Regulations last checked for updates: Nov 24, 2024

Title 32 - National Defense last revised: Nov 18, 2024
§ 37.200 - What are my responsibilities as an agreements officer for ensuring the appropriate use of TIAs?

You must ensure that you use TIAs only in appropriate situations. To do so, you must conclude that the use of a TIA is justified based on:

(a) The nature of the project, as discussed in § 37.205;

(b) The type of recipient, addressed in § 37.210;

(c) The recipient's commitment and cost sharing, as described in § 37.215;

(d) The degree of involvement of the Government program official, as discussed in § 37.220; and

(e) Your judgment that the use of a TIA could benefit defense research objectives in ways that likely would not happen if another type of assistance instrument were used. Your answers to the four questions in § 37.225 should be the basis for your judgment.

§ 37.205 - What judgments must I make about the nature of the project?

You must:

(a) Conclude that the principal purpose of the project is stimulation or support of research (i.e., assistance), rather than acquiring goods or services for the benefit of the Government (i.e., acquisition);

(b) Decide that the basic, applied, or advanced research project is relevant to the policy objective of civil-military integration (see appendix A of this part); and

(c) Ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable, any TIA that uses the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2371 (see appendix B of this part) does not support research that duplicates other research being conducted under existing programs carried out by the Department of Defense. This is a statutory requirement of 10 U.S.C. 2371.

(d) When your TIA is a type of assistance transaction other than a grant or cooperative agreement, satisfy the condition in 10 U.S.C. 2371 to judge that the use of a standard grant or cooperative agreement for the research project is not feasible or appropriate. As discussed in appendix B to this part:

(1) This situation arises if your TIA includes a patent provision that is less restrictive than is possible under the Bayh-Dole statute (because the patent provision is what distinguishes a TIA that is a cooperative agreement from a TIA that is an assistance transaction other than a grant or cooperative agreement).

(2) You satisfy the requirement to judge that a standard cooperative agreement is not feasible or appropriate when you judge that execution of the research project warrants a less restrictive patent provision than is possible under Bayh-Dole.

§ 37.210 - To what types of recipients may I award a TIA?

(a) As a matter of DoD policy, you may award a TIA only when one or more for-profit firms are to be involved either in the:

(1) Performance of the research project; or

(2) The commercial application of the research results. In that case, you must determine that the nonprofit performer has at least a tentative agreement with specific for-profit partners who plan on being involved when there are results to transition. You should review the agreement between the nonprofit and for-profit partners, because the for-profit partners' involvement is the basis for using a TIA rather than another type of assistance instrument.

(b) Consistent with the goals of civil-military integration, TIAs are most appropriate when one or more commercial firms (as defined at § 37.1250) are to be involved in the project.

(c) You are encouraged to make awards to consortia (a consortium may include one or more for-profit firms, as well as State or local government agencies, institutions of higher education, or other nonprofit organizations). The reasons are that:

(1) When multiple performers are participating as a consortium, they are more equal partners in the research performance than usually is the case with a prime recipient and subawards. All of them therefore are more likely to be directly involved in developing and revising plans for the research effort, reviewing technical progress, and overseeing financial and other business matters. That feature makes consortia well suited to building new relationships among performers in the defense and commercial sectors of the technology and industrial base, a principal objective for the use of TIAs.

(2) In addition, interactions among the participants within a consortium potentially provide a self-governance mechanism. The potential for additional self-governance is particularly good when a consortium includes multiple for-profit participants that normally are competitors within an industry.

(d) TIAs also may be used for carrying out research performed by single firms or multiple performers in prime award-subaward relationships. In awarding TIAs in those cases, however, you should consider providing for greater involvement of the program official or a way to increase self-governance (e.g., a prime award with multiple subawards arranged so as to give the subrecipients more insight into and authority and responsibility for programmatic and business aspects of the overall project than they usually have).

§ 37.215 - What must I conclude about the recipient's commitment and cost sharing?

(a) You should judge that the recipient has a strong commitment to and self-interest in the success of the project. You should find evidence of that commitment and interest in the proposal, in the recipient's management plan, or through other means. A recipient's self-interest might be driven, for example, by a research project's potential for fostering technology to be incorporated into products and processes for the commercial marketplace.

(b) You must seek cost sharing. The purpose of cost share is to ensure that the recipient incurs real risk that gives it a vested interest in the project's success; the willingness to commit to meaningful cost sharing therefore is one good indicator of a recipient's self-interest. The requirements are that:

(1) To the maximum extent practicable, the non-Federal parties carrying out a research project under a TIA are to provide at least half of the costs of the project. Obtaining this cost sharing, to the maximum extent practicable, is a statutory condition for any TIA under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2371,and.

(2) The parties must provide the cost sharing from non-Federal resources that are available to them unless there is specific authority to use other Federal resources for that purpose (see § 37.530(f)).

(c) You may consider whether cost sharing is impracticable in a given case, unless there is a non-waivable, statutory requirement for cost sharing that applies to the particular program under which the award is to be made. Before deciding that cost sharing is impracticable, you should carefully consider whether there are other factors that demonstrate the recipient's self-interest in the success of the current project.

§ 37.220 - How involved should the Government program official be in the project?

(a) TIAs are used to carry out cooperative relationships between the Federal Government and the recipient, which requires a greater level of involvement of the Government program official in the execution of the research than the usual oversight of a research grant or procurement contract. For example, program officials will participate in recipients' periodic reviews of research progress and will be substantially involved with the recipients in the resulting revisions of plans for future effort. That increased programmatic involvement before and during program execution with a TIA can reduce the need for some Federal financial requirements that are problematic for commercial firms.

(b) Some aspects of their involvement require program officials to have greater knowledge about and participation in business matters that traditionally would be your exclusive responsibility as the agreements officer. TIAs therefore also require closer cooperation between program officials and you, as the one who decides business matters.

§ 37.225 - What judgment must I make about the benefits of using a TIA?

Before deciding that a TIA is appropriate, you also must judge that using a TIA could benefit defense research objectives in ways that likely would not happen if another type of assistance instrument were used (e.g., a cooperative agreement subject to all of the requirements of 32 CFR part 34). You, in conjunction with Government program officials, must consider the questions in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this section, to help identify the benefits that may justify using a TIA and reducing some of the usual requirements. In accordance with § 37.1020, you must document your answers to these questions in the award file. Note that you must give full concise answers only to questions that relate to the benefits that you perceive for using the TIA, rather than another type of funding instrument, for the particular research project. A simple “no” or “not applicable” is a sufficient response for other questions. The questions are:

(a) Will the use of a TIA permit the involvement in the research of any commercial firms or business units of firms that would not otherwise participate in the project? If so:

(1) What are the expected benefits of those firms' or divisions' participation (e.g., is there a specific technology that could be better, more readily available, or less expensive)?

(2) Why would they not participate if an instrument other than a TIA were used? You should identify specific provisions of the TIA or features of the TIA award process that enable their participation.

(b) Will the use of a TIA allow the creation of new relationships among participants at the prime or subtier levels, among business units of the same firm, or between non-Federal participants and the Federal Government that will help the DoD get better technology in the future? If so:

(1) Why do these new relationships have the potential for helping the DoD get technology in the future that is better, more affordable, or more readily available?

(2) Are there provisions of the TIA or features of the TIA award process that enable these relationships to form? If so, you should be able to identify specifically what they are. If not, you should be able to explain specifically why you think that the relationships could not be created if an assistance instrument other than a TIA were used.

(c) Will the use of a TIA allow firms or business units of firms that traditionally accept Government awards to use new business practices in the execution of the research that will help us get better technology, help us get new technology more quickly or less expensively, or facilitate partnering with commercial firms? If so:

(1) What specific benefits will the DoD potentially get from the use of these new practices? You should be able to explain specifically why you foresee a potential for those benefits.

(2) Are there provisions of the TIA or features of the TIA award process that enable the use of the new practices? If so, you should be able to identify those provisions or features and explain why you think that the practices could not be used if the award were made using an assistance instrument other than a TIA.

(d) Are there any other benefits of the use of a TIA that could help the Department of Defense better meet its objectives in carrying out the research project? If so, you should be able to identify specifically what they are, how they can help meet defense objectives, what features of the TIA or award process enable the DoD to realize them, and why the benefits likely would not be realized if an assistance instrument other than a TIA were used.

[68 FR 47160, Aug. 7, 2003, as amended at 85 FR 51245, Aug. 19, 2020]
§ 37.230 - May I use a TIA if a participant is to receive fee or profit?

In accordance with 32 CFR 22.205(b), you may not use a TIA if any participant is to receive fee or profit. Note that this policy extends to all performers of the research project carried out under the TIA, including any subawards for substantive program performance, but it does not preclude participants' or subrecipients' payment of reasonable fee or profit when making purchases from suppliers of goods (e.g., supplies and equipment) or services needed to carry out the research.

authority: 5 U.S.C. 301 and 10 U.S.C. 113.
source: 68 FR 47160, Aug. 7, 2003, unless otherwise noted.
cite as: 32 CFR 37.215