hemorrhage and bleeding obscured by bone or bowel are named because they are where most sensing modalities fail. Address them directly, including where your approach cannot reach, because DARPA asked for limitations as well as capabilities.
Proposals shall define quantitative performance metrics for hemorrhage detection, localization, bleeding-rate estimation, response time, and operational robustness under austere conditions, including environmental stressors, limited power availability, transportation, storage, and deployment.
While field-ready systems are not required, proposals utilizing components with demonstrated field suitability will be viewed favorably.
The Phase I effort should culminate in a proof-of-concept demonstration and a detailed technical development plan supporting maturation into an integrated prototype during Phase II.
Phase II in detail
Phase II will build upon the successful Phase I demonstration by developing, integrating, and validating a portable prototype capable of real-time hemorrhage detection, anatomical localization, bleeding-rate estimation, and longitudinal monitoring across a broader range of clinically relevant battlefield injuries.
Then a sentence that constrains the work in a useful way: Phase II should emphasize engineering maturation, system integration, and operational validation rather than fundamental sensor development. The sensing hardware architecture established during Phase I should remain substantially unchanged, with improvements focused on optimization, robustness, algorithm refinement, and user-centered operation.
If you enter at DP2, that tells you DARPA expects your sensing architecture to be settled. Proposing to explore modalities in Phase II is a mismatch with the topic.
Performers shall expand system performance to encompass additional solid organs, vascular structures, and clinically relevant hemorrhage scenarios while collecting additional datasets to improve algorithm performance, robustness, and generalizability.
The system shall support serial or continuous assessment of hemorrhage progression, enabling near-real-time updates of bleeding location and rate.
The integrated prototype shall provide intuitive clinical decision support suitable for Role 1 medical personnel, including actionable visualization of hemorrhage location, bleeding rate, confidence estimates, injury implications, and recommendations supporting triage, treatment prioritization, and evacuation decisions.
Note confidence estimates in that list. A rate estimate without an uncertainty bound is not usable for evacuation triage, and DARPA has asked for it explicitly.
Validation should be conducted using representative preclinical, cadaveric, clinical, or other operationally relevant test environments, with performance evaluated under conditions representative of austere military operations, including motion, environmental stress, limited logistical support, and communications degradation where appropriate.
Proposals shall define quantitative Phase II performance metrics for detection accuracy, localization precision, bleeding-rate estimation, response time, longitudinal tracking performance, usability, and operational suitability.
Phase II should conclude with delivery of an integrated prototype, validation results demonstrating operational feasibility, and a transition strategy supporting military evaluation, regulatory planning, manufacturing, and commercialization.
As with Phase I, proposals shall define envisioned Phase II metrics for success in the detection, localization, and characterization of bleeding. Phase II proposals should enumerate the planned list of injury targets planned for characterization.
The Direct to Phase II Feasibility Requirement
DP2 proposers must provide documentation demonstrating they have already achieved the feasibility milestones expected at the conclusion of a Phase I effort. Specifically, proposals must demonstrate existing evidence of four things.
Proof-of-Concept: an established sensing and AI framework capable of accurately identifying the anatomical source of occult or internal bleeding.
Hemorrhage Rate Estimation: the ability to quantitatively or semi-quantitatively estimate hemorrhage rates to distinguish slow bleeding from rapidly expanding hemorrhage across various injury profiles.
Performance Metrics: tested parameters detailing the minimum and maximum resolvable hemorrhage rates, localization accuracy, and anatomical applicability, including challenging areas such as retroperitoneal hemorrhage.
Operational Robustness: preliminary data indicating the approach can withstand austere conditions, including environmental stressors and limited power availability.
All four are evidentiary, not aspirational. The second one, rate estimation, is the element most likely to be missing from an otherwise strong team, because plenty of groups can detect free fluid or hemorrhage while far fewer can put a rate on it. If you cannot show rate estimation data, the Phase I path is the correct entry.
Per the DP2 authority, if a proposer can provide adequate documentation to substantiate that the scientific and technical merit and feasibility described in the Phase I section of the topic has been met, and describes the potential commercial applications, the Direct to Phase II authority allows the Department of War to make an award under Phase II of the SBIR program without regard to whether the small business concern was provided an award under Phase I of an SBIR program.
For the White Paper and Slide Deck DP2 format, the white paper shall not exceed 20 pages and the slide deck shall not exceed 15 pages, within the 35 page overall format DARPA describes. Refer to Appendix B, DARPA Direct to Phase II Instructions, for the content of each element of the Technical Volume and the commercialization strategy.
Phase III Dual Use
DARPA splits this into two applications, both concrete.
Military application, battlefield. The developed noninvasive hemorrhage detection system transitions directly to military operational medicine, specifically empowering Role 1 combat medics. In austere and contested environments where definitive surgical care or medical evacuation is delayed or denied, this portable technology provides critical clinical decision support. By continuously monitoring non-compressible torso hemorrhage progression, medics can perform highly accurate triage, prioritize life-saving interventions, and optimize evacuation scheduling for casualties with exsanguinating hemorrhage versus those with self-limiting bleeding.
Civilian and commercial application, remote disaster areas. In the civilian sector, this technology holds significant dual-use potential for emergency medical services, search-and-rescue teams, and disaster response units. During mass casualty incidents or natural disasters such as earthquakes or severe storms where infrastructure is damaged and access to hospital imaging is impossible, first responders can use this tool to rapidly detect occult internal bleeding at the point of injury. It provides paramedics with real-time, actionable data to prioritize helicopter transport or specialized trauma center routing for critically internally injured patients in remote or rural environments, ultimately reducing preventable mortality outside of the hospital setting.
Both framings converge on the same commercial proposition: pre-hospital triage of internal bleeding. Ground and air EMS, rural hospitals without imaging, and disaster response organizations are the buyers, and the regulatory pathway is a medical device clearance rather than a defense qualification. Your commercialization strategy should address FDA strategy explicitly, since Phase II asks for a transition strategy supporting regulatory planning.
Funding, Cost Structure, and DARPA Mechanics
The awards
Phase I: $250,000 over 6 months. Technical volume is a 10 page white paper plus a 5 page slide deck.
Direct to Phase II: $1,000,000 over 12 months, plus an option of $500,000 over 12 months, for $1,500,000 across 24 months if the option is exercised.
The resources made available for each topic will depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds. The Government reserves the right to award all, some, one, or none of the options based on available funding and the performer's technical performance.
Contract type, which you must elect
DARPA may award FAR-based contracts, firm-fixed-price or cost-plus reimbursement, or Other Transactions for Prototype under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 4021, subject to approval of the Contracting Officer or Agreements Officer respectively. Proposers must state their requested contract type in their proposal.
Cost-plus reimbursement requires including your Defense Contract Management Agency Final Determination Letter showing approval of your accounting system. An Other Transaction for Prototype requires including a completed OT using the Model OT for Prototype from the DARPA Small Business site, plus completed OT Certifications, both loaded in Volume 5, with at minimum the color-coded areas completed and redlines with explanations for any article you wish to negotiate. Firm-fixed-price requires no additional action.
Templates are mandatory
Templates for Volume 2 Technical Volume and Volume 3 Cost Volume are provided as attachments on the DARPA Small Business website. Use of the DARPA Cost Proposal template is mandatory.
Technical and Business Assistance
Phase I awardees may request up to $6,500 in TABA funding. Phase II awardees may request up to $25,000 per Phase II project. TABA funding is in addition to the Phase I and Phase II cost ceilings and is not subject to profit or fee. TABA funding requests will be reviewed by the respective contracting office or specialist at time of award to ensure compliance with TABA requirements.
For a medical device topic, regulatory strategy support and market validation with EMS and trauma system buyers are both plausible uses.
Questions and the FAQ
DSIP Topic Q&A will not be available for these DARPA topics. Technical questions related to improving the understanding of a topic's requirements must be submitted by October 14, 2026, by email to SBIR_BAA@darpa.mil with the topic number in the subject line, including the name, email address, and telephone number of a point of contact. Questions submitted within seven calendar days of the proposal due date may not be answered. DARPA posts a consolidated Frequently Asked Questions document under the topic number summary on its Small Business site, updated on an ongoing basis until one week prior to the proposal due date.
DARPA will not accept late proposals.
Classification, marking, and registrations
All proposals are required to be UNCLASSIFIED or CUI. Do not include any classified information in your proposal submission. Do not include any proprietary information on the Proposal Coversheet in Volume 1.
Proposal titles, abstracts, anticipated benefits, and keywords of proposals selected for contract award will undergo a DARPA Policy and Security Review and are subject to revision or redaction by DARPA. Final approved versions may appear on the DoW SBIR/STTR awards website and the SBA's award website at sbir.gov/awards.
Proposers should ensure they have an accurate and active entity registration on SAM.gov. Those engaging in ITAR or CUI work for DARPA must have CMMC Level 2 certification, though the projected requirement for this topic is Level 1. DARPA points to sprs.csd.disa.mil/nistsp.htm and notes Project Spectrum at projectspectrum.io as an assistance resource.
Venture capital, hedge fund, and private equity ownership
Proposers that are more than 50 percent owned by multiple venture capital operating companies, hedge funds, private equity firms, or any combination of these as set forth in 13 CFR 121.702 are eligible to submit proposals in response to DARPA topics advertised within this BAA. Three conditions apply: register with the SBA Company Registry Database before submitting; submit the Majority-Owned VCOC, HF, and PEF Certification, with the SBIR VC Certification available on the DARPA Small Business site, in Supporting Documents Volume 5; and immediately notify the Contracting Officer, register in the appropriate SBA database, and submit the required certification if you enter that ownership class after submitting but before receiving a funding agreement.
DARPA's permissive posture matters here, since medical device companies at this stage are commonly venture-funded.
Evaluation and selection
All proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria listed in the DoW SBIR Program BAA. DARPA will conduct an evaluation of each conforming proposal. Proposals that do not comply with the requirements detailed in this BAA and the research objectives of the corresponding topic are considered non-conforming and are therefore not evaluated nor considered for award.
Using the evaluation criteria, the Government will evaluate each proposal in its entirety, documenting the strengths and weaknesses relative to each evaluation criteria, and based on those identified strengths and weaknesses will determine the proposal's overall selectability for funding. Proposals will not be evaluated against each other during the evaluation process but rather evaluated on their own individual merit.
A selectable proposal is one where the strengths of the overall proposal outweigh its weaknesses, with no accumulated weaknesses that would require extensive negotiations or a resubmitted proposal. A non-selectable proposal is one where the strengths do not outweigh its weaknesses.
Proposing firms will be notified of selection or non-selection status for a Phase I or Direct to Phase II award within 90 calendar days of the closing date of the BAA. The Corporate Official indicated on the Proposal Cover Sheet will be notified by email. In accordance with the SBA SBIR/STTR Policy Directive, Appendix I, paragraph 4, subparagraph (d), DARPA will provide a technical evaluation narrative to the proposer for each proposal submitted in response to a topic. An informal feedback session may additionally be requested via email at sbir@darpa.mil, provided at the sole discretion of DARPA.
Company Commercialization Report information will not be considered by DARPA during proposal evaluations.
Protests regarding the selection decision should be submitted, as prescribed in FAR 33.106(b) and FAR 52.233-3, to DARPA Contracts Management Office, 675 N. Randolph Street, Arlington, VA 22203, by email to CMO_SBIRProtests@darpa.mil and sbir@darpa.mil.
Post-award support
DARPA provides Transition and Commercialization Support Program services to Phase II and DP2 awardees upon contract execution at no cost to awardees, with the goal of maximizing the potential to move technology beyond Phase II into other research and development programs, DoW acquisition programs, other federal programs, or the commercial market. Awardees may also be eligible for the Embedded Entrepreneurship Initiative, an invitation-only program at DARPA's sole discretion, typically no more than $310,000 per awardee over the duration of the award, supporting a Senior Commercialization Advisor relationship, investor working group connections, and hiring an embedded entrepreneur to execute a Go-to-Market strategy. For a medical device seeking regulatory and market entry, both programs have real value.
The References
Two, and both are foundational rather than technical.
Eastridge BJ, Mabry RL, Seguin P, Cantrell J, Tops T, Uribe P, et al. Death on the battlefield (2001-2011): Implications for the future of combat casualty care. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery. 2012 Dec;73(6):S431-7.
Eastridge BJ, Hardin M, Cantrell J, Oetjen-Gerdes L, Zubko T, Mallak C, Wade CE, Simmons J, Mace J, Mabry R, Bolenbaucher R, Blackbourne LH. Died of wounds on the battlefield: causation and implications for improving combat casualty care. J Trauma. 2011 Jul;71(1 Suppl):S4-8.
These are the papers that quantified preventable death from hemorrhage in Iraq and Afghanistan and established non-compressible torso hemorrhage as the dominant category. DARPA cites no sensing technology references at all, which tells you the agency is not steering you toward a modality. It is stating a clinical problem and leaving the physics open. That is unusual and it is an opportunity: ultrasound, photoacoustics, electrical impedance, microwave, near-infrared, and hybrid approaches are all on the table, and your argument for a modality is part of what gets evaluated.
Timeline and What to Do When
The dates
Topic opens: September 23, 2026
Technical question deadline: October 14, 2026, to SBIR_BAA@darpa.mil with the topic number in the subject line
Proposal deadline: October 21, 2026. DARPA will not accept late proposals
Selection notification: within 90 calendar days of BAA close
Phase I period: 6 months
Direct to Phase II base: 12 months. Option: a further 12 months
A working backward plan
Before September 23. Decide your entry point by testing yourself honestly against the four DP2 feasibility elements, especially hemorrhage rate estimation. Download the mandatory DARPA Volume 2 and Volume 3 templates. Read the FAQ and keep rechecking it. Assemble your evidence base: retrospective clinical datasets, phantom results, ex vivo or preclinical data, and any field-suitability data on components. Settle your sensing modality and be ready to defend it, since DARPA cites no modality references. Work out your position on retroperitoneal hemorrhage and bleeding obscured by bone or bowel, including where you cannot reach. Decide your contract type and prepare the corresponding documents. Confirm SAM registration. If venture-backed, register with the SBA Company Registry and obtain the SBIR VC Certification. Submit technical questions before October 14.
September 23 through October 5. Draft to the format for your chosen path. For Phase I, a 10 page white paper plus 5 slides with 6 month tasking and milestones. For DP2, a 20 page white paper plus 15 slides with 12 month base tasking and separate 12 month option tasking. In either case, walk the nine-element concept of operations list, define the quantitative performance metrics DARPA names, and state limitations as well as capabilities.
October 6 through October 14. Build the cost volume in the mandatory template. Price your validation environment realistically, whether phantom, ex vivo, cadaveric, preclinical, or retrospective clinical data access, since data access agreements and IRB or IACUC timelines can dominate a 6 or 12 month schedule.
October 15 through October 18. Assemble Volume 5 with contract-type documents and certifications, complete Volume 7 and the Volume 4 CCR, and run compliance: page and slide limits for your format, unclassified or CUI only, no proprietary information on the coversheet, mandatory cost template.
October 19 through October 20. Submit and certify in DSIP.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is DARPA SBIR topic DPA26BZ06-DV025?
DPA26BZ06-DV025 is a DARPA SBIR topic titled "Noninvasive Detection and Localization of Occult Hemorrhage," released under the DoW 2026 SBIR Broad Agency Announcement, Release 6. The objective is to demonstrate a capability that noninvasively detects and localizes occult, meaning internal, non-compressible hemorrhage outside of a hospital.
Can I submit either a Phase I or a Direct to Phase II proposal?
Yes. This is one of only two topics in this DARPA release that appears in both the Phase I and the Direct to Phase II award structure tables. Phase I is $250,000 over 6 months with a 10 page white paper and 5 page slide deck. Direct to Phase II is $1,000,000 over 12 months plus a $500,000 option over 12 months, with a 20 page white paper and 15 slide deck.
How do I decide which path to take?
By evidence, not preference. The DP2 path requires documentation demonstrating four specific existing capabilities: an established sensing and AI proof-of-concept identifying the anatomical source of internal bleeding, quantitative or semi-quantitative hemorrhage rate estimation across injury profiles, tested performance parameters covering minimum and maximum resolvable rates plus localization accuracy and anatomical applicability including retroperitoneal hemorrhage, and preliminary operational robustness data under austere conditions. If you cannot document all four, a DP2 proposal risks being found non-conforming and Phase I is the correct route.
Who is the intended user?
Role 1 medical personnel, specified as a combat medic with no surgical or pre-operative imaging expertise. That constraint drives the entire interface and acquisition design. A device requiring skilled imaging technique does not satisfy this topic.
What must the system actually do?
Four things. Detect occult non-compressible torso hemorrhage. Localize it anatomically. Estimate bleeding rate quantitatively or semi-quantitatively, distinguishing slow or self-limiting hemorrhage from rapidly expanding exsanguinating hemorrhage. And support serial or continuous monitoring so changes in rate can be tracked and reported to the medic in near-real time. It must also provide intuitive, actionable visualization of location and rate to support triage and evacuation prioritization.
What sensing modality does DARPA want?
The topic does not say, and notably cites no sensing technology references at all, only the two Eastridge clinical papers. Proposals shall describe the sensing technologies to be employed, their anticipated technology maturity, the proposed AI algorithms and training strategy, available datasets, and any additional data collection planned. The modality choice and its justification are yours to make and defend.
What anatomical challenges must I address?
The topic names challenging locations explicitly: retroperitoneal hemorrhage and bleeding obscured by bone or bowel. Phase I efforts should establish anatomical applicability including these, and the DP2 feasibility requirement names retroperitoneal hemorrhage specifically. State where your approach works and where it does not.
What testbeds are acceptable in Phase I?
Representative testbeds may include retrospective clinical datasets, computational models, physical phantoms, ex vivo preparations, or controlled preclinical studies. That is a permissive list, which matters because a 6 month schedule will not accommodate a new animal study from scratch.
Do I need a field-ready system?
No. While field-ready systems are not required, proposals utilizing components with demonstrated field suitability will be viewed favorably.
What must my proposal define quantitatively?
Performance metrics for hemorrhage detection, localization, bleeding-rate estimation, response time, and operational robustness under austere conditions, the latter including environmental stressors, limited power availability, transportation, storage, and deployment. Phase II adds longitudinal tracking performance, usability, and operational suitability.
What concept of operations detail is required?
Proposals shall describe the envisioned concept of operations including sensor placement or access method for minimally invasive approaches, data acquisition, user workflow, system-guided adjustments to sensor positioning or data collection, data processing, reporting, and where appropriate serial or continuous monitoring. The system-guided adjustment element is the one that speaks to the untrained-user constraint.
Can I change my sensing hardware in Phase II?
Not substantially. Phase II should emphasize engineering maturation, system integration, and operational validation rather than fundamental sensor development, and the sensing hardware architecture established during Phase I should remain substantially unchanged, with improvements focused on optimization, robustness, algorithm refinement, and user-centered operation.
What does Phase II have to deliver?
An integrated portable prototype capable of real-time detection, anatomical localization, bleeding-rate estimation, and longitudinal monitoring across a broader range of clinically relevant battlefield injuries, expanded to encompass additional solid organs, vascular structures, and hemorrhage scenarios. Plus validation results demonstrating operational feasibility and a transition strategy supporting military evaluation, regulatory planning, manufacturing, and commercialization. The prototype must provide clinical decision support including actionable visualization of hemorrhage location, bleeding rate, confidence estimates, injury implications, and recommendations supporting triage, treatment prioritization, and evacuation decisions.
How should Phase II validation be conducted?
Using representative preclinical, cadaveric, clinical, or other operationally relevant test environments, with performance evaluated under conditions representative of austere military operations including motion, environmental stress, limited logistical support, and communications degradation where appropriate.
Are confidence estimates required?
Yes, in Phase II. The integrated prototype's clinical decision support must include confidence estimates alongside hemorrhage location, bleeding rate, injury implications, and recommendations. A rate estimate without an uncertainty bound is not usable for evacuation triage.
How long can my technical volume be?
For Phase I, a 10 page white paper plus a 5 page slide deck. For Direct to Phase II, a 20 page white paper plus a 15 page slide deck, within the 35 page White Paper and Slide Deck format DARPA describes. Refer to Appendix A for Phase I content and Appendix B for DP2 content.
What milestone structure should I propose?
Phase I proposals shall present tasking and relevant milestones for a 6-month base period. Phase II proposals shall present tasking and relevant milestones for a 12-month base period, and separate tasking and milestones for a subsequent single 12-month option period.
Can I ask questions through DSIP Topic Q&A?
No. DARPA states DSIP Topic Q&A will not be available for these topics. Technical questions go to SBIR_BAA@darpa.mil with the topic number in the subject line by October 14, 2026. Questions submitted within seven calendar days of the due date may not be answered. DARPA posts a consolidated FAQ, updated until one week before the due date.
Do I have to choose a contract type?
Yes. Proposers must state their requested contract type. DARPA may award FAR-based firm-fixed-price or cost-plus reimbursement contracts, or Other Transactions for Prototype under 10 U.S.C. 4021. Cost-plus requires your DCMA Final Determination Letter showing accounting system approval. An OT requires a completed Model OT plus OT Certifications in Volume 5. Firm-fixed-price requires no additional action.
Is the cost template mandatory?
Yes. Templates for Volume 2 and Volume 3 are on the DARPA Small Business website, and use of the DARPA Cost Proposal template is mandatory.
How much TABA can I request?
Phase I awardees may request up to $6,500. Phase II awardees may request up to $25,000 per Phase II project. TABA funding is in addition to the cost ceilings and is not subject to profit or fee, and requests are reviewed by the contracting office at time of award.
Are venture capital backed companies eligible?
Yes. Proposers more than 50 percent owned by multiple venture capital operating companies, hedge funds, private equity firms, or any combination as set forth in 13 CFR 121.702 are eligible, subject to registering with the SBA Company Registry Database before submitting, submitting the Majority-Owned VCOC, HF, and PEF Certification in Volume 5, and notifying the Contracting Officer if you enter that class after submitting but before award.
How will my proposal be evaluated?
Against the evaluation criteria in the DoW SBIR Program BAA. DARPA evaluates each conforming proposal in its entirety, documenting strengths and weaknesses relative to each criterion, then determines overall selectability. Proposals are not evaluated against each other. A selectable proposal is one where strengths outweigh weaknesses with no accumulated weaknesses requiring extensive negotiations or resubmission.
Will I get feedback if not selected?
Yes. DARPA will provide a technical evaluation narrative to the proposer for each proposal submitted in response to a topic, per the SBA SBIR/STTR Policy Directive. An informal feedback session may additionally be requested via sbir@darpa.mil, at DARPA's sole discretion.
What is the commercial market?
Pre-hospital triage of internal bleeding. The topic names emergency medical services, search-and-rescue teams, and disaster response units, and describes mass casualty incidents and natural disasters where infrastructure is damaged and hospital imaging is unavailable. First responders would use the tool to detect occult internal bleeding at the point of injury and prioritize helicopter transport or trauma center routing. Ground and air EMS, rural hospitals without imaging, and disaster response organizations are the buyers.
Who do I contact with questions?
The DARPA Small Business Programs Office at SBIR_BAA@darpa.mil for both program administration and topic technical questions, with the topic number in the subject line. DSIP technical support at DoDSBIRSupport@reisystems.com with a copy to SBIR_BAA@darpa.mil, Monday through Friday 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. ET. DARPA also offers free resources through DARPAConnect at DARPAConnect.us.
Positioning Advice for Companies Considering This Topic
Choose your entry point on evidence. The four DP2 feasibility elements are checkable, and rate estimation is the one that separates teams. Detecting free fluid is well-trodden ground; quantifying a bleeding rate is not. If you have rate data, take the DP2 path and the four-times funding. If you do not, Phase I is not a lesser choice, it is the correct one.
Design for the medic, and say so on page one. No surgical or pre-operative imaging expertise is the phrase to internalize. System-guided sensor positioning, automated or assisted acquisition, and an output that reads as a decision rather than an image are all responsive to that constraint. Many strong medical imaging teams will propose excellent physics with an operator model that does not exist at Role 1.
Make rate estimation the technical centerpiece. It is what the whole capability is for. Detection tells you there is bleeding; rate tells the medic whether this casualty goes on the next aircraft. Show your physics for rate, your validation approach, and your uncertainty quantification.
Be candid about the anatomy you cannot see. Retroperitoneal hemorrhage and bleeding obscured by bone or bowel are named because they are hard. DARPA asked for capabilities and limitations. A proposal claiming uniform torso coverage will read as either uninformed or overselling; one that maps its performance envelope honestly reads as expert.
Own the modality argument. With no sensing references cited, DARPA has left the physics open and will judge your reasoning. State why your modality can resolve rate and location in a torso, what its failure modes are, and why alternatives are worse for this use case.
Plan the data problem early. AI algorithms need training data, and hemorrhage rate ground truth is scarce. Retrospective clinical datasets, phantoms with controlled flow, ex vivo preparations, and preclinical models each give you different ground truth quality. Name your sources and your access arrangements, because in a 6 or 12 month schedule, IRB, IACUC, and data use agreements are often the critical path.
Put field suitability in the component choices. Proposals utilizing components with demonstrated field suitability will be viewed favorably, which is a low-cost way to earn credit. If a subsystem already has ruggedized or fielded heritage, say so.
Address the regulatory path in the commercialization section. Phase II asks for a transition strategy supporting regulatory planning, and the civilian market is a cleared medical device market. A realistic FDA pathway view, including predicate strategy or de novo reasoning, distinguishes a company that intends to sell a product from one that intends to publish.
Use both Eastridge papers. They are the only references, they are the canonical statement of the problem, and citing them correctly signals you understand why this topic exists rather than treating it as a generic imaging opportunity.
Write to eliminate weaknesses. DARPA's selectability test turns on whether accumulated weaknesses would require extensive negotiation or resubmission. An unaddressed anatomical limitation, an unexplained data source, or a missing regulatory view are each the kind of gap that pushes a good proposal from selectable to non-selectable.
