Start with the research decision, not a hardware wish list
A research budget should begin with the question the study must answer. KOKO Research is described by Homebot One as a platform in active development for robotics and human-robot interaction work, with access and interfaces subject to change. That makes scoping especially important. Define the population, environment, interaction, comparison, outcome, and study duration before asking what access might cost. Otherwise, a quote cannot be connected to a defensible research plan.
The price is right when the platform, staff effort, study controls, and evidence quality are appropriate for the decision. A laboratory exploring navigation may need different access and instrumentation than a team studying long-term household interaction. The official platform page is evidence of the program’s intended direction and access path, not proof that every proposed interface, sensor stream, behavior, or study setup is currently available. Confirm the exact research configuration in writing.
Build the budget from the complete study lifecycle
Separate the estimate into planning, access, preparation, data collection, analysis, and closeout. Planning includes protocol development, feasibility work, contracts, security review, and any IRB submission. Access may include hardware, platform services, shipping, deposits, facility modifications, or support, but only a current quote can establish those terms. Preparation includes staff training, integration, pilot scripts, participant materials, accessibility, and failure-recovery procedures.
Data collection includes researcher and participant time, room scheduling, observation, technical monitoring, compensation, travel, and repeated sessions. Analysis may require annotation, storage, software, statistical support, qualitative coding, and reproducibility work. Closeout includes returning equipment, exporting or deleting information, documenting deviations, preserving approved records, and restoring the study space. Add contingency by risk category instead of placing an unexplained percentage at the bottom.
- Known cost: supported by a current quote, institutional rate, or staff plan.
- Estimated cost: based on a stated quantity and unit rate.
- Range: used where iteration count or participant workload can vary.
- Quote required: a vendor-dependent item with no verified public price.
- Decision risk: an unknown that could change feasibility or study validity.
Budget for research protections and data governance
A home or lab study may involve people, identifiable information, or interventions. The research team and institution must determine whether human-subjects rules, IRB review, informed consent, or other requirements apply. When consent is required, HHS guidance emphasizes understandable information, foreseeable risks and benefits, confidentiality, contacts, voluntariness, and the ability to withdraw. The budget should cover the communication and ongoing process, not only production of a form.
Create a data management plan before collection. Identify each data type, collection purpose, access role, processing location, retention period, sharing condition, and deletion or archival method. Include the cost of secure storage, access review, de-identification where appropriate, transcription, transfer, incident handling, and participant requests. Confirm what the KOKO Research configuration exposes; do not infer access to raw data or interfaces from an illustrative product description.
Protect validity with readiness and contingency gates
A platform can be interesting but not ready for a particular protocol. Before full enrollment, run a technical feasibility gate: verify the required behavior, repeatability, logging, timing, researcher controls, recovery procedure, and environmental constraints. Document the software and hardware configuration used. A demonstration in a different room or with a different workflow is useful background, but it is not evidence that the planned protocol will run reliably.
Create contingencies for integration delay, unavailable interfaces, failed sessions, hardware downtime, software changes, recruitment shortfalls, and redesign after pilot feedback. Define who can approve scope changes and when a change requires renewed technical, privacy, or IRB review. A stop rule protects both participants and the budget. It also keeps a sunk cost from becoming the reason to continue a study that can no longer answer its original question.
- Gate 1: the research question and required evidence are specific.
- Gate 2: the current platform can support the critical protocol steps.
- Gate 3: protections, consent, security, and data plans are approved.
- Gate 4: pilot data meet predefined quality and burden thresholds.
- Gate 5: the remaining study is still worth its complete expected cost.
Compare proposals by evidence delivered
Normalize each proposal around the same study unit: number of sites, participants, sessions, hours of platform access, supported interfaces, support level, and deliverables. Then calculate a range for cost per usable session or cost per completed study unit. Pair that number with data quality, participant burden, researcher workload, reproducibility, and the value of answering the question. The cheapest session is not useful if it cannot produce interpretable evidence.
The approval memo should identify confirmed capabilities, quote assumptions, excluded costs, readiness evidence, research protections, contingency, and the next decision gate. Keep roadmap ideas in a separate section. This allows a lab to consider Homebot One KOKO Research on its actual study value while remaining honest about an active-development platform and the limits of currently public information.
Frequently asked questions
Does Homebot One publish KOKO Research platform pricing?
The official page reviewed for this guide describes an active-development platform and an access process, not a public price sheet. Request a quote tied to the required hardware, interfaces, support, sites, and schedule.
Does every KOKO Research study require IRB review?
Not necessarily. The institution must determine whether a project is human-subjects research and what rules apply. Make that determination early enough to include review, consent, privacy, and participant-protection work in the plan.
Can a lab assume access to raw KOKO sensor data or APIs?
No. Confirm the exact interfaces, data fields, rates, controls, limitations, and support status for the proposed configuration. Public product concepts or illustrative interfaces are not a substitute for technical documentation.
What is the most useful budget denominator?
Use a unit tied to the research decision, such as a usable session, completed participant, or validated study milestone. Report evidence quality and participant burden alongside cost so a low number does not hide unusable data.
Sources & further reading
From Homebot One, the team building KOKO in Fremont, California.
