What is the Make-II procedure, and how does it differ from Make-I?

Make-I involves government funding for part of prototype development; Make-II does not. Under Make-II the vendor develops and funds the prototype itself, typically to substitute an import or offer an innovative solution, and the return is the prospect of an order once the prototype is accepted rather than a development grant along the way.

Not automatically, but the terms are moving that way. The draft DAP 2026 proposes five years of assured orders for Make and iDEX projects once accepted, and DPM 2025 already provides for assured orders running up to five years and beyond for items developed under indigenisation. Exact quantities and terms are still fixed case by case in the resulting contract.

DPM 2025 caps liquidated damages on indigenisation contracts at 0.1 percent per week, compared with 0.5 percent per week that applies to other contracts, and the general 10 percent maximum is levied only for inordinate delay rather than ordinary slippage. Confirm the clause actually written into your own contract, since DPM 2025 sets the ceiling, not a fixed figure.

They are different stages, not competing routes. Make-II is how a vendor develops and proves a prototype, often with no prior government funding. Buy (Indian-IDDM), which DAP 2020 treats as the most preferred capital acquisition category, requiring at least 50 percent indigenous content, is how a proven design is then procured at scale. A Make-II success can feed into a later Buy (Indian-IDDM) order.

Yes, alongside other routes. Buyers may relax prior turnover and experience requirements for micro and small enterprises, iDEX funds startups and individual innovators directly, and SRIJAN lists items open to new developers, alongside Make-II's industry-funded prototype route. Critical, security-sensitive items may still require prior experience regardless of which route is used.