REST Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Per ISO Section 4.1, ARPA-H must prioritize awards to entities that will conduct the funded work in the United States. Non-domestic performers are encouraged to collaborate with a domestic entity. ARPA-H will not make awards to entities organized under the laws of a covered foreign country per 42 U.S.C. 290c(n)(1)(D).

Per ISO Section 4.1, Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and government entities, including federal employees, are not permitted to respond to this ISO as a prime or sub-performer. A Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)-affiliated investigator may submit a Solution Summary as either a non-profit employee or as a university employee.

Eligibility requirements are provided in ISO Section 4.1.

Teams are expected to be interdisciplinary and complementary. Proposers are encouraged to build the best and most effective team to execute their proposed work. 

This restriction applies to the individual, not the institution. An individual may be a Principal Investigator on only one proposal but may be a collaborator on other proposals.

Per ISO Section 4.1, ARPA-H must prioritize awards to entities that will conduct the funded work in the United States. Non-domestic performers are encouraged to collaborate with a domestic entity. ARPA-H will not make awards to entities organized under the laws of a covered foreign country per 42 U.S.C. 290c(n)(1)(D).

Yes. Proposers are encouraged to establish collaborations, including with other proposing teams, at the Solution Summary stage — regulatory planning does not need to be finalized before teaming discussions begin. If a collaboration involves shared equipment or resources, the associated costs may be included in the proposal budget, provided the budget clearly identifies which entity is incurring the cost, how the shared resource supports the proposed technical approach, and that the cost is well justified and non-duplicative across team members' budgets.

Per ISO Section 2.3.3, efforts focused solely on lifestyle or behavioral interventions, pharmacologic treatment, non-personalized interventions, or interventions that do not credibly use objective physiological measurements to adapt treatment to the user’s sleep state or physiology are out of scope. 

Per ISO Section 2.3.3, efforts focused solely on lifestyle or behavioral interventions, pharmacologic treatment, non-personalized interventions, or interventions that do not credibly use objective physiological measurements to adapt treatment to the user’s sleep state or physiology are out of scope.

Per ISO Sections 1.1, 2.1.1, and 2.1.2, REST is focused on home-based systems.

Per ISO Section 2.1.1, TA1 approaches may focus on during-sleep measurements, multi-night measurements, or broader 24-hour characterization of sleep and arousal as interdependent systems, provided the proposer explains how the approach supports REST objectives and stated program metrics.

Per ISO Section 2.1.2, strong TA2 proposals will deliver intervention during sleep, but alternative approaches that are responsive to individual sleep physiology will also be considered.

Per ISO Sections 3.2 and 3.3, this program requires human subjects research to meet success metrics and milestones.

There is no clinical diagnostic requirement for insomnia. Program metrics are based on the Insomnia Severity Index, not a clinical diagnostic interview. 

Per ISO Section 1.1., all proposals must include an emphasis on insomnia.

Per ISO Section 2.1.1., proposers to TA1 should develop in-home systems that translate sleep-related data into individualized health-risk assessment and prediction capabilities.

The REST ISO does not limit studies to adults. Proposers should define and justify the study population in their proposal and ensure the proposed human subjects research is appropriate for the objectives of the proposed effort. 

Solution summaries may not include an "optional" work package. Proposers are encouraged to bring their biggest and best ideas.

Per ISO Section 2.1.1, proposed methods may also incorporate proposer-generated retrospective or prospective data collection and modeling efforts.

Per ISO Section 2.1.2, systems may comprise multiple coordinated devices rather than a single unified platform.

Per ISO Section 2.1.1, proposed methods may also incorporate proposer-generated retrospective or prospective data collection and modeling efforts.

Per ISO Section 1.1, proposers may either (1) submit one proposal to one of the two Technical Areas, OR (2) submit one proposal that addresses both Technical Areas as an integrated approach.

Per ISO Section 2.1.1., proposed TA1 methods may incorporate additional in-home/wearable data sources beyond EEG and physiology during sleep, such as wearable/continuous biochemical markers. ARPA-H cannot comment on whether a team’s idea fits within the REST program scope.

Per ISO Section 2.1.1., proposers to TA1 should design, build, and iterate on wearable or nearable devices capable of capturing the signals necessary to compute sleep microstructures in the home environment.

Per ISO Section 2.1.1., proposers to TA1 should design, build, and iterate on wearable or nearable devices capable of capturing the signals necessary to compute sleep microstructures in the home environment.

Per ISO Section 2.1.1., TA1 systems must capture sleep microstructure at clinical PSG-comparable fidelity.  Proposed methods may incorporate additional in-home/wearable data sources beyond EEG and physiology during sleep, such as circadian signals, wearable/continuous biochemical markers, daytime assessments, continuous 24-hour physiology, and environmental context, provided the proposer demonstrates that the approach can achieve fidelity sufficient to support clinically meaningful interpretation on key microstructural features and support objective diagnosis and health-relevant predictions. Insomnia subtype diagnosis alone, without that physiological characterization, would not be sufficient.

Per ISO Sections 2.2.2 and 2.3.2, IV&V will provide independent assessment of technical progress, integration readiness, and data quality assurance and quality control. Performers should expect to participate in program-level coordination, common evaluations, benchmarking exercises, integration reviews, demonstrations, and site visits.

Per ISO Sections 2.2, the Foundational Sleep Health Modeling and Discovery effort is a separate, non-solicited shared program resource. However, per ISO Section 2.1.1, proposers may also include independent or complementary data generation, curation, harmonization, and modeling activities within their proposed effort.

This program ISO does not specify funding range. Awards are anticipated in Spring 2027. Proposers should propose a budget that is appropriate and well justified for their approach and apply applicable HHS salary cap limitations.

Per ISO Sections 2.1.1, ARPA-H anticipates that proposers will secure industry cost share that increases as the work matures toward translation and commercialization. Proposers should describe a credible cost share strategy commensurate with the maturity and transition trajectory of the proposed technology, including anticipated source(s) of cost share, when such support is expected to become available (in terms of timing and/or milestones accomplished), and how the proposed cost share approach will support commercialization and long-term sustainability. Cost share is not required to be uniform across all team members. 

Per ISO Part II, proposals addressing both Technical Areas shall clearly identify the scope, objectives, and evaluation plan for each Technical Area. ARPA-H may select the integrated proposal or may elect to pursue only the TA1 or TA2 component.

ARPA-H doesn't differentiate between OT for Research and OT for Prototype. The salary ceiling typically required for grants does not apply.

The solution summary should address the entire program across all three phases. More detail should be provided in Phase 1 of the proposal, and Phase III may be more ambiguous given the 5.5 year program timeline.

Yes, collaboration is encouraged. Costs should be budgeted by whichever entity incurs the cost, not duplicated across both budgets, and justified in the proposal.

Lightning Talk presenters do not need to attend the entire Proposers' Day. However, Lightning Talks are not guaranteed, and presenters must be in-person to provide their talk.

Lightning Talks are not guaranteed, and presenters must be in-person to provide their talk.

Prospective performers are encouraged to use the Teaming Profiles page to share their capabilities and identify potential partners.