Submissions are welcome from the private sector, academia and Public Sector Research Establishments (PSRE’s). UKDI will examine the legal status of organisations prior to placement of any contract or agreement. In most cases there are no nationality restrictions, however UKDI individual competition documents will detail any necessary restrictions.

UKDI encourage collaboration between innovators for this competition. To support this, we have a short survey to collect details of those who wish to explore collaboration possibilities. If you are interested, please complete the collaboration survey.

The information (including personal details) you provide will be circulated among the innovators who have completed the survey. The sharing of details will only be done after an initial screening process has taken place, we reserve the right to not share all details.

All collaboration for proposal submissions is on an innovator-innovator basis. It is the innovators’ responsibility to determine the suitability of collaborators.

Inclusion or absence of collaboration will not affect assessment. The survey will stay open until 3 March 2026.

Total funding available: £1.5 million (excluding VAT) We expect to fund 5 to 7 proposals, in the region of £200,000 to £300,000 each, but we reserve the right to fund proposals at higher and lower values than these amounts.

Technology Readiness Level (TRL): Challenge 1: Model – Starting from a minimum of TRL 1, ending at maximum of TRL 6. Challenge 2: Treat – Starting from a minimum of TRL 4, ending at a maximum of TRL 8.

Contract start month: Aim to start July 2026.

Project duration: Equal to or less than 28 months.

The key problem area in scope for this competition is the ‘complex conflict wound’. Our definition of a ‘wound’ in the context of this competition is an injury to skin, muscle, and / or bone at the extremities (including maxillofacial) or torso. We are not including injury to internal organs, traumatic brain injury, ocular injury or hearing loss.

Specifically, the problem area can be broken down into 1) the current lack of effective models available in which to study wound aetiology and test novel therapeutics and 2) the urgent need to develop novel treatments that can lead to lower morbidity and improved outcomes in those patients who sustain complex conflict wounds.

The two vignettes below provide representative examples of modern combat injuries and the challenges faced in treating them.

Vignette 1:

A soldier lies injured on the battlefield. The blast shock wave and shrapnel generated by a nearby mortar coupled with a hard landing on a jagged surface have caused extensive damage to the extremities. The soldier has open fractures of both legs, significant soft tissue loss, and the wounds are contaminated with soil and debris. The soldier is aided by a combat medic, but their location means they cannot be extracted for damage control surgery for another 36 hours. The contaminants seed and spread infection throughout the wound and tissue necrosis accelerates.

Vignette 2:

Due to the non-permissive nature of the modern battlefield, another soldier has taken 10 days to reach definitive surgical care. They have a partial amputation of their hand, fragmentation injuries to their face, and an open fracture of their left tibia with extensive skin and muscle loss. During their transfer the volume of casualties at each echelon of care has resulted in the provision of minimal treatment: partial washouts of wounds and temporary stabilisation of the open fracture. Upon reaching definitive surgical care, bacterial colonisation has resulted in the development of multi-drug-resistant infection in the wounds, including in the open fracture. The gold standard of care for this patient would involve tens of hours of operating theatre time, expensive limb salvage kit, extended courses of antibiotics, input from multiple specialist multidisciplinary teams, and months to years of rehabilitation. However, each day the receiving hospital is progressively overwhelmed  by the volume of similar casualties that will continue to increase every day.

These vignettes demonstrate the need for better treatments for conflict wounds, which can be administered as early as possible following injury and before the patient reaches substantive care. To develop these treatments, we also need a better understanding of the tractable mechanisms underpinning conflict wounds. This competition therefore has two linked challenge areas:

• Modelling Conflict Wounds – Relevant models of conflict wounds are essential to advance our understanding of the pathophysiology and infectious aetiology underpinning conflict wounds, and allow us to innovate, develop and test therapeutic and management strategies.
• Treating Conflict Wounds – Treatments to maintain tissue viability and reduce infection during protracted evacuation, where there is prolonged, non-specialist field care, are crucial to improve clinical outcomes; early treatment reduces long-term morbidity and improves functional outcome.

All proposals, for both challenges, must make clear how they accord with the principles of the National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement & Reduction of Animals in Research (NC3Rs), and how the PREPARE guidelines have been used in planning any animal work.

In this challenge we are looking for robust, stand-alone in vitro, in silico, ex vivo, and in vivo models (or any combination of these). The models must be ecologically valid, i.e. accurately reflect real world situations, and able to replicate as many facets as possible that define conflict wounds. This includes the ability to model:

• injury of more than one tissue (of skin, muscle, and bone)
• injury via a relevant mechanism (e.g. blast, shrapnel, thermal, etc.); please demonstrate that the model has potential to be wounded by these means, you do not need to demonstrate that these mechanisms have already been used on your model
• injury coupled with infection of the wound with pathogens of interest (e.g. Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus) implicated in multi-drug resistant wound infections and / or other relevant contamination

The model should be capable of providing output over a relevant timeline (days; a minimum of 24 hours) and those that encompass an element of wound deterioration without therapeutic intervention are of particular interest.

Ideally models will be high throughput whilst enabling study of prolonged timelines prior to substantive medical care and the impact of medical intervention during this period.

We are seeking innovations that will start from TRL 1 or above, and which will progress through at least one TRL during the project, up to a maximum of TRL 6 by the end of the project.

In this challenge we are seeking the development of approaches that treat or prevent bacterial colonisation / infection, optimise tissue viability, and prevent the progression of necrosis.

Such treatments may include, but are not limited to:

• novel biologics
• pharmaceuticals
• bacteriophages
• devices

Proposals that present novel routes of administration for existing interventions are also within scope (e.g. gels, sprays, foams, etc.) but they must be feasible in austere, pre-hospital settings. Proposals that explore the repurposing of existing licensed approaches are also welcome.

We are seeking proposals outlining treatment strategies that can be delivered as close as possible to the point of injury when rapid evacuation is not possible and the casualty requires prolonged, non-specialist field care. Interventions must be able to be administered by non-specialist medical personnel in austere environments with minimal logistical burden. Of particular interest are solutions that:

• are small and physically easy to carry
• are ruggedised
• require no refrigeration
• have little or no electrical heat signature

Proposers should also consider the need to develop approaches that are easy and cost-effective to produce at scale.

We are interested in proposals to progress interventions that have already demonstrated proof of concept (i.e. that are at TRL 4 or above and have already been validated in a laboratory environment), or to explore the repurposing of existing therapeutics. We are seeking innovations that will start from at least TRL 4, which will progress through at least one TRL during the project, up to a maximum of TRL 8 by the end of the project.

We want novel ideas to benefit end-users working in UK defence and security. Your proposal should include evidence of:

• relevance for injury to skin, muscle, and / or bone at the extremities (including maxillofacial) or torso
• the potential for your innovation to be translated into a practical demonstration in the future, whether it be theoretical development, method / technical advancement or proof of concept research
• innovation or a creative approach
• how the proposed work applies to any defence and / or security context

We are not interested in proposals that:

• seek to develop models of simple wounds (e.g. wounding to skin only) or ‘civilian-type’ injuries such as closed fractures or dislocations.
• seek to develop models of or treatments for isolated injuries to internal organs such as the brain, thoracic or abdominal contents
• describe research / models based on chronic wounding related to a comorbidity (such as diabetes), or with a genetic basis (for example muscular dystrophy) without clear theoretical or empirical evidence for how the approach could be applied to a traumatic wound in a healthy individual
• aim to model or treat non compressible haemorrhage (subject of an earlier DASA competition)
• seek to develop haemostatics (including bandages and tamponades, etc.) unless they present a way of delivering therapeutic to the wound
• do not demonstrate accordance with the 3Rs or evidence use of the PREPARE guidelines in planning any work involving animals (regardless of whether this work is performed in the UK or elsewhere)
• do not provide information about the project licence, establishment licence and personal licences for and animal work taking place in the UK (proposals with animal work taking place outside of the UK will need to include the equivalent information)
• include work that requires MOD Research Ethics Committee (MODREC) review but do not account for the time required to achieve favourable opinion in their project timeline (approximately 3 months including mandatory Scientific Assessment Committee review prior to MODREC submission)
• constitute consultancy, paper-based studies or literature reviews, which just summarise the existing literature without any view of future innovation
• are an unsolicited resubmission of a previous DASA bid
• offer demonstrations of off-the-shelf products requiring no experimental development (unless applied in a novel way to the challenge)
• offer no real long-term prospect of integration into defence and security capabilities
• offer no real prospect of out-competing existing technological solutions

Briefing webinar

10 February 2026 (10am-11.30am) – Launch webinar providing further detail on the problem space and a chance to ask questions in an open forum. If you would like to participate, please register on the UKDI Eventbrite page.

One-to-Ones

18 & 24 February 2026 – A series of 15 minute one-to-one teleconference sessions, giving you the opportunity to ask specific technical questions to the competition team in a closed forum. Registration for these sessions will be available the day after the launch webinar on 10 February 2026, on the Eventbrite pages below. Booking will be on a first come first served basis, please use the following links to register:

• 18 February 2026 (1pm-4pm)
• 24 February 2026 (9am-noon)

Non-technical questions about the competition process should be sent to the UKDI Help Centre, accelerator@dstl.gov.uk.

Innovation Partners

UKDI has a team of locally based Innovation Partners that can provide support in working with us. It is strongly recommended that you contact your local Innovation Partner to discuss your idea for any aspect of this competition. You can initiate this through the submission of a Contact Form by following instructions on the Contact an Innovation Partner page if you do not already have an established relationship with your local Innovation Partner.