HR001122S0050-Amendment-02.pdf

HR001122S0050

Broad Agency Announcement Next Generation Microelectronics Manufacturing (NGMM)

Phase 0 Microsystems Technology Office

HR001122S0050

August 5, 2022

Amendment 02 As amended September 30, 2022

The purpose of this amendment is to extend the Full Proposal Due Date to

October 12, 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. Schedule and Milestones E. Deliverables F. Government Furnished Equipment/Property/Information G. 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. Full Proposal Format

2. Proprietary Information

3. Security Information

a. Program Security Information

b. Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)

i. CUI Proposal Markings

ii. CUI Submission Requirements

c. Unclassified Submissions

4. Disclosure of Information and Compliance with Safeguarding Covered Defense

Information Controls

5. Human Subjects Research (HSR)/Animal Use

6. Approved Cost Accounting System Documentation

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

8. Grant Abstract

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. Full Proposal Date

b. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

2. Proposal Submission Information

a. For Proposers Requesting Grants or Cooperative Agreements:

b. For Proposers Requesting Technology Investment Agreements

c. For Proposers Requesting Contracts or Other Transaction Agreements

d. Classified Submission Information

3. 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. 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 grants and cooperative agreements only)

C. Reporting D. Electronic Systems

1. Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF)

2. i-Edison

3. Vault

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 Transactions (OT) Certifications Template

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

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

Funding Opportunity Title: Next Generation Microelectronics Manufacturing (NGMM), Phase 0

Announcement Type: Initial Announcement Funding Opportunity Number: HR001122S0050 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA): Not applicable Dates: (All times listed herein are Eastern Time) o Posting Date: August 5, 2022 o Proposers Day: August 17, 2022 o FAQ Submission Deadline: September 15, 2022 o Proposal Due Date: October 12, 2022 o Estimated period of performance start: February 2023

Concise description of the funding opportunity: The NGMM program will establish a domestic center for R&D and manufacturing 3DHI (3D heterogeneous integration) microsystems through a subsequent Program Solicitation. The NGMM program will consist of three phases. Phase 0 research for this program (solicited through this HR001122S0050 BAA) will inform planning for the 3DHI manufacturing center by defining exemplar 3DHI microsystems and identifying the equipment, process, and facility requirements for manufacturing these microsystems. The NGMM program plans to establish the 3DHI manufacturing center through a separate, future solicitation.

Anticipated Funding Available for Award: Approximately $20M of total funding is anticipated for awards made against this BAA.

Anticipated individual awards: Multiple awards are anticipated.

Anticipated funding type: 6.2 Types of instruments that may be awarded: Procurement contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, Other Transactions Agency contact:

Dr. Carl McCants, Special Assistant to the DARPA Director BAA Coordinator: HR001122S0050@darpa.mil

DARPA/MTO

ATTN: HR001122S0050

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 System for Award Management (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 Microsystems Technology Office at DARPA seeks innovative proposals to inform planning for the Next Generation Microelectronics Manufacturing (NGMM) program. NGMM will work to establish, via a subsequent, future Program Solicitation, a domestic center for producing silicon-based and non-silicon-based 3D heterogeneously integrated (3DHI) prototypes (see definition in Section A below), by defining exemplar 3DHI microsystems and identifying the equipment, process, and facility requirements for manufacturing these microsystems. Proposed research should investigate innovative design and packaging of heterogeneous chip and wafer stacked components that enable revolutionary advances in science and technology for 3DHI manufacturing. Specifically excluded, is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice for 3DHI microsystems.

Establishing the prototyping center is not being solicited within this BAA. A planned future Program Solicitation will establish the 3DHI manufacturing center, develop baseline process modules, qualify initial pilot-line processes, and implement the access model for R&D services.

A. Background

Microelectronics are essential to technology competition in both the economic and national security realms. Microelectronics are designated a critical technology for national security, and are also foundational for other critical and emerging dual-use technologies such as advanced computing, artificial intelligence, autonomous systems and robotics, communications and networking, and networked sensing.1 Recent experience with supply chain disruptions from the COVID-19 pandemic and a rapidly shifting geopolitical order have led to a reassessment of domestic capabilities for manufacturing microelectronics for continued U.S. leadership.

1 Subcommittee on Critical and Emerging Technologies, National Science and Technology Council, “Critical and Emerging Technologies List Update,” February 2022.

While silicon transistor scaling will continue over the next decade, traditional technology scaling alone will provide diminishing cost and performance improvements and is unlikely to drive future long-term microelectronics innovation. Access to leading edge-silicon, while critical, must be regarded as one element of a longer-term view of advanced capabilities and supply chain security. This longer view needs to address the next wave of innovation that will overtake the role that complementary metal oxide semiconductor (CMOS) transistor scaling held until now.

The next major wave of microelectronics innovation is expected to come from the ability to integrate heterogeneous materials, devices, and circuits through advanced packaging, producing a tightly coupled system that extends into the third dimension with performance that exceeds what is available from today’s monolithic approach. This was echoed by a recent statement, “As we enter the advanced packaging era, these 2D (two-dimensional) and 3D stacking technologies give architects and designers the tools to further increase the number of transistors per device…”2 While industry leaders such as Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), Intel, and Micron Technology in the U.S., Samsung and SK hynix in South Korea, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Corporation (TSMC) in Taiwan have aggressively pursued advanced packaging for logic and memory, their advances may not widely benefit the U.S. domestic semiconductor industry without new strategies for pre-competitive collaboration and the development and adoption of 3DHI technologies and standards.

The 2019 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Heterogeneous Integration Roadmap states “Heterogeneous Integration refers to the integration of separately manufactured components into a higher-level assembly (System in Package – SiP) that, in the aggregate, provides enhanced functionality and improved operating characteristics.”3 The 3D part of 3DHI refers to stacking these components on each other within the same package. In this solicitation, 3DHI refers to the stacking of separately manufactured components from different material systems, within a single package, to produce a microsystem that provides revolutionary improvements in functionality and performance. Industry leaders currently use 3D integration of modestly dissimilar silicon digital technologies for a narrow range of commercial products, from stacked dynamic random access memory (DRAM) to CMOS imagers to high-performance computing. However, the opportunity to broadly impact defense systems relies on expanding the types of microelectronics that can be integrated and assembled. Today’s mature integration techniques, even those often referred to as 3DHI, focus primarily on low-power, leading-edge CMOS, legacy CMOS, and silicon-based memory. Advancing digital integration requires increasing interconnect densities well beyond today’s state-of-the-art.

DARPA’s expansion to heterogeneous integration also includes compound semiconductors for radio frequency (RF) and photonics for interconnect, novel memory devices for computing, and wide-bandgap and ultra-wide bandgap semiconductors for power electronics. For example, The 3D heterogeneous integration (3DHI) of high power and efficiency Gallium Nitride (GaN) power amplifiers (PAs) with functionally dense Si CMOS (complementary metal-oxide-semiconductor) logic will create a new class of

2 https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/newsroom/opinion/moore-law-now-and-in-the-future.html#gs.6icfo2 3 http://eps.ieee.org/hir, Heterogeneous Integration Roadmap 2019 Edition, Chapter 1, p.4.

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/newsroom/opinion/moore-law-now-and-in-the-future.html#gs.6icfo2 http://eps.ieee.org/hir compact, digitally enhanced RF integrated circuits (ICs) that will revolutionize radar and multifunction systems.4

In order to address such a diversity of materials and functions, integration technologies will be challenged to improve thermal management, improve power conditioning, improve testing and electrical characterization for known good die, and improve the design tools for modeling and simulation of these new microsystems.

Barriers in the current U.S. ecosystem that limit or slow the progress in 3DHI R&D include:

• lack of centralized facilities to facilitate information sharing during development

• lack of common standards

• lack of access to affordable manufacturing capacity for low-volume products o very long iteration cycles at existing facilities o expensive fabrication equipment

• limitations of expensive and proprietary design tools for exploring new concepts.

Presently, the U.S. has no open-access manufacturing center with comprehensive capacity for 3DHI research and development. With very few exceptions, U.S. companies engaged in 3DHI research rely upon off-shore facilities, e.g., TSMC (Taiwan) and Interuniversity Microelectronics Center (IMEC, Belgium). An open-access national manufacturing center for 3DHI R&D would result in a more expansive wave of innovation, would promote shared learning, and would ensure that start-ups, academia, and the defense industrial base could engage in 3DHI R&D for low-volume products.

In the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 (Public Law 116-283), Congress authorized multiple federal agencies to create public-private partnerships to promote domestic manufacturing research capacity in the microelectronics sector. Notably, Congress directed the Department of Commerce, in collaboration with the Department of Defense, to establish a National Semiconductor Technology Center to “conduct research and prototyping of advanced semiconductor technology to strengthen the economic competitiveness and security of the domestic supply chain,” and a National Advanced Packaging Manufacturing Program “to strengthen semiconductor advanced test, assembly, and packaging capability in the domestic ecosystem.”

While the scope of these activities is still being determined, it is expected that these efforts will prioritize conventional silicon-based technologies. The Department of Defense is also directed to establish a National Network for Microelectronics Research and Development (NNMRD) composed of United States research universities to enable the laboratory-to-fabrication transition of microelectronics innovations. This network, which will be established by the Under Secretary of Defense for Research & Engineering (USD(R&E)), is referred to as the “Microelectronics Commons” or “the Commons.” It is expected that the Commons will consist of multiple regional, university-focused U.S. innovation hubs to foster a pipeline of ideas and talent from university labs and small business teams across a wide range of device technologies and circuit

4 Raytheon Technology Today, Issue 2, May 2019.

architectures. While these new efforts will foster innovation broadly, neither specifically addresses the need for an open-access, national manufacturing center for 3DHI R&D.

Anticipating that the next major wave of microelectronics innovation will come from the ability to integrate heterogeneous materials, devices, and circuits through advanced packaging, DARPA is proposing to stand up a national accelerator specifically for next-generation 3DHI. This national accelerator would take the form of a pilot-line manufacturing capability that would allow users from across the country to assemble and test their R&D designs without the need for expensive investments in their own capability. This national accelerator would be distinguished from the other congressionally authorized efforts by its emphasis on the heterogeneous integration of multiple material systems, rather than prioritizing only silicon-based technologies.

In addition, the accelerator will employ a holistic approach to specifically advance domestic 3DHI capabilities. This national accelerator would prioritize:

• centralized manufacturing resources;

• short turn-around manufacturing process cycle times; and

• cost-effectiveness from shared resources for design, packaging, assembly, and testing.

While investment in R&D for silicon-based 3DHI will undoubtably accelerate in the commercial sector, the opportunity to accelerate innovation comes from enhancing collaboration across industry, defense, and academic partners. Investing now, before vendor-specific manufacturing approaches mature to a point where it becomes difficult to integrate intellectual property (IP) from multiple sources, will help ensure that the ecosystem has the foundation for future collaboration.

As seen in many industries including microelectronics, insights gained from R&D in manufacturing enhance and accelerate the learning cycle that leads to product innovation. By leading in the creation of the next generation manufacturing techniques, the U.S. will secure broad and sustained leadership in microelectronics.

B. Program Description

The Next-Generation Microelectronics Manufacturing (NGMM) program seeks to establish a holistic domestic capability for 3DHI R&D, developing key process modules for the design, packaging, assembly, and testing of 3DHI microsystems. If successful, the program will provide:

• an open-access manufacturing center to holistically address design, assembly, packaging, and testing;

• a pilot-line manufacturing capability;

• multi-project runs or dedicated taxi runs as a feature of the research service; and

• training and orientation for all users.

The NGMM program comprises three phases as depicted in Figure 1.

Figure 1. NGMM Program Structure

Phase 0 of this program, which is the focus of this BAA, will inform planning for the manufacturing center by defining exemplar 3DHI microsystems and identifying the equipment, processes, software tools, and facility requirements for manufacturing these microsystems.

Proposers will provide a detailed analysis of an exemplar 3DHI microsystem (see the “Exemplar Microsystems and Process Modules” section below). In Phase 0, DARPA encourages proposers to form teams consisting of, but not limited to, microsystem designers, tooling manufacturers, and system integrators. In addition to the analysis of the exemplar 3DHI microsystem, proposers will provide specific recommendations for the software and hardware tools needed to manufacture their microsystem, including, but not limited to, electronic design automation (EDA) tools, packaging and assembly tools, and metrology and test tools and techniques.

The output of Phase 0 will be a detailed analytical report of exemplar 3DHI microsystems that could be fabricated in the 3DHI manufacturing center. In addition to providing a description of the layout, performance benefits, and applications, the report will describe the required equipment and process modules for manufacturing and testing the 3DHI microsystem.

Another goal of Phase 0 is to determine an operational balance in the diversity of the 3DHI processes that will be supported in the 3DHI manufacturing center. DARPA recognizes that too narrow a selection of processes may not prove useful to the targeted set of users (academia, defense industrial base, small businesses), while too broad a set may be prohibitively expensive and time-consuming to develop and sustain (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Objective of Phase 0 Analyses

The analyses from Phase 0 will be used to inform a separate solicitation for Phases 1 and 2 of NGMM, subject to DARPA’s discretion and funding availability. In this separate solicitation, Phases 1 and 2 will focus on establishing the 3DHI manufacturing center, creating and finalizing baseline process modules, qualifying the pilot-line manufacturing process, and implementing the R&D access model for the center. DARPA does not anticipate that teams selected for Phase 0 would be identical to the teams proposing to the follow-on solicitation for Phases 1 and 2. Phase 0 relies on synthesizing the perspective of user needs with manufacturing capabilities, whereas Phases 1 and 2 will emphasize the expertise to create an operational manufacturing service for R&D. These phases rely on a different balance of expertise which, DARPA anticipates would naturally result in different teaming arrangements.

Exemplar Microsystems and Process Modules

For this solicitation, NGMM aims to emphasize 3DHI microsystems that incorporate different material systems in the same package, such as photonics for interconnects, novel memory devices for computing, and wide-bandgap and ultra-wide bandgap semiconductors for power electronics, and additively manufactured passive components. Specifically, Phase 0 of NGMM seeks to define disruptive representative microsystems that integrate disparate wafers or chips into vertically stacked architectures.

Figure 3: Representative Building Blocks for Defining Exemplar 3DHI Microsystems

Proposers should define their exemplar microsystem by incorporating at least two building blocks from Figure 3. Proposers should also identify specific components or applications that would demonstrate revolutionary performance improvements from the 3D integration in their exemplar microsystem. It is expected that the microsystems defined in this research study will reflect significant advances in the state-of-the-art for 3DHI performance and packaging by innovating in areas such as architecture, integration approach, novel materials, thermal and power management, and interconnect density.

The exemplar microsystems should have a minimum of three individual 2D chips vertically integrated together. In addition, they should contain a minimum of two disparate semiconductor material systems, such as Si, SiGe, GaAs, GaN, InP, HgCdTe, SiC, etc., rather than just two different Si CMOS technology nodes (e.g. 7 nm and 22 nm); however, deeply scaled CMOS as a part of the microsystem is not excluded.

Table 1. Exemplar Microsystem Structure Objective Features

Number of integrated 2D chips Number of material systems ≥ 3 ≥ 2

Proposers should include in their proposal the following details in their description of each exemplar microsystem:

• a high-level block diagram of the exemplar microsystem, including a description of the function of each block;

• a chip floorplan, with circuit blocks depicted in approximate proportional size;

• a summary of the anticipated applications for the exemplar microsystem; and

• figures of merit relevant to the exemplar microsystem.

If warranted, device-level schematics can be provided, but are not expected unless the unique nature of a design warrants inclusion to illustrate why that design would be considered exemplar.

3DHI Manufacturing Equipment and Tooling

It is expected that the 3DHI microsystems fabricated within the 3DHI manufacturing center will comprise wafers, die, or chips that originate from multiple external foundries, laboratories, and process technologies, and are assembled using leading-edge packaging solutions. Incorporating diverse sets of die into a single, manufacturable package will require design standards to ensure successful integration. Proposers should address any needs for interface standards for chips that originate in different facilities and contain different semiconductors, metals, and dielectrics. For example, the integration of a GaN power amplifier with a silicon digital circuit may require reconciling dissimilarities in design and materials. Note that fabricating 2D die in a foundry or integrated device manufacturer is not in scope for this Phase 0 HR001122S0050 BAA or the NGMM 3DHI center, which will focus on integrating die from external foundries or integrated device manufacturers.

The research report should also describe the process modules required for each exemplar microsystem, which includes the design, manufacturing, and test capabilities that are needed to fabricate these devices. One aim of the NGMM 3DHI center is to create standard approaches that enable novel circuit architectures. Therefore, the Phase 0 report should address the use of a standard process flow that provides a baseline integration capability but also allows for flexibility of incorporating new device types or materials. Because of the diverse set of chips that will be supported by this fabrication capability, standardization will require a small number of process flows encompassing a broad range of circuits. Proposers should describe the methodology and framework for assessing how the process modules can be applied beyond the exemplar circuit to a wider group of circuits.

The process modules should describe the design support required, including access to EDA tools and the approach for developing, maintaining, and distributing 3D assembly design kits (3D- ADKs). The certification of the 3D-ADK and its support by chip manufacturers will be addressed in Phase 1 of NGMM, and not in Phase 0.

A detailed, step-by-step process flow is not expected for this research study. However, the report should encompass high level capabilities and novel manufacturing approaches in the following areas: through substrate vias, bump and bond pad formation, redistribution layers, wafer/chip/die bonding, backside processing (including wafer/die thinning), reconstituted wafers, dicing, and die attach. In addition, a description of required test, metrology, and reliability toolsets should be provided. The analysis should identify the key equipment necessary for accomplishing these processes, including an assessment of equipment availability. Finally, the process module discussion should outline the features that can be supported, including: substrate or chip sizes, semiconductor types, and materials (e.g. metals, oxide, polymers).

Intellectual Property

DARPA is aware that IP concerns will need to be addressed during Phases 1 and 2 of NGMM.

Successful collaboration within the 3DHI manufacturing center will require IP arrangements that accommodate a wide range of potential partners, such as academia, start-ups, the defense industrial base, and commercial corporations. As the output of Phase 0 is a detailed analysis, DARPA expects that the analysis and exemplar microsystem may include propriety information.

However, DARPA expects that a non-proprietary summary be available to share across teams within the program. DARPA anticipates that any IP concerns within a teaming arrangement will be addressed by that individual team.

DARPA expects proposers to leverage an existing IP model used in a similar semiconductor research center to identify barriers to collaboration that are specific to 3DHI, and recommend an IP model that could potentially reduce the identified barriers. Examples of existing IP models that may be used include the models used at one of the Manufacturing USA institutes or IMEC’s Industrial Affiliation Program.5 Other relevant IP models may be proposed.

C. Program Structure

Phase 0 of NGMM is a 6-month, single phase effort that seeks to provide a detailed analysis to define a 3DHI manufacturing center between the United States Government (USG), academia, and industry. This initial phase will emphasize defining the requirements and capabilities of a 3DHI R&D/prototyping ecosystem rather than solving a specific design challenge. DARPA expects that performers will leverage existing designs that would benefit from 3DHI architecture.

A separate, subsequent solicitation will be issued for establishing the center, subject to DARPA’s discretion and available funding. Figure 1 depicts the relationship between Phase 0 and planned subsequent phases.

D. Schedule and Milestones

The Phase 0 NGMM program planned schedule is shown in Figure 4.

5 A representative model may be found in Manufacturing USA’s “Guidance on Intellectual Property Rights for the National Network for Manufacturing Innovation,” October 2014. Available at https://www.manufacturingusa.com/reports/guidance-intellectual-property-rights-national-network-manufacturing-innovation

Figure 4. NGMM Phase 0 Schedule

Phase 0 of this program is 6 months, with an anticipated start date in February 2023. Program kickoff, mid-point review, final review, and monthly review sessions will be held and represent an opportunity to interact with the Government on planned work, specifics of the technical approaches, and any technical or programmatic items of concern. In addition, 3DHI technical workshops may be held during the program in which performers may provide further insights on future technical paths for 3DHI and technical challenges that must be addressed. Monthly progress teleconferences will be scheduled with the Government team to review technical progress and identify risks to completing the analysis. Figure 5 shows the schedule for all planned phases of the program.

Figure 5. NGMM Program Planned Schedule

E. Deliverables

At the end of Phase 0, performers should provide a detailed final report that includes:

• complete description of the exemplar microsystem to the device or component level, as appropriate;

• floorplan for each chip in the vertical stack;

• plan for functional simulation of each circuit design;

• performance metrics for each exemplar microsystem;

• hardware test plan that will validate the performance metrics; and

• list of milestones for design review over the course of Phase 0.

All performers shall deliver monthly technical reports, monthly financial reports including updated expenditures, and a final report at program completion. Performers shall prepare and submit briefing materials and participate in monthly progress reviews, either via teleconference or at the performer’s site at the discretion of DARPA. Proposers should anticipate two in-person meetings with the Program Manager near Arlington, Virginia. To foster collaboration between teams and to disseminate program results, at least one of those meetings is planned to be a program-wide two-day Principal Investigator meeting. This program-wide meeting will be planned to be held at the mid-point of the six-month period of performance. Additional travel may be planned but the rationale should be explained within the proposal. These are shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6. Example Schedule for Deliverables

F. Government Furnished Equipment/Property/Information

No Government furnished equipment, property, or information will be provided for the effort solicited in this BAA.

G. 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 and Section IV.B.1, “Section III. Other Transaction Request”, if applicable.

II. Award Information

A. General Award Information

Multiple awards are anticipated. The amount of 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, grant, 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. § 4022(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

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.

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

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.pdf

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)

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.

https://www.darpa.mil/attachments/092021DARPACFIPRubric.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.dcsa.mil/

(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.

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 fundamental strategic interests of the U.S are under threat.

Proposers should indicate in their proposal whether they believe the scope of the research included in their proposal is fundamental or not. While proposers should clearly explain the intended results of their research, the Government shall have sole discretion to determine whether the proposed research shall be considered fundamental…