HR001122S0021.pdf

HR001122S0021

Broad Agency Announcement Massive Cross-Correlation (MAX) Microsystems Technology Office

February 14, 2022

Table of Contents

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description A. Background B. Program Description C. Program Structure D. Technical Areas E. Schedule/Milestones F. Deliverables G. Government Furnished Equipment/Property/Information H. Intellectual Property

II. Award Information A. General Award Information B. Fundamental Research

III. Eligibility Information A. Eligible Applicants

1. Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and Government Entities

2. Other Applicants B. Organizational Conflicts of Interest C. Cost Sharing/Matching D. Other Eligibility Criteria

1. Collaborative Efforts IV. Application and Submission Information

A. Address to Request Application Package B. Content and Form of Application Submission

1. Abstract Format

2. Full Proposal Format

3. Proprietary Information

4. Security Information

a. Program Security Information

b. Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)

i. CUI Proposal Markings

ii. CUI Submission Requirements

c. Unclassified Submissions

5. Disclosure of Information and Compliance with Safeguarding Covered Defense

Information Controls

6. Human Subjects Research (HSR)/Animal Use

7. Approved Cost Accounting System Documentation

8. Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. § 749d)/FAR 39.2

9. Small Business Subcontracting Plan

10. Intellectual Property

a. For Procurement Contracts

b. For All Non-Procurement Contracts

11. Patents

12. System for Award Management (SAM) and Universal Identifier Requirements

13. Funding Restrictions

C. Submission Information

1. Submission Dates and Times

a. Abstract Due Date

b. Full Proposal Date

c. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

2. Abstract Submission Information

3. Proposal Submission Information

a. For Proposers Requesting Cooperative Agreements:

b. For Proposers Requesting Technology Investment Agreements

c. For Proposers Requesting Contracts or Other Transaction Agreements

4. Other Submission Requirements

V. Application Review Information A. Evaluation Criteria

1. Overall Scientific and Technical Merit

2. Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission

3. Cost Realism

B. Review and Selection Process

1. Review Process

2. Handling of Source Selection Information

3. Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information (FAPIIS)

4. Countering Foreign Influence Program (CFIP)

VI. Award Administration Information A. Selection Notices

1. Abstracts

2. Proposals

B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

1. Meeting and Travel Requirements

2. Solicitation Provisions and Award Clauses, Terms and Conditions

3. Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) and Controlled Technical Information

(CTI) on Non-DoD Information Systems

4. Representations and Certifications

5. Terms and Conditions (for cooperative agreements only)

C. Reporting D. Electronic Systems

1. Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF)

2. i-Edison

3. Vault

4. DARPA Embedded Entrepreneur Initiative (EEI)

VII. Agency Contacts VIII. Other Information

A. Proposers Day B. Protesting

ATTACHMENT 1: Cost Volume Proposer Checklist ATTACHMENT 2: Proposal Summary Slide Template ATTACHMENT 3: General MTO Controlled Unclassified Information Guide (CUIG) ATTACHMENT 4: Other Transaction (OT) Certifications Template

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

Federal Agency Name: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Microsystems Technology Office (MTO)

Funding Opportunity Title: Massive Cross Correlation (MAX) Announcement Type: Initial Announcement Funding Opportunity Number: HR001122S0021 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA): 12.910 Research and

Technology Development Dates: (All times listed herein are Eastern Time) o Posting Date: February 14, 2022 o Proposers Day: February 17, 2022 o Abstract Due Date: March 16, 2022 at 5:00 PM o FAQ Submission Deadline: April 20, 2022 at 5:00 PM o Proposal Due Date: May 4, 2022 at 5:00 PM o Estimated period of performance start: October 2022

Concise description of the funding opportunity: The DARPA Microsystems Technology Office seeks innovative proposals to develop correlators with high power efficiency, high dynamic range, and wide bandwidth to enable passive sensing, real-time SAR imaging and jam-resistant communications applications.

Anticipated Funding Available for Award: Approximately $55M of total funding is anticipated for awards made against this BAA, with a distribution of:

o $49M in Technical Area 1 (TA1) o $6M in Technical Area 2 (TA2)

Anticipated individual awards: Multiple awards are anticipated in each Technical Area.

Anticipated funding type: 6.2 Types of instruments that may be awarded: Procurement contract, cooperative agreement, or other transaction.

Agency contact:

o Dr. James Wilson, Program Manager BAA Coordinator: HR001122S0021@darpa.mil

DARPA/MTO

ATTN: HR001122S0021

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114 mailto:name@darpa.mil

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) often selects its research efforts through the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) process. This BAA is being issued, and any resultant selection will be made, using the procedures under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016 and 2 C.F.R. § 200.203. Any negotiations and/or awards will use procedures under FAR 15.4, Contract Pricing. Proposals received as a result of this BAA shall be evaluated in accordance with evaluation criteria specified herein through a scientific review process.

DARPA BAAs are posted on the beta SAM website, under the Contract Opportunities (FBO) link, at https://sam.gov/, and, as applicable, the grants.gov website at http://www.grants.gov/.

The following information is for those wishing to respond to the BAA.

The DARPA Microsystems Technology Office seeks innovative proposals to develop correlators with high power efficiency, high dynamic range, and wide bandwidth to enable passive sensing, real-time SAR imaging, and jam-resistant communications applications. Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

A. Background

The mathematical function of correlation lies at the heart of virtually all digital signal processing systems, utilizing multiple computationally expensive digital fast Fourier transforms to move between the time and frequency domains to compare signals for similarity. In addition, real-world impairments and background noise in the environment necessitates that correlators utilize power hungry digital signal processing to produce additional processing gain for high dynamic range operation, which is necessary to sense weak signals below the noise floor. The resulting correlation computation scales exponentially in power. Therefore, today’s systems require racks of state of the art (SoA) graphics processing units (GPUs) and field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs) to perform correlation over a relatively small frequency range with low bandwidth. In the context of passive coherent location, this power scaling relationship is the primary factor preventing operation at high frequencies, large bandwidths, and high dynamic range simultaneously.

Although it has long been known that analog processors can achieve higher power efficiency than digital, that advantage has been limited to dynamic ranges below ~72 decibels (dB). Due to high dynamic range system requirements, most advanced and capable signal processing therefore employ digital signal processing. In addition, analog architectures do not scale well beyond the 45 nanometer (nm) node due to the inherently low precision of the capacitors utilized in advanced digital processes, which further limits dynamic range. As a result, analog architectures have not been able to benefit in power efficiency from the continued advancement of Moore’s law, and digital architectures have increasingly outperformed analog with respect to power https://sam.gov/ http://www.grants.gov/ efficiency. Even the most advanced SoA analog architectures, such as the Mythic AI1 chip, operate at only ~5 TOPs/W or just 2-3x better efficiency than a programmable digital solution.

As a consequence, adoption of analog computation in today’s Department of Defense (DoD) systems is minimal.

But recent advances in analog correlator design are demonstrating a new pathway for achieving high-dynamic range analog correlator designs. For example, techniques for charge recycling have opened a path to dramatically increase the efficiency of analog computing.2 Additionally, capacitor optimization techniques demonstrate high precision analog computation that could scale to at least the 12nm complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor (CMOS) node and beyond, while maintaining high intrinsic dynamic range3. In addition, new innovative architectures that enable ultra-long correlation lengths at low power demonstrate that these techniques could be applied to provide significant signal processing gain necessary to exceed that of digital signal processing while consuming far less power.

By exploiting these and other innovations, the Massive Cross Correlation (MAX) program will achieve a disruptive leap forward for correlation in advanced CMOS nodes to fulfill the long unrealized potential of analog computation in future DoD sensing, imaging, and communications systems.

B. Program Description

The MAX program seeks to leverage the advantages of novel signal processing architectures to achieve a breakthrough in correlator power efficiency performance at high dynamic range operation. Novel signal processing is defined as any approach that is not purely digital, such as analog signal processing (ASP), hyperdimensional computing, or hybrid approaches. MAX seeks to achieve at least a 100x improvement in power efficiency and information processing density compared to state-of-the-art (SoA) digital signal processing systems.

Specifically, MAX will achieve:

100 TOPs/W power efficiency at 72 dB hardware dynamic range 120 dB of total system dynamic range (e.g. 72 dB of hardware dynamic range and 48 dB of signal processing gain dynamic range)

MAX will achieve these goals in a highly scaled analog correlator architecture with the following additional constraints:

Sample rate = 5 GSps Power ≤ 10W

1 https://www.mythic-ai.com/ 2 R. Karakiewicz, R. Genov and G. Cauwenberghs, "1.1 TMACS/mW Fine-Grained Stochastic Resonant Charge-Recycling Array Processor," in IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 785-792, April 2012, doi: 10.1109/JSEN.2011.2113393

3 S. Joshi, C. Kim, C. M. Thomas and G. Cauwenberghs, "Digitally Adaptive High-Fidelity Analog Array Signal Processing Resilient to Capacitive Multiplying DAC Inter-Stage Gain Error," in IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers, vol. 66, no. 11, pp. 4095-4107, Nov. 2019, doi:

10.1109/TCSI.2019.2926447

Size ≤ 1.7” x 1.7” x 0.25”

Through a combination of minimizing wasted energy in analog computations and addressing the technology challenges associated with moving analog signal processing into highly scaled CMOS nodes, MAX will develop power efficient circuits with high intrinsic hardware dynamic range while providing additional signal processing gain through ultralong correlation length. The MAX program will culminate in the demonstration of an analog correlator implemented in 22nm (or below) CMOS, with 100x performance/power improvements compared to a SoA digital field-programmable gate array (FPGA) implemented in 14nm CMOS. This combination of features is unprecedented in today’s SoA, and will establish a new technology regime that is expected to transform the types and capabilities of military and commercial sensing, imaging, and communications systems.

MAX will pursue advanced prototype development of a large scale, highly efficient correlator capable of operation at high dynamic range as well as research studies into additional novel circuit design and architectural techniques to advance beyond the end goals of the prototype MAX correlator. Each phase of the program will tackle individual technical challenges that when combined are viewed as necessary to meet important DoD application requirements. During the early phases of the program, the primary focus will be on achieving high power efficiency in nodes beyond 45nm. Later phases will push to a large architecture at more challenging nodes such as 12nm to validate the technology for application-specific maturation at the conclusion of the program. DARPA expects that partnerships between the defense industrial base and the academic and small business research community may be necessary in order to achieve all program goals.

It is expected that proposed approaches will advance analog signal processing designs.

Combined analog and digital “mixed-signal” approaches will be considered if they demonstrate a credible path to satisfying all metrics and goals of the proposed technical area. Purely digital approaches will not be considered.

Approaches that are compatible with future low-cost manufacturing at commercial volumes are preferred, and proposals should identify the technical elements that support this goal (e.g., targeted microelectronics foundry fabrication lines or nodes, packaging). Solutions that use domestic manufacturing capabilities to achieve program goals are also preferred, as DARPA seeks to strengthen DoD access to differentiating technologies. While MAX technologies may not be subject to export control regulation, proposers should still be careful to safeguard any specific application of the MAX technology to DoD systems at the appropriate level of the system.

C. Program Structure

MAX will be a 48-month program divided into three phases whose primary goals for TA1 (the primary technical area) are summarized below:

Phase 1 (Base Period) – 18 months: Demonstration of highly efficient scalable analog circuits with a correlation efficiency of at least 500 TOPs/W at 48 dB of hardware dynamic range

Phase 2 (Option 1) – 15 months: Demonstration a small-scale analog correlator architecture achieving better than 100 TOPs/W at 72 dB of hardware dynamic range

Phase 3 (Option 2) – 15 months: Demonstration of a large-scale analog correlator architecture simultaneously achieving all of the program goals including 100 TOPs/W efficiency, 72 dB hardware dynamic range, and 48 dB signal processing gain in a 10 W form factor with 5 GSps throughput

DARPA expects to fund a variety of technical approaches within the MAX program. It is anticipated that fewer performers may be funded to participate in Phases 2 and 3 of the program.

Options may be exercised, at the Government’s sole discretion, based on technical progress measured against the metrics and milestones defined in this BAA and funding availability.

D. Technical Areas

MAX seeks proposals in two main Technical Areas (TAs). Entities may submit to more than one Technical Area, and multiple proposals per organization are permitted. Each proposal must address only a single TA and must address all phases and metrics.

1. Technical Area 1 (TA1) – World’s Best General-Purpose Analog Correlator

TA1 will develop the world’s best general-purpose analog correlator. TA1 will produce architectures in an advanced CMOS node with 100 TOPs/W power efficiency, 72 dB of intrinsic hardware dynamic range, and 65,536 sample correlation length for an additional 48 dB of signal processing gain. The final architecture will achieve these specifications simultaneously while operating within a required 10W power envelope and at 5 GSps throughput. Full performance metrics and requirements are specified in Table 1.

Phases and Metrics Phase 1 (Base Period) – TA1 Phase 1 will develop highly scalable analog circuit techniques to overcome wasted energy that limits the power efficiency in today’s advanced CMOS nodes.

Such techniques include, but are not limited to, resonant clocking and charge recycling that reuses otherwise wasted energy. At the end of Phase 1, performers will demonstrate extremely efficient correlators achieving 500 TOPS/W to meet the overall program goal for correlation efficiency.

Phase 1 will culminate in a report on the circuit level measurements of highly efficient scalable analog correlator circuits meeting the Phase 1 program metrics. In addition, performers will be required to submit a preliminary design for work in Phase 2, based on the successful techniques demonstrated in Phase 1. The preliminary design for Phase 2 should provide initial simulation results and other relevant scientific evidence confirming that the proposer’s approach will successfully achieve the Phase 2 goals and metrics. All performer measurements and reports are required 17 months after Phase 1 award to enable evaluation and option exercise decisions in time to meet the aggressive Phase 2 timeline of 15 months.

Phase 2 (Option 1) – TA1 Phase 2 will develop optimization and calibration techniques that overcome the dynamic range limitations set by component and environmental variations intrinsic to advanced nodes such as the Global Foundries 22nm FDX or 12nm LP technology. At the end of Phase 2, performers will demonstrate analog architectures with 72 dB of hardware dynamic range in order to meet the overall program goal for hardware dynamic range.

Phase 2 will culminate in the delivery of two working prototypes meeting the Phase 2 metrics to a government testing facility, as directed by DARPA, for independent verification and validation (IV&V). In addition, performers will also deliver a report documenting testing procedures, internal characterization results as well as any necessary data and documentation for IV&V to reproduce the stated results. Performers will also be required to submit a preliminary design for work in Phase 3, based off of the successful techniques demonstrated in Phase 2. The preliminary design for Phase 3 should provide initial simulation results and other relevant scientific evidence confirming that the proposer’s approach will successfully achieve the Phase 3 goals and metrics. A separate report will also be delivered detailing the projected impact of the Phase 2 correlator architecture and Phase 3 preliminary design towards a relevant DoD use case of the performer’s selection. All performer measurements and reports are required by 14 months after Phase 2 award to to enable evaluation and option exercise decisions in time to meet the aggressive Phase 3 timeline of 15 months.

Phase 3 (Option 2) – In TA1 Phase 3, performers will develop scalable frequency domain or non-traditional time domain architectures in advanced nodes such as Global Foundries 22nm FDX or 12nm LP technology to overcome correlation length limitations. At the end of Phase 3, performers will demonstrate 65,536 correlation length architectures, achieving the 48 dB of signal processing gain, as necessary to meet the overall program goal of 120 dB system dynamic range. Final correlator demonstrations will have 10 W power consumption operating at 100 TOPs/W and with a throughput of 5 GSps.

Phase 3 will culminate in the delivery of three working prototypes meeting the Phase 3 metrics to a government testing facility, as directed by DARPA, for independent verification and validation (IV&V). In addition, performers will deliver a report documenting testing procedures, internal characterization results, as well as any necessary data and documentation for IV&V to reproduce the stated results. Also, performers will develop a report detailing the projected impact of the Phase 3 hardware performance when applied to a relevant DoD use case of the performer’s selection. All performer measurements and reports are required 15 months after Phase 3 award to successfully complete the program on time.

Table 1. Technical Area 1 – The World’s Best Analog General-Purpose Correlator: Program Metrics and Goals

1. Sample rate = 5 GSps

2. Power ≤ 10W

3. Size ≤ 1.7” x 1.7” x 0.25”

4. Operating Temperature: -55 °C to 125 °C (MIL-SPEC)

5. Power Supply Variation: +/- 10%

TA1 metric Baseline Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

Key Outcomes Efficient Scalable Analog Circuits

High Dynamic Range Operation

Signal Processing Gain

Efficiency (TOPs/W) <5 500 100 100 Hardware Dynamic Range (dB) 48 48 72 72 Correlator Length (samples) 16 16 16 65,536 Total Dynamic Range (dB) 60 60 84 120

6. Correlator efficiency is defined as the amount of operations required for correlation divided by the amount of power required for the correlation at the stated hardware dynamic range

2. Technical Area 2 (TA2) – Advanced Analog Signal Processing Circuit and Architecture Exploration

TA2 will consist of three-phase research studies intended to experimentally validate approaches to achieve performance 10x beyond the end of program goals for TA1. Proposers should meet one (1) proposer-selected “Moonshot” metric simultaneously with the remaining baseline metrics described in Table 2. Other TA2 performance metrics will be study-dependent and should be proposed by the performer. The “Moonshot” metrics are chosen to be 10x greater than the stated TA1 Phase 3 MAX program goals. Proposed efforts must demonstrate a new technological path to improve efficiency, intrinsic analog hardware dynamic range, or extend correlator length.

Phases and Metrics Phase 1 (Base Period) – TA2 Phase 1 will undertake a circuit level demonstration of the proposed moonshot metric in analog CMOS. Phase 1 performance metrics other than those prescribed in Table 2 should be defined by the proposer for this phase and provide a pathway toward achieving success in future phases of the program. Performer-defined metrics should be selected to establish the feasibility of the technical approach in Phase 1 to demonstrate progress necessary to continue into Phase 2.

Phase 2 (Option 1) – TA2 Phase 2 will produce an analog correlator architecture that is within at least 10x of the moonshot metric. Performer-defined metrics for Phase 2 should be selected to establish the practicality of the Phase 2 when applied to the end of program goals. Phase 2 will culminate with the delivery of one prototype to the government for IV&V.

Phase 3 (Option 2) – TA2 Phase 3 will produce a full-scale analog correlator architecture that achieves the moonshot metric as well as all other baseline and performer defined goals.

Performer-defined metrics for Phase 2 should be selected to establish the practicality of the Phase 3 when applied to a commercial scale application. Phase 3 will culminate with the delivery of two prototypes to the government for IV&V. All performer measurements and reports are required 15 months after Phase 3 award to successfully complete the program on time.

Table 2. Technical Area 2 – Advanced Analog Signal Processing Circuit and Architecture Exploration:

Baseline and Moonshot Metrics

1. Sample rate = 5 GSps

2. Power ≤ 10W

3. Size ≤ 1.7” x 1.7” x 0.25”

4. Operating Temperature: Room temperature (20 °C to 30 °C)

5. Power Supply Variation: Standard supply specifications

6. Correlator efficiency is defined as the amount of operations required for correlation divided by the amount of power required for the correlation at the stated hardware dynamic range

TA2 metric Baseline MAX TA1 Goal Moonshot Efficiency (TOPs/W) <5 500 1000 Hardware Dynamic Range (dB)

48 72 92

Correlator Length (samples) 16 65,536 ≥ 523,288

E. Schedule/Milestones

MAX is a 48-month program with an anticipated start in October 2022. Program kickoff and periodic review sessions are mandatory and represent an opportunity to interact with the Government on planned work, specifics of the technical approach, and any technical or programmatic items of concern. All performers are required to provide monthly technical presentations (with accompanying slides) and written financial reports. Narrative quarterly technical reports will also be required to accompany the quarterly progress presentations.

Figure 1. Max program schedule overview; see subsection text bullets below for specific event dates

1. Schedule and Milestones

The following program milestones are applicable to Technical Area 1. Performers may make reasonable modifications to the schedule to suit their specific technology development plan with the exception of end of phase (EOP) reviews (Phase 1 and Phase 2) which must be held at a minimum of one month before the end of the phase:

Phase 1:

Month 1: Program Kickoff Month 4: Preliminary Design Review (PDR) (DARPA attendance required) Month 8: Critical Design Review (CDR) (Summary report required, DARPA meeting attendance at DARPA’s discretion) Month 9: Tapeout Month 9: Site Visit with Quarterly Progress Report (QPR) Month 16: Hardware Test (proof of life)

TA1 Only – Month 17: EOP review including demonstration of efficient correlation including a detailed analysis of correlator design and performance meeting all program metrics. Submission of all end of phase deliverables and reports

TA2 Only – Month 17: EOP review including demonstration of test circuits meeting Phase 1 performer defined metrics. Review should provide a detailed analysis of circuit scaling to meet performer defined Phase 2 metrics. Submission of all end of phase deliverables and reports

QPRs with slide presentation and written technical reports (1-2 hours) Interim monthly pulse checks (slides only) and financial reports (30-45 minutes)

Phase 2:

Month 0.5: Phase 2 Kickoff / PDR (DARPA attendance required) Month 5: CDR (Summary report required, meeting attendance at DARPA’s discretion) Month 6: Tapeout Month 6: Site Visit with QPR Month 12: Hardware Test (proof of life) TA1 Only – Month 14: EOP review including demonstration of hardware dynamic range, including a detailed analysis of correlator design and performance meeting all Phase 2 metrics. Submission of all end of phase deliverables including two working packaged correlators, meeting all Phase 2 metrics, for IV&V

TA2 Only – Month 14: EOP review including demonstration of test chips meeting Phase 2 performer-defined metrics. Review should provide a detailed analysis of circuit scaling to meet performer defined Phase 3 metrics. Submission of all end of phase deliverables and reports

Quarterly program reviews (QPR) with slide presentation and written technical reports (1-2 hours)

Interim monthly pulse checks (slides only) and financial reports (30-45 minutes)

Phase 3:

Month 0.5: Phase 3 Kickoff / PDR (DARPA attendance required) Month 5: CDR (Summary report required, meeting attendance at DARPA’s discretion) Month 6: Tapeout Month 6: Site Visit with QPR Month 12: Hardware Test (proof of life) TA1 Only – Month 15: EOP review including demo of hardware correlation length, including a detailed analysis of correlator design and performance meeting all program metrics. Submission of all end of phase deliverables including three working packaged correlators, meeting all Phase 3 metrics, for IV&V

TA2 Only – Month 15: EOP review including demonstration of test chips meeting Phase 2 performer defined metrics. Review should provide a detailed analysis of circuit scaling to meet performer defined Phase 3 metrics. Submission of all end of phase deliverables and reports including one working packaged correlator achieving the “moonshot” metric goal and all other baseline metrics

Quarterly program reviews (QPR) with slide presentation and written technical reports (1-2 hours)

Interim monthly pulse checks (slides only) and financial reports (30-45 minutes)

F. Deliverables

All performers shall deliver detailed spend plans (or detailed program plans for fixed-price award instruments) at program kickoff and execution of subsequent option awards, quarterly technical reports, monthly technical status updates, and monthly financial reports including updated expenditures (for cost reimbursement award instruments). Performers shall prepare and submit briefing materials and participate in quarterly progress reviews and interim monthly pulse checks, either via teleconference or at the performer’s site at the discretion of DARPA. All performers shall participate in and support program-wide reviews held at least annually and scheduled at the Program Manager’s discretion. All performers should be prepared to respond to off-schedule delivery of technical updates and summary slides at the DARPA Program Manager’s request.

Upon the completion of each phase, performers in all the Technical Areas must provide to the Government an end-of-phase Final Technical Report that includes:

a) A description of the technical development and achievements in each area

b) Detailed measurements and test results

c) Charts and explanations of how the experimental results meet, exceed, or fall short of specified program goals (as described in this BAA)

d) Plans and projections for the following program phase with an updated risk assessment in each of the critical program areas

e) Documentation of all publications, conference presentations and patent activity

f) Analysis of how the projected technology development will impact a future DoD

(TA1 only) or commercial (TA2 only) system of the performer’s choosing

In addition, the following deliverables are expected by Technical Area and by program phase:

Table 3. Program Deliverables Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

TA 1

- Documentation of the design reviews

- Interim technical reports

- End of Phase report

- Documentation of the design reviews

- Interim technical reports

- End of Phase report

- Report documenting application to DoD System of interest

- Delivery of two (2) analog correlators for IV&V

- Documentation of the design reviews

- Interim technical reports

- End of Phase report

- Report documenting application to DoD System of interest

- Delivery of three (3) analog correlators for IV&V meeting the program metrics

TA 2

- Documentation of the design reviews

- Interim technical reports

- End of phase report

- Documentation of the design review milestone

- Interim technical reports

- End of phase report

- Report documenting application to a commercial system of interest

- Delivery of one (1) analog correlators for IV&V

- Documentation of the design review milestone

- Interim technical reports

- End of phase report

- Two (2) full analog correlators for IV&V meeting the program metrics

All prototypes shall be provided with adequate instructions to support government testing and evaluation using standard laboratory equipment. The components included are expected to meet the program metrics and may be used in decisions to execute Phase Options.

G. Government Furnished Equipment/Property/Information

No Government Furnished Equipment, Property, or Information will be provided for the effort solicited in this BAA.

H. Intellectual Property

Any use of proposer-defined intellectual property (patents, proprietary information, etc.) should be clearly marked as such within the proposal. Include all proprietary claims to the results, prototypes, intellectual property, or systems supporting the effort and/or necessary for the use of the research, results and/or prototype. If there are no proprietary claims, this should be stated.

For forms to be completed regarding intellectual property, see Section IV.B.10.

II. Award Information

A. General Award Information

Multiple awards are anticipated. The resources made available under this BAA will depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds.

The Government reserves the right to select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of the proposals received in response to this solicitation, and to make awards without discussions with proposers. The Government also reserves the right to conduct discussions if it is later determined to be necessary. If warranted, portions of resulting awards may be segregated into pre-priced options. Additionally, DARPA reserves the right to accept proposals in their entirety or to select only portions of proposals for award. In the event that DARPA desires to award only portions of a proposal, negotiations may be opened with that proposer. The Government reserves the right to fund proposals in phases with options for continued work at the end of one or more of the phases, as applicable.

Awards under this BAA will be made to proposers on the basis of the evaluation criteria listed below (see section labeled “Application Review Information,” Sec. V.), and program balance to provide overall value to the Government. The Government reserves the right to request any additional, necessary documentation once it makes the award instrument determination. Such additional information may include but is not limited to Representations and Certifications (see Section VI.B.4., “Representations and Certifications”). The Government reserves the right to remove proposers from award consideration should the parties fail to reach agreement on award terms, conditions and cost/price within a reasonable time or the proposer fails to timely provide requested additional information. Proposals identified for negotiation may result in a procurement contract, cooperative agreement, or other transaction, depending upon the nature of the work proposed, the required degree of interaction between parties, whether or not the research is classified as Fundamental Research, and other factors.

Proposers looking for innovative, commercial-like contractual arrangements are encouraged to consider requesting Other Transactions. To understand the flexibility and options associated with Other Transactions, consult http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions.

In accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 2371b(f), the Government may award a follow-on production contract or Other Transaction (OT) for any OT awarded under this solicitation if: (1) that participant in the OT, or a recognized successor in interest to the OT, successfully completed the entire prototype project provided for in the OT, as modified; and (2) the OT provides for the award of a follow-on production contract or OT to the participant, or a recognized successor in interest to the OT.

In all cases, the Government contracting officer shall have sole discretion to select award instrument type, regardless of instrument type proposed, and to negotiate all instrument terms and conditions with selectees. DARPA will apply publication or other restrictions, as necessary, if it determines that the research resulting from the proposed effort will present a high likelihood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies that are unique and critical to defense. Any award resulting from such a determination will include a requirement for DARPA permission before publishing any information or results on the program. For more information on publication restrictions, see the section below on Fundamental Research.

http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions

B. Fundamental Research

It is DoD policy that the publication of products of fundamental research will remain unrestricted to the maximum extent possible. National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 189 defines fundamental research as follows:

‘Fundamental research’ means basic and applied research in science and engineering, the results of which ordinarily are published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from proprietary research and from industrial development, design, production, and product utilization, the results of which ordinarily are restricted for proprietary or national security reasons.

As of the date of publication of this solicitation, the Government expects that program goals as described herein may be met by proposed efforts for fundamental research and non-fundamental research. Some proposed research may present a high likelihood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies that are unique and critical to defense. Based on the anticipated type of proposer (e.g., university or industry) and the nature of the solicited work, the Government expects that some awards will include restrictions on the resultant research that will require the awardee to seek DARPA permission before publishing any information or results relative to the program.

University or non-profit research institution performance under this solicitation may include effort categorized as fundamental research. In addition to Government support for free and open scientific exchanges and dissemination of research results in a broad and unrestricted manner, the academic or non-profit research performer or recipient, regardless of tier, acknowledges that such research may have implications that are important to U.S. national interests and must be protected against foreign influence and exploitation. As such, the academic or non-profit research performer or recipient agrees to comply with the following requirements:

(a) The University or non-profit research institution performer or recipient must establish and maintain an internal process or procedure to address foreign talent programs, conflicts of commitment, conflicts of interest, and research integrity. The academic or non-profit research performer or recipient must also utilize due diligence to identify Foreign Components or participation by Senior/Key Personnel in Foreign Government Talent Recruitment Programs and agree to share such information with the Government upon request.

i. The above described information will be provided to the Government as part of the proposal response to the solicitation and will be reviewed and assessed prior to award. Generally, this information will be included in the Research and Related Senior/Key Personnel Profile (Expanded) form (SF-424) required as part the proposer’s submission through Grants.gov.

1. Instructions regarding how to fill out the SF-424 and its biographical sketch can be found through Grants.gov.

ii. In accordance with USD(R&E) direction to mitigate undue foreign influence in DoD-funded science and technology, DARPA will assess all Senior/Key Personnel proposed to support DARPA grants and cooperative agreements for potential undue foreign influence risk factors relating to professional and financial activities. This will be done by evaluating information provided via the SF-424, and any accompanying or referenced documents, in order to identify and assess any associations or affiliations the Senior/Key Personnel may have with foreign strategic competitors or countries that have a history of intellectual property theft, research misconduct, or history of targeting U.S. technology for unauthorized transfer. DARPA’s evaluation takes into consideration the entirety of the Senior/Key Personnel’s SF-424, current and pending support, and biographical sketch, placing the most weight on the Senior/Key Person’s professional and financial activities over the last 4 years. The majority of foreign entities lists used to make these determinations are publicly available. The DARPA Countering Foreign Influence Program (CFIP) “Senior/Key Personnel Foreign Influence Risk Rubric” details the various risk ratings and factors. The rubric can be seen at the following link:

https://www.darpa.mil/attachments/092021DARPACFIPRubric.pd f

iii. Examples of lists that DARPA leverages to assess potential undue foreign influence factors include, but are not limited to:

1. Executive Order 13959 “Addressing the Threat From Securities Investments That Finance Communist Chinese Military Companies”: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- 2020-11-17/pdf/2020-25459.pdf

2. The U.S. Department of Education’s College Foreign Gift and Contract Report: College Foreign Gift Reporting (ed.gov)

3. The U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security, List of Parties of Concern:

https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/policy-guidance/lists-of-parties-of-concern

4. Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET) Chinese Talent Program Tracker:

https://chinatalenttracker.cset.tech

5. Director of National Intelligence (DNI) “World Wide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community”: 2021 Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community (dni.gov) https://www.darpa.mil/attachments/092021DARPACFIPRubric.pdf https://www.darpa.mil/attachments/092021DARPACFIPRubric.pdf https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-11-17/pdf/2020-25459.pdf https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-11-17/pdf/2020-25459.pdf https://sites.ed.gov/foreigngifts/ https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/policy-guidance/lists-of-parties-of-concern https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/policy-guidance/lists-of-parties-of-concern https://chinatalenttracker.cset.tech/ https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reports-publications/reports-publications-2021/item/2204-2021-annual-threat-assessment-of-the-u-s-intelligence-community https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reports-publications/reports-publications-2021/item/2204-2021-annual-threat-assessment-of-the-u-s-intelligence-community https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reports-publications/reports-publications-2021/item/2204-2021-annual-threat-assessment-of-the-u-s-intelligence-community

6. Various Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) products regarding targeting of US technologies, adversary targeting of academia, and the exploitation of academic experts: https://www.dcsa.mil/

DARPA’s analysis and assessment of affiliations and associations of Senior/Key Personnel is compliant with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Information regarding race, color, or national origin is not collected and does not have bearing in DARPA’s assessment.

University or non-profit research institutions with proposals selected for negotiation that have been assessed as having high or very high undue foreign influence risk, will be given an opportunity during the negotiation process to mitigate the risk. DARPA reserves the right to request any follow-up information needed to assess risk or mitigation strategies.

iv. Upon conclusion of the negotiations, if DARPA determines, despite any proposed mitigation terms (e.g. mitigation plan, alternative research personnel), the participation of any Senior/Key Research Personnel still represents high risk to the program, or proposed mitigation affects the Government’s confidence in proposer’s capability to successfully complete the research (e.g., less qualified Senior/Key Research Personnel) the Government may determine not to award the proposed effort. Any decision not to award will be predicated upon reasonable disclosure of the pertinent facts and reasonable discussion of any possible alternatives while balancing program award timeline requirements.

(b) Failure of the academic or non-profit research performer or recipient to reasonably exercise due diligence to discover or ensure that neither it nor any of its Senior/Key Research Personnel involved in the subject award are participating in a Foreign Government Talent Program or have a Foreign Component with an a strategic competitor or country with a history of targeting U.S. technology for unauthorized transfer may result in the Government exercising remedies in accordance with federal law and regulation.

i. If, at any time, during performance of this research award, the academic or non-profit research performer or recipient should learn that it, its Senior/Key Research Personnel, or applicable team members or subtier performers on this award are or are believed to be participants in a Foreign Government Talent Program or have Foreign Components with a strategic competitor or country with a history of targeting U.S. technology for unauthorized transfer , the performer or recipient will notify the Government Contracting Officer or Agreements Officer within 5 business days.

https://www.dcsa.mil/

1. This disclosure must include specific information as to the personnel involved and the nature of the situation and relationship. The Government will have 30 business days to review this information and conduct any necessary fact-finding or discussion with the performer or recipient.

2. The Government’s timely determination and response to this disclosure may range anywhere from acceptance, to mitigation, to termination of this award at the Government’s discretion.

3. If the University receives no response from the Government to its disclosure within 30 business days, it may presume that the Government has determined the disclosure does not represent a threat.

ii. The performer or recipient must flow down this provision to any subtier contracts or agreements involving direct participation in the performance of the research.

(c) Definitions

i. Senior/Key Research Personnel

1. This definition would include the Principal Investigator or Program/Project Director and other individuals who contribute to the scientific development or execution of a project in a substantive, measurable way, whether or not they receive salaries or compensation under the award.

These include individuals whose absence from the project would be expected to impact the approved scope of the project.

2. Most often, these individuals will have a doctorate or other professional degrees, although other individuals may be included within this definition on occasion.

ii. Foreign Associations/Affiliations

1. Association is defined as collaboration, coordination or interrelation, professionally or personally, with a foreign government-connected entity where no direct monetary or non-monetary reward is involved.

2. Affiliation is defined as collaboration, coordination, or interrelation, professionally or personally, with a foreign government-connected entity where direct monetary or non-monetary reward is involved.

iii. Foreign Government Talent Recruitment Programs

1. In general, these programs will include any foreign-state-sponsored attempt to acquire U.S. scientific-funded research or technology through foreign government-run or funded recruitment programs that target scientists, engineers, academics, researchers, and entrepreneurs of all nationalities working and educated in the U.S.

2. Distinguishing features of a Foreign Government Talent Recruitment Program may include:

a. Compensation, either monetary or in-kind, provided by the foreign state to the targeted individual in exchange for the individual transferring their knowledge and expertise to the foreign country.

b. In-kind compensation may include honorific titles, career advancement opportunities, promised future compensation or other types of remuneration or compensation.

c. Recruitment, in this context, refers to the foreign-state-sponsor’s active engagement in attracting the targeted individual to join the foreign-sponsored program and transfer their knowledge and expertise to the foreign state. The targeted individual may be employed and located in the U.S. or in the foreign state.

d. Contracts for participation in some programs that create conflicts of commitment and/or conflicts of interest for researchers. These contracts include, but are not limited to, requirements to attribute awards, patents, and projects to the foreign institution, even if conducted under U.S. funding, to recruit or train other talent recruitment plan members, circumventing merit-based processes, and to replicate or transfer U.S.-funded work in another country.

e. Many, but not all, of these programs aim to incentivize the targeted individual to physically relocate to the foreign state. Of particular concern are those programs that allow for continued employment at U.S. research facilities or receipt of U.S.

Government research funding while concurrently receiving compensation from the foreign state.

3. Foreign Government Talent Recruitment Programs DO NOT include:

a. Research agreements between the University and a foreign entity, unless that agreement includes provisions that create situations of concern addressed elsewhere in this section,

b. Agreements for the provision of goods or services by commercial vendors, or

c. Invitations to attend or present at conferences.

iv. Conflict of Interest

1. A situation in which an individual, or the individual’s spouse or dependent children, has a financial interest or financial relationship that could directly and significantly affect the design, conduct, reporting, or funding of research.

v. Conflict of Commitment

1. A situation in which an individual accepts or incurs conflicting obligations between or among multiple employers or other entities.

2. Common conflicts of commitment involve conflicting commitments of time and effort, including obligations to dedicate time in excess of institutional or funding agency policies or commitments. Other types of conflicting obligations, including obligations to improperly share information with, or withhold information from, an employer or funding agency, can also threaten research security and integrity and are an element of a broader concept of conflicts of commitment.

vi. Foreign Component

1. Performance of any significant scientific element or segment of a program or project outside of the U.S., either by the University or by a researcher employed by a foreign organization, whether or not U.S. government funds are expended.

2. Activities that would meet this definition include, but are not limited to:

a. Involvement of human subjects or animals;

b. Extensive foreign travel by University research program or project staff for the purpose of data collection, surveying, sampling, and similar activities;

c. Collaborations with investigators at a foreign site anticipated to result in co-authorship;

d. Use of facilities or instrumentation at a foreign site;

e. Receipt of financial support or resources from a foreign entity; or

f. Any activity of the University that may have an impact on U.S. foreign policy through involvement in the affairs or environment of a foreign country.

3. Foreign travel is not considered a Foreign Component.

vii. Strategic Competitor

1. A nation, or nation-state, that engages in diplomatic, economic or technological rivalry with the United States where the…