Your TL;DR: Grants, Broad Agency Announcement (BAAs), CommercialSolutions Opening (CSOs), and Other Transactions (OTs) are not competing options so much as tools designed for different stages of innovation. The fastest path depends less on organization type and more on technical readiness, desired flexibility, and how closely the government wants to engage. Understanding those differences upfront prevents wasted effort and misaligned applications.
Why This Choice Feels Harder Than It Should
Many innovators do not struggle because they lack good ideas. They struggle because they are trying to force those ideas into the wrong federal mechanism. Grants, Broad Agency Announcement (BAAs), Commercial Solutions Opening (CSOs), and Other Transactions (OTs) are all viable options, but knowing which one fits your project or business model best is key to positioning yourself as a competitive applicant.
Funding conversations often start with the question, “Is this a grant or a contract?” That framing misses the tools the Department of War (DoW) increasingly relies on to move innovation forward. Broad Agency Announcements (BAAs), Commercial Solutions Openings (CSOs), and Other Transactions (OTs) were created precisely because traditional instruments could not keep up with modern technology cycles.
If it’s helpful, EBHC often encourages teams to step back from the funding label and instead ask what the government is trying to do with the work.
Grants and Cooperative Agreements: Support With Structure
Grants and cooperative agreements are assistance mechanisms. Their primary purpose is to support a public objective authorized by law, not to acquire a specific product or capability for government use.
A grant is used when the government does not expect substantial involvement in how the work is carried out. A cooperative agreement is similar, but it anticipates active collaboration or participation by the government during execution. In both cases, no fee or profit is allowed, and the structure is governed by statute rather than negotiation.
These mechanisms work well for well-defined research programs, academic studies, and initiatives where predictability matters more than speed or flexibility.
BAAs: When the Question Is Still Being Explored
A Broad Agency Announcement is most appropriate when the DoW understands the problem but is still open to how it might be solved. BAAs invite technical ideas that require additional research and development, often from innovators who have never worked with the Department before.
Rather than ranking proposals against each other, BAAs evaluate each submission against the stated technical objectives. This allows the government to fund multiple promising approaches and engage early with emerging technology.
BAAs frequently lead to negotiated awards and may use contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, or OTs, depending on what best fits the proposed work.
CSOs: When Readiness Matters More Than Research
Commercial Solutions Openings are designed for solutions that have already moved beyond core R&D. The emphasis shifts to demonstration, prototyping, and operational relevance.
CSOs reduce barriers to entry by replacing lengthy proposals with concise solution briefs and by focusing evaluation on innovation, maturity, and deployability. Many CSOs operate under rolling submissions or targeted calls, allowing the DoW to act quickly when a strong solution appears.
CSOs are commonly paired with OTs, especially for software and adaptable technologies where requirements evolve rapidly.
Other Transactions: The Flexible Backbone
Other Transactions are not solicitations. They are the legal authority that allows the DoW to structure awards outside traditional procurement and assistance rules.
OTs are used for research and prototype projects where negotiation, intellectual property considerations, and rapid iteration are critical. Prototype OTs can also allow follow-on production without a new competition if statutory conditions are met, creating a direct path from demonstration to deployment.
Not every opportunity will use an OT, but when flexibility and speed abut when flexibility and speed are emphasized, OTs are often part of the design.
Many capable innovators default to grants because they feel familiar, even when their work is better suited to a BAA, CSO, or OT-backed pathway. That mismatch can lead to long timelines, limited engagement, and outcomes that never fully transition.
A Better Way to Decide
Instead of starting with the mechanism, start with three questions: How mature is the technology? How quickly does it need to move? How much flexibility will the work require as it evolves?
Early-stage, exploratory work often aligns with BAAs. Market-ready solutions aiming for adoption tend to fit CSOs. Projects that demand negotiation and adaptability frequently rely on OTs. Grants and cooperative agreements remain valuable when the goal is structured support rather than deployment.
If you’d like a second set of eyes on how your current project maps to these pathways, EBHC can offer a perspective informed by how agencies actually select and execute these awards.
There is no single “best” federal funding mechanism. There is only the best fit for the work at hand. Teams that understand how grants, BAAs, CSOs, and OTs interrelate make faster decisions, pursue fewer dead ends, and move innovation into use more effectively.
If choosing between these options feels unclear, that uncertainty is often a signal to reframe the question rather than push harder on the wrong path.
Ready To Take the Next Step?
We assist our clients in locating, applying for, and evaluating the outcomes of non-dilutive grant funding. We believe non-dilutive funding is a crucial tool for mitigating investment risks, and we are dedicated to guiding our clients through the entire process—from identifying the most suitable opportunities to submitting and managing grant applications.