Apple`s legendary efforts to keep future products secret are well known, but the terms of the agreements linking suppliers and workers were partially unveiled on Friday, thanks to newly sealed court proceedings. We have entered into Apple`s contracts and confidentiality agreements and have selected a few strengths: ARPA-E has established the following contractual documents. The implementation of a standardised agreement speeds up the procurement process and reduces the administrative burden associated with the active management of ARPA-E projects. The terms of Apple`s extensive confidentiality agreements have been announced through the ongoing bankruptcy proceedings of former sapphire supplier GT Advanced Technologies. On Friday, a New Hampshire judge announced a series of documents in the case, including the confidentiality agreement approved by Apple and GTAT, which was previously kept secret. ARPA-E mainly funds projects through cooperation agreements. Under cooperation agreements, ARPA-E and Prime Recipients share responsibility for project management, control, management and implementation. – Work authorization – Financial instrument used when a federally funded research and development centre (FFRDC) is a DEE laboratory in a project team. The work authorization is executed directly with the DOE laboratory separately from the cooperation agreement with the other team members.
– Inter-institutional agreement (ILO) – Agreement between two government agencies (excluding DOE National Labs). If a lab (non-DOE) is a member of the project team, ARPA-E can run an ILO directly with the non-DOE National Lab entity. A unique, separate cooperation agreement is implemented with the other entities of the project team. – Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) – An agreement between a non-federal entity (i.e. the private/scientific sector) and a federal laboratory. All federal funds go to the premium recipient and the premium recipient is responsible for making the funds allocated to the sub-receiver (laboratory) available. GT did not submit the entire contract, but only a selection of it. You should therefore assume that this version of the agreement favors GT and makes Apple look bad. If a Federally Funded Research and Development Centre (FFRDC) or State Laboratory (GOGO) is the lead organization of a project team, ARPA-E implements a funding agreement directly with the FFRDC or GOGO and a single separate cooperation agreement with the rest of the project team. Regardless of the use of several agreements, the FFRDC or GOGO is the leading organization for the entire project, including all work performed by the FFRDC or GOGO and the rest of the project team. Premium recipients are required to submit certain administrative and national policy requirements for sub-premiums or related agreements to their sub-recipients.
These requirements are outlined in the announcement of funding opportunities and Schedule 1 of the ARPA-E Association Agreement. The clauses relating to cooperation agreements that must be paid to sub-recipients are clearly stated in the agreement. For example, for all forms of Appendix 2 (intellectual property provisions), recipients must remove the corresponding IP clauses to their sub-recipients, and Schedule 6 (national security) contains several requirements that must be passed on to sub-recipients. In addition, ARPA-E beneficiaries may wish to pass any clause in cooperation agreements that would impose an obligation on the principal beneficiary that could be affected by the actions of a sub-recipient. Some examples of Schedule 1 are Clause 9 (foreign work and travel), clause 10 (purchases), clause 13 (publications), clause 19 (audits) and clause 26 (applicable cost principles). This question originally appeared on Quora. Ask a question, get a great answer. Learn from experts and access insider knowledge.