BAA Tactical Autonomy UARC 6 Sep 2022.docx

AIR FORCE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF SCIENTIST RESEARCH BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT (BAA)

TACTICAL AUTONOMY (TA)

UNIVERSITY AFFILIATED RESEARCH CENTER (UARC)

AFRL Announcement #FA9550-22-S-0001

OVERVIEW INFORMATION

For decades, Congress has recognized the need to develop a diverse national science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce. While federal agencies provide significant opportunities for underrepresented racial and ethnic minorities in these fields, the national STEM workforce remains less racially and ethnically diverse than the U.S. general population. As the largest federal R&D funding agency and the largest employer of federal STEM professionals, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) plays an essential role in the U.S. science and technology ecosystem and can greatly expand opportunities to diversify the STEM workforce. To this end, the DoD operates under a department-wide STEM strategic plan, with the following goals:

1. Inspire community engagement in DoD STEM education programs and activities to provide meaningful STEM learning opportunities for students and educators.

2. Attract the Nation’s and DoD’s current and future STEM workforce through multiple pathways to educational and career opportunities.

3. Increase participation of underserved and underrepresented groups in STEM education and workforce development programs, activities, and outreach.

4. Advance the efficiency and effectiveness of STEM education and workforce development programs, activities, and outreach through evaluation and assessment.

Section 220 of the FY22 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) directed DoD to develop a plan to assess the capacity of Historically Black Colleges and Universities and Minority Serving Institutions (HBCUs/MIs) and establish program(s) to award contracts, grants, or other agreements in order to develop the capability of these institutions to more effectively compete for Federal R&D funding.

Additionally, despite the autonomy advances in the last decade, several factors continue to impede the deployment and adoption of autonomous systems:

1. Trust in Mission Autonomy: Machine learning techniques widely used today are inherently unpredictable and lack the necessary mathematical framework to provide guarantees on correctness, while DoD applications that depend on safe and correct operation for mission success require predictable behavior and strong assurance. Additionally, if we assume autonomous systems are capable of moral agency, then the goal of machine ethics is to enable machines to reason ethically.

2. Collaboration between Platforms: Achieving higher levels of autonomy in uncertain, unstructured, and dynamic environments increasingly involves data-driven machine learning techniques with many open systems science and systems engineering challenges.

3. Human-Machine Teaming: In the absence of an adequately high-level of autonomy that can be relied upon, substantial operator involvement is required, which not only severely limits operational gains, but creates significant new challenges in the areas of human-machine interactions and mixed initiative control.

The Department of the Air Force (DAF) and the DoD intend to address the NDAA directive, and the need to progress autonomy research, in part, by establishing an HBCU-led University Affiliated Research Center (UARC) consortium to execute research focused in Tactical Autonomy that will aid in the transition of research into practical applications. The program objectives include fostering creative autonomy research in science and engineering; enhancing early career development of outstanding STEM professionals to ultimately increase and diversify the pool of STEM talent to fulfill the Department’s missions; and increasing opportunities for university(ies) faculty, staff, and students to engage with the Air Force, Space Force and DoD missions and related challenges in science and engineering.

Under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 3204(a)(3)(b) as implemented by FAR 6.302-3(a)(2)(ii), Industrial mobilization; engineering, developmental, or research capability; or expert services and 10 U.S.C. 3204(a)(5) as implemented by FAR 6.302-5(a)(2)(i) Authorized or required by Statue, specifically 10 U.S.C. § 4144, the Secretary of the Air Force, Office of the Chief Scientist (AF/ST) invites Universities from eligible educational institutions that can demonstrate the following:

a. Carnegie Foundation Classification of R2 or higher. (Required at time of proposal)

b. Research and engineering capabilities in autonomy. (Required at time of proposal)

c. Research and education consortium with other HBCUs and with defense organizations.

d. Plans to increase the number of graduates in DoD-relevant STEM disciplines

e. Plans to support the implementation of the DoD Mentor Protégé Program (MPP) where eligible small businesses expand their footprint in the defense industrial base.

The award will be a 5 year Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract with a ceiling estimated at $90,000,000. Anticipated annual funding is estimated at $12,000,000 per year. UARC re-certification will occur every 5 years as long as requirements continue to be met. Please review the remainder of this announcement for additional information.

Hyperlinks have been embedded within this document and appear as underlined, and or blue-colored words in the midst of paragraphs. The reader may “jump” to the linked section within this document by “clicking” (CTRL + CLICK, or CLICK).

BAA: FA9550-22-S-0001

SUMMARY FUNDING OPPORTUNITY INFORMATION

1. FEDERAL AWARDING AGENCY NAME

Air Force Office of Scientific Research 875 North Randolph Street, STE 325, Room 3112 Arlington, VA 22203

2. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY TITLE

Tactical Autonomy University Affiliated Research Center (UARC)

3. ANNOUNCEMENT TYPE

Initial Announcement

4. ANNOUNCEMENT NUMBER

FA9550-22-S-0001

5. KEY DATES

Deadlines UARC BAA posted 6 September 2022 (Tuesday)

Proposal questions due 21 September 2022 (Wednesday)

Proposal answers posted 28 September 2022 (Wednesday)

UARC proposals must be received no later than 7 November 2022 (Monday) at 8:00 AM Eastern Time Submitted to lexcie.potter@us.af.mil and denise.johnson.19@us.af.mil

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 7

Summary 7

SECURITY CLEARANCE AND PUBLIC DISSEMINATION OF RESEARCH

A. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

1. SUMMARY

In support of the FY22 NDAA, the Department of the Air Force (DAF), in coordination with the Under Secretary of Defense for Research & Engineering (USD(R&E)) and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition & Sustainment (USD(A&S)), will identify a lead-HBCU and fund a university consortium of HBCUs with engineering and technology capabilities essential to the DAF and DoD in tactical autonomy research. In support of the commitment to the UARC and importance of the educational and research outcomes, the government will establish a Government Board of Advisors to guide the UARC. This board is in addition to any Board of Governance the lead institution might convene in support of the UARC.

The consortium is expected to increase the Carnegie Foundation Research Classification from R2 (high research) to R1 (very-high research) for at least one member of the consortium. Additional requirements include:

1. Establish a domestic, state of the art research facility(s) dedicated to tactical autonomy research,

2. Assemble, foster, and support a world-leading team of autonomy faculty and researchers,

3. Increase the quality and quantity of job candidates in this area of military need, and

4. Support an ecosystem of business and government partnerships to transition autonomous technologies to the warfighter.

DoD Directive, 3000.09, Autonomy in Weapon Systems assigns responsibilities for the development and use of autonomous and semi-autonomous functions in weapon systems, including manned and unmanned platforms.

The primary focus is on innovative research to advance the state of the art in tactical autonomy by understanding and mitigating challenges, developing revolutionary new approaches, tracking, characterizing and reducing challenges to operational integration, and developing supporting technology. Specific research topics of interest include, but are not limited to, the following: Trust in Mission Autonomy, Collaboration between Platforms, and Human Machine Teaming. Proposals should describe the long-term vision of the proposed work and how it relates to satisfaction of individuals and systems with the advanced capabilities. Proposals should describe expected technical challenges and steps to overcome them.

It is important that your proposal shows strength in as many of the evaluation areas as practicable for maximum competitiveness. The evaluation areas include Technical, Consortium Coordination Plan (CCP), and STEM education. See section E.1. for Principal Evaluation and Selection Criteria.

The award(s) will be made to an R2 classified HBCU from a covered educational institution for research and education programs. UARC principal investigators must be U.S. citizens, or permanent residents. Eligibility Requirements are further discussed in Section C.

2. REQUIREMENT/OBJECTIVE

TECHNICAL

a) Research, develop and demonstrate autonomous technologies that will enable various DAF and DoD mission sets, with minimal supervision from human operations in environments that are complex and unpredictable with applications in Air, Space, Cyberspace, Ground, and Sea. These efforts should increase opportunities for faculty, staff, and students to recognize the Air Force, Space Force, and Department of Defense mission and related challenges in science and engineering to meet the UARC core competencies and capabilities.

1. Core Competencies: The Tactical Autonomy (TA) UARC must possess the following unique core competencies (areas of expertise in key technical areas to support the UARC’s mission):

i. Theoretical and practical understanding of the techniques and technologies related to Foundational AI science and technology for the rapid development, evaluation, and deployment of AI-enabled operational capabilities across DoD at scale, and for operation around the world.

ii. Theoretical and practical understanding of the techniques and technologies related to Trust in Mission Autonomy to deliver trusted autonomy for Robotic and Intelligent Autonomous Systems in complex, contested missions on the multi-domain battlefield, enabled by operational trust and shared understanding, and supported by natural interaction, communication and learning

iii. Theoretical and practical understanding of the techniques and technologies related to Collaboration between Platforms, I.e., Human/Autonomous System Interaction and Collaboration, or Machine/Machine Interaction and Collaboration, enabled by addressing main technical challenges including interoperability, composability, complexity, and adaptability.

iv. Theoretical and practical understanding of the techniques and technologies related to Human Machine Teaming, i.e. the ability to perceive, reason, and adapt to complex, dynamic, and contested operating environments with limited human intervention.

v. Basic and applied autonomy research in order to cultivate STEM talent.

2. Core Capabilities: The TA UARC must in turn possess the following capabilities (skills, proficiencies, and abilities that are essential and mutually complementary to the UARC mission and the core competencies):

i. Specialized facilities for autonomy RDT&E in the following areas: Enhancement of Multi-domain Situational Awareness; Reduction of Cognitive Workload; Enabling Force Protection; and Projecting Solutions At-scale, and in general for autonomy-at-rest (Decision aids), autonomy-in-motion (UxVs, Cyber), and interdependent systems (Human-Autonomous Teams).

ii. Data collection technology for field environments.

iii. Nationally recognized nexus of academic, industrial, interagency and defense partnerships in facilitating effective interchange and fostering an environment of excellence in the development of multidisciplinary Autonomy solutions and talent.

iv. Higher education institutional and program policies that support workforce development and training across the autonomy spectrum, including a robust data collection effort to track student, faculty, and staff growth in autonomy.

b) The Tactical Autonomy (TA) UARC will assist the DAF and DoD in the oversight and guidance of research, development, testing, evaluation, and use of scientific and technological capabilities to advance technology in pursuit of autonomous capabilities, processes, and systems. The core mission of the TA UARC is to assist the DAF and DoD to achieve dominant capabilities through technical excellence and innovation in autonomy. The TA UARC will meet its core mission by better enabling the DAF and DoD to meet the following 10 initiatives, as referenced in the DoD Better Buying Power 3.0: Achieving Dominant Capabilities Through Technical Excellence and Innovation.

1. Seek efficiencies to better achieve affordable programs for DoD

2. Anticipate and plan for responsive and emerging threats by building stronger partnerships with acquisition, requirements, and academia.

3. Institutionalize stronger DoD level long-range R&D plans.

4. Remove barriers to commercial technology utilization.

5. Increase the use of prototyping and experimentation.

6. Emphasize technology insertion and refresh program planning.

7. Reduce cycle times while ensuring sound investments.

8. Improve outreach for technology and products.

9. Improve the effectiveness and productivity of engineering and technical services.

10. Increase support for Stem education.

c) Tactical Autonomy is defined as autonomous systems acting with delegated and bounded authority of humans in support of tactical, short-term actions associated with a longer-term strategic vision. Focus Areas include:

1. Trust in Mission Autonomy:

a. Systems will behave as expected when exposure to the operators or “users” results in behavior expectations (a mental model of what the system will do) and users are willing to be vulnerable to the actions taken by the autonomous solution.

i. A major contributor to trust is proficiency of the solution. Estimating proficiency requires Test, Evaluation, Validation & Verification (TEV/V) which can be challenging in complex systems and particularly difficult in autonomy.

ii. New approaches to TEV/V are required that envisions more than a single authorization, but periodic validation / certification.

b. A myriad of hardware/software (HW/SW) assessment technologies and technical approaches are sought by the Department to support fielding of Tactical Autonomy.

i. As an example, Artificial Intelligence (AI) or Machine Learning (ML) models may be needed to collect mission data to aid in establishing trust as models improve over time.

ii. After deployment of the models, consideration should be given to:

- Gathering observations and incorporating updates to the AI models to enable Tactical Autonomy.

- Regression testing of prior tests and the identification of issues from ‘re-training’ users to account for new errors introduced by autonomy updates.

c. AI enabled autonomy – aggregate areas to determine the conditions under which the system should be used to perform a given mission.

d. Focus on tactical/real-time trust estimates to establish a ‘pocket of trust’ – real time trust estimates based on details of the current planned or ongoing use, versus aggregate measures of performance.

e. Ethical Autonomy: Provide a clear, efficient process of inquiry for personnel involved in Tactical Autonomy system development (e.g.: program managers, commercial vendors, or government partners) to achieve the following goals:

i. Ensure DoDs Ethical Principles for AI are integrated into the planning, development, and deployment phases of the technical lifecycle;

ii. Effectively examine, test, and validate all programs and prototypes align with DoD’s Ethical Principles for AI; and,

iii. Leverage a process that is reliable, replicable, and scalable across a variety of programs

2. Collaboration Between Platforms:

a. Study interaction between various autonomous agents to determine feasibility. To achieve mosaic warfare requires disaggregation / distribution across manned and unmanned platforms. The composition of legacy solutions with new systems/platforms can create an adaptive kill web but should not be overly costly to develop.

b. Three main technical challenges have to be addressed to achieve this goal:

i. Interoperability – should not lock down standards that limit technical innovation.

ii. Composability – allow solution to combine together to accomplish tasks that could not have been accomplished independently.

iii. Adaptability – broad, flexible solutions; functionality change.

3. Human-Machine Teaming: Hybrid teaming where individuals have different roles. Roles need to be flexible – subordinate, peer, and supervising/tasking.

a. Identify levels of acceptance, failure, etc., for approval. Describe and develop assessments to define levels of success.

b. Requirements over time to achieve optimal performance.

c. Research must answer the following questions

- What is the system doing?

- Why is it performing in this manner, and,

- What happens if it’s exposed to a different set of variables?

i. Systems can use a representation with similar aspects of human cognition to facilitate the formation by the human teammates of a mental model of what the Tactical Autonomy is doing. Alternatively, in some instances joint training, co-creation between the human operators and the Tactical Autonomy developers.

ii. Research and development of systems must be inter-predictable. If systems must represent explainability, they are likely to suffer a loss in performance.

iii. Research and development of systems must focus on the dynamic between explainability and performance to avoid sacrifices in performance. It must be additive to the human-machine teaming relationship to spur development in Tactical Autonomy and be identified as an asset in real-time operations.

4. Areas of particular interest are tactical autonomous systems that:

a. Enhance multi-domain situational awareness

b. Reduce Cognitive Workload

c. Enable Force Protection

d. Support Cyber Defense

e. Augment Logistics

f. Automate maneuver and mobility The technology developments that result from these efforts will substantially improve the DAF and DoD’s capability to conduct missions in a variety of environments while minimizing risks to Airmen, Guardians, and DoD Personnel.

CONSORTIUM COORDINATION PLAN

a) The UARC Consortium will be led by a lead HBCU responsible for managing, coordinating, and evaluating the Consortium. Functioning as an effective consortium to leverage capabilities, resources, and knowledge, as well as share and adopt best practices to achieve the Government’s objectives will be a significant measure of success for this UARC.

b) Management: The selected HBCU will lead the Consortium to ensure fundamental elements are focused on planning and executing programs in alignment with the AF’s UARC priorities and goals as outlined in this BAA. Thus, the lead HBCU will have a clear vision for the roles and contributions of the consortium participants and how funding would be distributed to address specific UARC priorities. The organizational framework of the Consortium should be efficient and flexible with defined areas of responsibility among the Consortium Members to minimize overhead and duplication, yet ensure relevance and proper oversight.

c) Coordination: The Consortium lead will also assemble and work with Consortium representatives to successfully coordinate and implement fundamental UARC priorities described in this announcement. Coordination activities may include, but are not limited to hosting Consortium Committee meetings, submitting consolidated Consortium-wide deliverables, conducting Consortium-wide program evaluation and directing Consortium-wide outreach and communications efforts.

d) Consortium Evaluation: The evaluation effort for measuring the Consortium’s effectiveness is essential and will promote and enable collaboration, creativity, and synergy among members to ultimately achieve the goals established by the Government.

Thus, the lead institution should present an evaluation plan that includes but is not limited to:

1. Evaluation of the degree to which there is alignment of consortium activities and practices with the UARC’s tactical competencies, priorities, and goals

2. Identification of effective communication and meeting strategies across the consortium

3. A coordinated data collection effort across all consortium partners to compile common metrics, i.e. a set of standard evaluation measures across partners to demonstrate measurable progress and build a robust body of consortium outcomes

4. External or independent program evaluator to identify potential opportunities, threats and weaknesses to be addressed.

e) Additionally, since the UARC consortium is expected to elevate the Carnegie Classification for members of the consortium, quantitative and qualitative data that can measure progress of the overall UARC Consortium over time can include, but are not limited to:

1. Size of research facility dedicated to tactical research e.g. number of (new) research staff, (new) research faculty, value of equipment, size of lab spaces in participating institutions

2. Research productivity e.g. peer-reviewed publications; students graduating with Bachelor’s, Master’s, Ph.D.’s; additional grant funding in Autonomy and other STEM-related fields

3. Research translation and progress from 6.2 to 6.3 and above

4. Expansion of consortium ecosystem and participants e.g. increases in research collaborations external to the consortium

5. Growth of business and government investments to transition autonomous technologies to the warfighter

6. National Academies recommendations on enhancing HBCU research capacity. Please see Defense Research Capacity at HBCUs for additional metrics for measuring changes in institutions’ research portfolios.

f) The UARC Consortium will be led by a lead HBCU responsible for managing, coordinating, and evaluating the Consortium. At a minimum the CCP should include:

1. Prospective HBCUs

2. Definitions

3. Lead Institution proposed Agreement with Consortium members

4. Purpose of the Consortium

5. Commencement and Duration

6. Project Management w/Steering Group or Board of Governors

7. Responsibilities of Individual Members

8. Project Resources (Allocation / Distribution / Invoicing-Claims

9. Responsibilities of the Parties to include performance, Insurance, Compliance, Indemnification, Facility use/availability, Institution responsibility.

10. Policies for Addition of parties / Removal or withdrawal of parties from the consortium: At the request of the Consortium and at the approval of the DAF Sponsor, additional Consortium Members may be added or removed to advance the DAF/DoD tactical autonomy program.

11. Data Management

12. Confidentiality

13. Intellectual Property

14. Termination

15. Governing Law and Dispute Resolution

16. General Provisions

17. Submission Information

18. Structure and Operation of the Consortium

i. Summarize the organization of your consortium, its governance structure, and how it will be managed. You should include details on the funding plan for the lead institution and what functions it will provide to the consortium members. Also include details on the proposed agreement between the lead institution and consortium members, clearly outlining the responsibilities of the consortium lead and those of the HBCU or non-HBCU partners, the latter of which may be provided support by non-Tactical Autonomy UARC funds; how member institutions will request-receive-execute funding;, how their performance will be evaluated and how underperforming members can improve their performance or be removed from the consortium. Please see section in this BAA on Consortium Coordination Plan.

ii. Prepare the next generation. Provide a focus on how the R&D generated from this UARC will be leveraged to develop STEM education and workforce training for students and practitioners. Please see section in this BAA on STEM Education.

STEM EDUCATION

a) UARCs can play an important role in creating a STEM pipeline for the R&D areas that are essential to the department; it’s common among all of the established UARCs to have some form of educational or workforce line of effort. HBCUs have since inception been involved in STEM programing that specifically integrates STEM education with society’s needs. Thus, some consideration will also be placed on the proposed strategies that the UARC Consortium would use to harness the education and workforce development outcomes. These outcomes will inevitably emerge from the robust R&D that will be generated by this UARC. Universities are thus encouraged to propose creative and strategic plans that can capitalize on the Autonomy R&D within this UARC Consortium. There are a plethora of STEM education and workforce initiatives that can leverage the Autonomy work that the Department is investing in. Some of these include, but are not limited to:

1. Build the Autonomy pipeline with training programs for undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral opportunities, through for e.g. internships, fellowships, summer programs, and other research activities.

2. Create curriculum for teaching Autonomy-related topics to new and skilled students, which might include new labs, courses, majors of study, degrees offered for example.

3. Support equitable access via strategic execution of STEM programs to generate an awareness of STEM and Autonomy careers among diverse STEM talent via outreach activities e.g. site visits to DoD labs, or supporting STEM career events.

4. Promote widespread education and understanding of Autonomy principles as it’s utility rapidly evolves with respect to the ethical, social, and economic implications.

b) Data Collection & STEM Evaluation Plan One of the goals of this new UARC Consortium is to build institutional research capacity. A robust data collection effort will be essential in showing institutional growth. Thus, applicants are strongly encouraged to propose a comprehensive STEM/workforce evaluation plan to investigate and track how the UARC is impacting the STEM education and overall research portfolio of participating institutions. It is recommended that the lead UARC conducts a robust data collection effort on common metrics across the consortium. There are quite a few metrics that could be tracked in the STEM education/workforce development portfolio, and we encourage applicants to propose a STEM program evaluation plan to monitor for example, but not limited to:

B. FEDERAL AWARD INFORMATION

A proposal submitted by an eligible educational institution under this Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) should enhance defense-related research and education at the institution(s) pursuant to objectives defined by 10 U.S.C. § 4144 and align with the DoD Autonomy modernization priority. Only 1 proposal shall be submitted per educational institution.

The anticipated award will support Basic Research (budget activity 6.1), Applied Research (budget activity 6.2), Advanced technology development (budget activity 6.3), and Advanced component development and prototypes (budget activity 6.4), with the predominance of anticipated funding being 6.2.

We anticipate making one (1) award to one University. The award will be a 5 year (12 month base + 2- 24 month options) Indefinitely-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contract with predominately Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee task orders, with the possibility of Firm-Fixed Fee (FFP) task orders and a total maximum ceiling value estimated at $90,000,000. Anticipated annual funding is estimated at $12,000,000 per year. The minimum order amount will be $25,000. The maximum order amount is $20,000,000 annually. No disbursement of the minimum guarantee will be made until such time that the University has been awarded and successfully completed a task order for services. It is anticipated that the minimum order amount will be met upon the first task order placed upon the award of the IDIQ. See Section I First Order Task Order Requirement of this announcement for the first task order proposal request to be submitted with the overarching UARC contract proposal. UARC re-certification will occur every 5 years, as long as requirements continue to be met. Upon award all Federal Agencies may utilize the UARC.

Anticipated Contract Ordering Period:

Note: Individual Task Order Period of Performance will be listed on each order.

The Applicants selected for award will be notified by the Contracting Officer or his/her designee telephonically or via email. The award is not official until the University has received the award signed by the Contracting Officer.

The Government reserves the right to select and fund for award all, some, or none of the proposals submitted in response to this announcement. There is no guarantee of an award. The AFRL-RBK Contracting Division has the authority to award a variety of instruments. The government intends to award a contract, specifically, an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. The Contracting Officer reserves the right to select the type of contract vehicle most appropriate for the effort proposed. Applicants should familiarize themselves with this type of funding instrument and the applicable regulations before submitting a proposal.

a. Contract. Mutually binding legal relationship obligating the seller to furnish the supplies or services and the buyer to pay for them. This includes, an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ), which:

i. Provides for an indefinite quantity, within stated limits, of research during a fixed period. The Government places orders for individual requirements.

ii. Requires the Government to order and the contractor to furnish at least a stated minimum quantity of research. In addition, if ordered, the contractor must furnish any additional quantities, not to exceed the stated maximum.

iii. The base contract has no funding associated with it, and lays out the terms and conditions and pricing, applicable to any orders placed against the base contract.

b. Governed by the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR). See FAR 16.5 for more information on IDIQs.

C. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

1. ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES

a. Qualified and responsible United States Educational HBCUs as defined as:

i. Accredited post-secondary R2 classified lead-HBCU, and

ii. Institutions of higher education eligible for assistance under Title III of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1051 et seq.).

We review your proposal in accordance with FAR 9.1, as supplemented, to assess risk posed by applicants, and confirm applicants are qualified, responsible, and eligible to receive an award. If we cannot determine you or your organization qualified and responsible, you are not eligible to receive an award. Award will be made only to a university deemed responsible IAW FAR 9.1, as supplemented. See Section F.3.a for additional information.

b. All non-lead Consortium members shall be HBCUs. Non-lead Consortium member awards can be made to HBCUs without a Carnegie Foundation R2 classification, where the principal investigator(s) (PI) is a U.S. citizen, or has permanent residency at time of proposal submission; employed on a full-time basis and holds a permanent position. All PIs must meet all eligibility requirements.

c. Primary Investigator Employment Requirements Principal Investigators must hold a full-time, non-contractor permanent, career-competitive, or tenure-track position (based on your institution’s definition) with your organization, or the proposal must include a letter from your organization stating that you will be considered for a permanent, career- competitive, or tenure- track non-contractor position if you currently hold a short-term appointment. This is in addition to the requirement you are a U.S. citizen or permanent resident. You are not eligible as a PI if you do not meet these requirements. You must have permanent residency at time of proposal submission.

d. Consortium / Faculty / Post-Doctoral Associates HBCUs applying under this BAA may propose collaborations with as many degree-granting Institutions of Higher Education (IHE) as required, however, the UARC should only fund HBCU institutions. Participation by non-HBCU, including MSIs, and R1 institutions with recognized autonomy research excellence is welcomed, however, UARC funding will not be expended at such institutions. Collaborations with entities other than degree-granting IHEs should be explained in the project narrative, as well as, in the budget justification.

Faculty and/or post-doctoral associates at the applicant institution may participate in the project and assist the PI as co-PI or in another capacity.

2. OTHER

a. Acknowledgement of Support and Disclaimer Requirements You must include the F.3.b. Acknowledgement of Research Support on all materials created or produced under this award.

The F.3.c. Disclaimer Language for Research Materials and Publications must be included on materials as required.

Our award document may provide additional instructions about specific distribution statements to use when you provide research materials to us. You are not eligible to submit a proposal if you cannot accept these terms.

b. Representation for Felony Conviction, and Internal Confidentiality Agreements and Disclosure of Lobbying You must certify in SAM.gov to the “Representation for Felony Conviction, and Internal Confidentiality Agreements” and “Disclosure of Lobbying” in accordance with FAR 52.209-11 and FAR 52.203-18.

c. Conflict of Interest We cannot determine you are eligible for funding unless we receive this form for PI(s) and co-PI(s) identified in your submission.

i. General Requirement for Disclosure Your organization must disclose any potential or actual scientific or non- scientific conflict of interest(s). You must also disclose any potential or actual conflict(s) of interest for any sub recipient you include in your proposal. You must provide enough information for us to evaluate your disclosure. We may have to ask you more questions if we need more information.

At our discretion, we may ask you for a conflict of interest mitigation plan after you submit your proposal. Your plan is subject to our approval.

ii. Scientific Conflict of Interest Scientific collaborations on research and development projects are generally the result of close collaboration prior to the submission of proposals for support. Accordingly, virtually all of these collaborations might be considered to include a potential conflict of interest. The potential conflict is mitigated by the disclosure of these collaborations, and the list of current and pending support you provide for senior and key researchers.

You are not eligible to submit a proposal if you cannot accept the terms stated in this announcement. All other provisions, terms, and requirements of this BAA must be met. A University may be considered non-responsive if a submitted proposal does not adequately address or meet the requirements contained in this BAA.

D. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INFORMATION

The BAA process consists of a single Proposal stage. It is the Government’s intention to make an award selection without interchanges. In the event interchanges are conducted, the Contracting Officer may engage in fluid interaction with a university. Interchanges may address any aspect of the proposal. Interchanges may be conducted with all, some, or none of the offerors. Proposers may request a pre-award debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505.

1. CONTENT AND PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

a. Pre-proposal Inquiries and Questions and due dates. See section D.5.

b. The Proposal as a Whole You must submit your proposal electronically to the Contracting Officer, Lexcie Potter, lexcie.potter@us.af.mil and the Contract Specialist, Denise Johnson, denise.johnson.19@us.af.mil. We must receive your proposal before the Proposal Submission Deadline.

You must mark your proposal with the BAA number. The proposal must include the signature of an authorized representative from your organization.

A summary of what is required for a complete proposal is summarized below:

i. Project Summary / Abstract

ii. Project Narrative

· Statement of Objectives

· Structure and Operation of the Consortium

· Research Effort

· Principal Investigator (PI) and Senior Personnel Time

· Facilities

· High Performance Computing Requirements

· Support of Permanent Resident Status for Foreign National Principal Investigators

iii. Bibliography and References Cited

iv. Senior / Key Person Profile

v. Budget

vi. Budget Justification

vii. Project / Performance Site Locations

viii. Data Management Plan

c. Proposal Format

· Paper Size – 8.5 x 11-inch paper

· Margins – 1 inch

· Spacing – 1.5-line spacing

· Font – Times New Roman or Garamond 12 point

· Page Limitation – 25 pages maximum

· Content – as described below

d. Proposal Length Your project narrative must not exceed twenty (25) single-sided pages. We will not consider more than the maximum number of project narrative pages in our evaluation.

You must not include elaborate brochures, reprints, or presentations beyond those sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal.

We created this table to help you understand how to calculate your page count.

e. Marking Requirements for Confidential or Proprietary Information You must mark your proposal and proposal sections that contain proprietary or confidential information. You must use the protective legend found at FAR 52.215- 1(e) Instructions to Offerors -- Competitive Acquisition (NOV 2021) modified to permit release to our outside evaluators.

We make every effort to protect the confidentiality of proposals, including any proposal evaluations; however, under Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requirements, some or all proposal information may be subject to release.

Your entire proposal, or any portions thereof, without protective markings or otherwise identified as requiring protection will be considered voluntarily furnished to us without restriction, and will be treated as such for all purposes.

f. Electronic Form and Proposal Attachments All proposal documents should be in electronic file formats, specifically a Portable Document Format (PDF). The exception is budget, showing cost and pricing data, which should be provided in excel format with calculation formulas visible. The budget justification should be in a PDF format. DO NOT password protect any attachments.

2. COMPONENT PIECES OF THE PROPOSAL

a. Publicly Releasable Project Summary / Abstract You must provide a concise abstract of 300 words or less with your proposal. You must mark this abstract publicly releasable. Your abstract should use terms the public can understand to describe the research objective, technical approach, anticipated outcome, and potential impact of the specific research.

b. Project Narrative Your project narrative must not be longer than twenty (25) single-side pages. We will not consider any pages beyond this maximum in our evaluation. The narrative must be complete and self-contained to qualify for review.

You must clearly describe your research, including your research objective and approach. Your project narrative will be evaluated using the criteria listed in section E.1. Criteria. You should show strength in as many of the evaluation and selection areas as practicable to demonstrate maximum competitiveness.

You must describe any environmental impacts of your research outside the laboratory in any appropriate narrative section, including how you will ensure compliance with environmental statutes and regulations.

Proposals should address scientific study and experimentation directed toward increasing fundamental knowledge and understanding in fields of physical, engineering, environmental, life sciences, and information sciences related to long-term national security needs in Tactical Autonomy.

HBCUs are encouraged to consider innovative approaches for their research projects with a view toward enhancing the ability of their institution to develop stronger science and engineering programs that will enable the institution to participate more competitively in a variety of defense research programs and attract and retain students by exposing them to state-of-the-art research in support of the DAF and DoD missions, encouraging them to pursue careers in STEM disciplines.

DAF and DoD will not prescribe the approach for a proposal; instead, it expects proposals to reflect the unique needs and capabilities of the respective institution. Methods through which the statutory objectives can be achieved are varied. Factors such as research capabilities, facilities, and equipment are unique to each institution and should be considered when preparing the proposal Your narrative should include the following elements:

(1) Statement of Objectives You must summarize your proposed research on a no more than 2 page document titled “Statement of Objectives.” We may decide to incorporate your statement of objectives into the award as a description of the work instead of incorporating the whole technical proposal.

You should use active verbs when you prepare the statement of objectives, e.g., “conduct” research in a subject area, “investigate” a problem, “determine” to test a hypothesis.

(2) Structure and Operation of the Consortium

(a) Summarize the organization of your consortium, its governance structure, and how it will be managed. You should include details on the funding plan for the lead institution and what functions it will provide to the consortium members. Also include details on how member institutions will request-receive-execute funding, how their performance will be evaluated and how underperforming members can improve their performance or be removed from the consortium. See section in this BAA on Consortium Coordination Plan.

(b) Prepare the next generation. Provide a focus on education and training research, both in research on education and training, and in the actual education and training of researchers, graduate students, and practitioners. See section in this BAA on STEM Education.

(3) Research Effort

(a) You should describe the research you plan in detail. State the research objectives and approach, and the relationship and comparable objectives to research progress elsewhere. Describe your research team’s knowledge in the field, and provide a bibliography and list of literature citations. Discuss the nature of the expected results. Discuss how your research is relevant to current DAF and DoD research.

(b) Demonstrate and articulate a clear, unique and innovative approach to achieve the Technical Requirements. New and creative solutions and/or advances in knowledge, understanding, technology, and the state-of-the art.

(c) Demonstrate a clear, complete, creative and achievable approach for developing and leading a consortium of HBCUs to achieve the stated objectives to include increasing Carnegie Research Foundation Classification(s) from R2 (high research) to R1 (very-high research) for at least one of the consortium schools.

(d) Depict a management structure that supports the development of an ecosystem in autonomy related disciplines, between academia, the DAF/DoD, small businesses, and the local/regional community with the express goals of:

· Establishing autonomy related infrastructure,

· Establishing autonomy related business partnerships, and;

· Establishing a long-term relationship with DAF/DoD for the essential engineering, research, and development capability in tactical autonomy.

(e) Technology transfer efforts. You should describe how you plan to actively market federally-funded technologies and Intellectual Property (IP) to:

· Find partners to license and commercialize inventions, train aspiring entrepreneurs and researchers on start-up methodologies to identify and pitch innovations to investors,

· Evaluate regional innovation ecosystems and identify best practices to spur growth, and

· Host events to showcase technologies and accelerate technology transfer and commercialization efforts.

(f) Strengthen and leverage the research network. Convene groups across industry, academia, and the Department of Defense that engage and set the priorities.

(g) The adequacy of this information will influence the overall evaluation in accordance with the criteria and procedures specified in section E. .

(4) Principal Investigator (PI) and Senior Personnel Time

(a) You must provide estimate of time the principal investigator and other senior professional personnel will devote to the research. Your estimate must include information pertaining to the proportion of time anticipated devoted to this research, to other research, and to other commitments of time such as sabbatical, extended leave, and teaching duties.

(b) State the number of graduate students for whom each senior staff member is responsible.

(c) If your principal investigator or other key personnel have current, pending, or expected research supported by other sponsors or agencies during the period you seek our support, state the title of the other research, the proportion of time to be devoted to it, the amount of support, name of agency, dates, etc.

You must attach a list of Current and Pending Support for each person listed as a Senior or Key Person. Each abstract should include research title, objectives, approach, and budget for both present and pending research projects. Send any changes as they become known.

(d) This information should be completed on the Research & Related Senior/Key Profile (Expanded) form OMB number 4040-0001.

(5) Facilities

(a) Describe the facilities available for performing the proposed research, and any additional facilities or equipment the organization proposes to acquire at its own expense for the work.

(b) Indicate any government-owned facilities that will be used.