HR001122S0059.pdf

HR001122S0059

Broad Agency Announcement Space Power Conversion Electronics (SPCE)

Microsystems Technology Office

September 22, 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

1. Program Review Meetings

2. Prototype Delivery

3. Technical Reports

4. Monthly Financial Reports

5. Final Report

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. Grant Abstract

10. Small Business Subcontracting Plan

11. Intellectual Property

a. For Procurement Contracts

b. For All Non-Procurement Contracts

12. Patents

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

14. 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 (optional)

3. 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

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

4. Plans and Capability to Accomplish Technology Transition

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 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

ATTACHMENT 1: Cost Volume Proposer Checklist ATTACHMENT 2: Proposal Summary Slide Template ATTACHMENT 3: SPCE Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) Guide ATTACHMENT 4: Other Transactions (OT) Certifications Template ATTACHMENT 5: DARPA Standard Cost Proposal Spreadsheet

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

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

Funding Opportunity Title: Space Power Conversion Electronics (SPCE) Announcement Type: Initial Announcement Funding Opportunity Number: HR001122S0059 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA): 12.910 Research and

Technology Development Dates: (All times listed herein are Eastern Time) o Posting Date: September 22, 2022 o Proposers Day: September 26, 2022 o Abstract Due Date: October 18, 2022, 1:00 PM Eastern Time o FAQ Submission Deadline: November 14, 2022, 1:00 PM Eastern Time o Proposal Due Date: December 6, 2022, 1:00 PM Eastern Time o Estimated period of performance start: May, 2023

Concise description of the funding opportunity: The DARPA Microsystems Technology Office is soliciting research proposals for the development of compact point-of-load (POL) voltage converters that are radiation-tolerant and efficient.

Anticipated Funding Available for Award: Approximately $63M of total funding is anticipated for awards made against this BAA, with a distribution of:

o $60M for Technical Area 1 (TA1) across all program phases o $3M for Technical Area 2 (TA2) across all program phases

Anticipated individual awards: Multiple awards are anticipated Anticipated funding type:

o 6.2 for TA1 (Anticipated to be restricted research for all performers/team members).

o 6.2 for TA2 (Anticipated to be fundamental research for all performers/team members)(See "II.B. Fundamental Research" below).

Types of instruments that may be awarded:

o TA1: Procurement contract or Other Transaction.

o TA2: Procurement contract, cooperative agreement, grant, or Other Transaction.

Agency contact:

o Dr. Jason Woo, Program Manager

BAA Coordinator: HR001122S0059@darpa.mil

DARPA/MTO

ATTN: HR001122S0059

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 for FAR-based procurement contracts 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 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 for the research and development of compact point of load (POL) voltage converters that are radiation-tolerant and highly efficient. The Space Power Conversion Electronics (SPCE) program aims to demonstrate a 48 V-to-1 V POL converter with the following objectives: a) Radiation-tolerance > 75 MeV-cm2/mg linear energy transfer (LET) heavy ion/proton radiation, b) Efficiency > 85 % (at least 25 percentage points higher than state-of-the art (SOTA)), and c) Compact, with power density >500 W/in3 (10X greater than SOTA). Proposed research should investigate innovative approaches that enable revolutionary advances in science, devices, or systems. Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

A. Background

Point of load power conversion represents a severe bottleneck for space, particularly for proliferated low Earth orbit (LEO) applications. In today’s space power systems, radiation-tolerance is achieved by derating the operating voltage by more than a factor of two to permit sufficient margin from single event burnout (SEB) in the high-voltage transistors that serve as the power switches. As a result, space POL converters are characterized by low (< 60 %) efficiency, severely limiting the satellite available power, capabilities, and battery lifetime.

POL power conversion relies on high voltage transistors to serve as power switches. When energetic protons/heavy ions in a space environment strike the high electric field regions of these transistors, a large number of carriers are generated. This causes a large current pulse between the high voltage and ground, potentially leading to single event burnout in which the switch fails from catastrophic Joule heating. To achieve the program objectives, SPCE will overcome two key Technical Challenges (TCs) described in section I.B. The SPCE program will exploit technology advances in, for example, wide bandgap and other novel semiconductor power transistors, defect-free wide bandgap semiconductor growth, and advanced heterogeneous integration technology to overcome the TCs.

B. Program Description

The SPCE program seeks to develop radiation-tolerant high-voltage transistors with high performance and the integration technology to enable compact, high conversion ratio POL converters for space applications. Specific SPCE program goals are: realizing integrated radiation-tolerant high-voltage transistors with performance better than state-of-the-art (SOTA) wide bandgap semiconductor (WBGS) high-voltage devices for non-radiation environments, employing these transistors to demonstrate a 48 V-to-1 V radiation-tolerant POL converter with over eighty five percent efficiency at 50 A output current, and achieving power density greater than 500 W/in3.

To achieve the SPCE program objectives, performers in this program should be prepared to address two key Technical Challenges (TCs):

TC 1: Achieving a high-performance high-voltage transistor that is radiation-tolerant.

SOTA space POL systems use discrete, radiation-hardened, silicon lightly-doped-drain MOSFET (LDMOS) transistors, limiting the overall POL efficiency to < 60 %. This is because, to avoid SEB, these LDMOS transistors are operated at a voltage, Vmax, substantially lower than the device breakdown voltage. This derating leads to degradation in performance, reflected in the poor transistor figure-of-merit (FOM = 1/(RonQG)).1 For a space-qualified 100 V LDMOS, the FOM is more than 3X worse than for an LDMOS transistor for non-radiation environments. This results in a significant increase in the switch power loss, and consequently a reduced POL conversion efficiency. Recently, wide bandgap semiconductors such as GaN and SiC have been investigated for space applications. With their larger breakdown voltages and higher carrier mobilities, WBGS transistors promise a 10X-100X better FOM than LDMOS. However, WBGS transistors are also known to be prone to SEB in radiation environments and require substantially higher (up to 4X) voltage derating, which has limited their performance when implemented into space power converters.

TC 2: Achieving a low-loss, high-voltage integrated circuit technology that is radiation-tolerant. The most common terrestrial monolithic integrated power electronic technology, Bipolar-CMOS-DMOS (BCD),2 is not suitable for demanding space missions due to the poor radiation reliability and performance of older node CMOS, and degraded DMOS capabilities after derating. In addition, SOTA space-qualified high voltage transistors have large junction sizes and footprints (tens of square nanometers) due to voltage derating, preventing monolithic integration with advanced microelectronics. SOTA space POL systems are therefore based on discrete implementations of the LDMOS devices and passive components, which results in large POL size (power density of < 50 W/in3) with long and lossy electrical connections that contribute as much as five percentage points reduction in POL efficiency due to power loss in wiring under high output current conditions.

1 FOM, defined as 1/(RonQG), that is commonly used for power transistors, where Ron is the transistor on resistance and QG is the control gate charges from Off state to On state.

2 “Three Chips in One: The History of the BCD Integrated Circuit”, IEEE Spectrum 2021. BCD stands for Bipolar, CMOS and DMOS (Double Diffused MOS).

C. Program Structure

SPCE will be a 50-month program encompassing two main technical areas (TA):

TA1: Radiation-tolerant High-performance High-voltage Transistor and High-efficiency

POL DC-DC Converters. TA1 will be a three-phase program effort with a 20-month Phase 1 (Base), 18-month Phase 2 (Option), and 12-month Phase 3 (Option). At the end of Phase 1 and Phase 2, Options may be exercised, at the Government’s sole discretion, based on technical progress and funding availability. It is anticipated that the number of performers may diminish as options are exercised for progression into Phases 2 and 3 of the program.

TA2: Fundamental Device Exploration. TA2 will be a two-phase program effort with a 20-month Phase 1 (Base) and an 18-month Phase 2 (Option). At the end of Phase 1, Options may be exercised, at the Government’s sole discretion, based on technical progress and funding availability. It is anticipated that the number of performers may diminish as options are exercised for progression into Phase 2 of the program.

Performers will deliver the prototype device/circuits to the government. Their performance and radiation tolerance will be validated by a government-selected independent validation and verification (IV&V) organization.

A Proposal may address either TA1 (restricted research) or TA2 (fundamental research), but a single proposal may not address both TAs. Proposers who wish to submit to more than one TA must submit separate, standalone, full proposal packages for each Technical Area. Tasks that would be duplicated in the effort if both TAs were awarded should be explicitly called out.

D. Technical Areas

This SPCE Program BAA is soliciting research proposals for work in two Technical Areas (TA):

1. TA1: Radiation-tolerant High-performance High-voltage Transistor and High-efficiency POL DC-DC Converters

TA1 seeks to develop a device technology for realizing radiation-tolerant high efficiency POL DC-DC converters. To achieve the program goals, the performer(s) is expected to realize radiation-tolerant high-voltage transistors with switching performance better than SOTA high-voltage transistors for non-radiation environment and the integration technology needed for realizing high-efficiency, high-energy-density POL converters.

The goals for each program phase are:

Phase 1 (Base) – The goal of Phase 1 is to verify the device approach(es) to realize radiation-tolerant high voltage transistors with switching performance better than the SOTA high-voltage devices for non-radiation environments.

Phase 2 (Option) – The goal of Phase 2 is to demonstrate device integration technologies which enable compact radiation-tolerant POL converters with over 75 % efficiency for 48 V-to-1 V conversion, 50 A output current and power density larger than 250 W/in3. Another key part of this Phase 2 is further development and optimization of devices realized in Phase 1 for improved device characteristics and performance.

Phase 3 (Option) – The goal of Phase 3 is to realize further device optimization, and to demonstrate radiation-tolerant POL converters with > 85 % efficiency for 48 V-to-1 V conversion, 50 A output current and power density greater than 500 W/in3.

The proposer should offer their approach to achieving the above goals. In particular, they should describe their unique approach to overcome the two key Technical Challenges (TCs) introduced in section I.B above:

a) Achieving a high-performance high-voltage transistor that is radiation-tolerant. Potential approaches may involve a combination of material and/or device engineering to achieve radiation-tolerant high-voltage transistors with performance competitive with/better than SOTA terrestrial WBGS power switches. These could include low-defect WBGS high voltage transistors that require minimum voltage derating to avoid SEB and/or advanced high-voltage transistor architectures such as super-junction drains.

b) Achieving a low-loss, high-voltage integrated circuit technology that is radiation-tolerant. One class of potential solutions might involve semiconductor layer transfer to achieve three-dimensional heterogeneous integration of radiation-tolerant high-performance wide bandgap devices with intrinsically high radiation tolerance advanced node VLSI gate drive circuitries and compact low loss passives. An alternate approach could be monolithically-integrated radiation-tolerant WBGS-drain LDMOS transistors realized through the incorporation at the junction level of advanced semiconductors by heterogeneous selective growth into scaled VLSI CMOS.

Bidders are not limited to the potential approaches described in either a) and b) above and are welcome to propose any innovative approach to meet the program goals.

TA1 proposals are expected to provide concise discussion on how the proposed technical approaches, including quantitative preliminary analysis, will meet the program performance metrics of the radiation-tolerant high-voltage transistors. In addition, the proposals are also expected to provide similar concise discussion on the low-loss integration and circuit development to achieve the radiation-tolerant POL converter demonstration with greater than 85 % efficiency and power density greater than 500 W/ in3.

2. TA2: Fundamental Device Exploration

TA2 focuses on fundamental research on innovative high-risk/high payoff radiation-tolerant high-voltage transistors, and does not involve the design, integrate, and demonstrate a high-efficiency POL converter at the end of the program. Potential topics include novel wide bandgap semiconductor high-voltage transistors that are compatible with integration into the advanced node VLSI back-end-of-line, or novel WBGS high-voltage transistor design such as superlattice super-junction drains. TA2 performer(s) will explore these novel material/concepts to realize radiation-tolerant high-voltage devices that are compatible with tight integration with advanced node VLSI with breakthrough performance.

Performance Enhancement System demonstration

Performance Enhancement System demonstration

The goals for each phase are:

Phase 1 (Base) – The goal of Phase 1 is to verify experimentally the device approach(es) by realizing radiation-tolerant, high-voltage transistors with switching performance 2.5X better than TA1 Phase 1 devices.

Phase 2 (Option) – The goal of Phase 2 is to further optimize the design and fabrication of the proposed radiation-tolerant, high-performance transistors, and to experimentally demonstrate the transistor TA2 Phase 2 FOM metric.

Proposals addressing TA2 are expected to provide a concise discussion on (1) technical approach and rationale, including preliminary analysis, to realize the proposed radiation-tolerant, high-voltage transistors, (2) potential critical processes and process integration compatible with advanced microelectronics fabrication platforms to fabricate these transistors, and (3) risk mitigation paths to attain the performance metrics for the two program phases.

Table 1: TA1 and TA2 Metrics by Phase Technical Area/

Technical Challenge

Device Type(a) Metric Unit Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

TA1/TC1

Vmax=10V

1/QGRon m-1nC-1

0.1 0.15 0.4

Vmax=100V 0.01 0.01 0.025

TA1/TC2

POL conversion efficiency(b) %

Simulation of Phase 3 metrics

75 85

Integration level measured by POL power density W/in3 250 500

Vout ripple mV <20 <15 Vout

(c) V 1.5 1.0

TA2/TC1 Vmax=10V 1/QGRon m-1nC-1 0.25 0.5

Table 1 Notes:

(a) TA1 performers need to propose either or both types of device to meet the TA1/TC2 POL circuit metrics.

(b) POL conversion efficiency is calculated based on 48 Vin, 1.5 Vout (Phase 2)/1.0 Vout (Phase3), and 50 A Iout test conditions.

(c) Vout with 48 Vin.

E. Schedule/Milestones

SPCE will be a 50-month, three-phase program (TA1) and a 38-month, two-phase program (TA2) with an estimated period of performance start in May 2023. A mandatory post-award program kickoff meeting will be held to present the technical approaches, to discuss technical and programmatic items of concern, and to interact with the Government team and other program performers. The end of each phase represents a major technical milestone in the program; end-of-phase review meetings will be scheduled approximately two months before the end of Phase 1; and approximately one month before the end of Phase 2 and Phase 3 (TA1 only).

These meetings will be used to communicate technical progress toward the metrics during the entire phase. Technical progress towards the metrics of the program is the major deciding factor for continuation into subsequent phases and will be monitored through bi-monthly teleconference calls and occasional site visits by the DARPA program manager and other members of the Government team.

F. Deliverables

1. Program Review Meetings

Technical review meetings with the SPCE Program Manager will be held every two months, usually as a teleconference, and every nine months in person. The review meeting deliverable will be a technical slide presentation. Additional program reviews with all performers will be held in person at the beginning of each program phase, and may replace the technical review meetings. There will also be end-of-phase meeting with individual performers approximately two months before the end of each phase. Prior to each end-of-phase meeting, performers in both technical areas will provide to the Government a written report covering, a) technical results, and

b) charts with explanations of how well the component(s)/system(s) meets, exceeds, or falls short of specified program metrics (as described in this BAA). Templates will be provided for the technical review teleconferences and will include technical updates with simulated and measured results to demonstrate progress toward the program metrics, as well as an up-to-date financial spend plan.

2. Prototype Delivery

The Government expects to conduct performance and radiation testing of SPCE device and POL deliverables to independently validate performer progress towards achieving program goals.

Performers will deliver the hardware to the Government per the following schedule:

Technical Area Prototype device delivery expected Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3

TA1 18 mos. after phase start 16 mos. after phase start 10 mos. after phase start TA2 18 mos. after phase start 16 mos. after phase start N/A

3. Technical Reports

Technical reports shall be submitted on a monthly basis beginning within two weeks after the kick-off meeting and two working days prior to each subsequently scheduled program event, such as technical review meetings.

Other proposed deliverables specific to the objectives of the individual efforts may include registered reports, experimental protocols, publications, data management plan, intermediate and final versions of software libraries, code, and APIs, documentation and user manuals, and/or a comprehensive assemblage of design documents, models, modeling data and results, and model validation data.

4. Monthly Financial Reports

The financial report shall describe resources expended, resources available, any deviation from planned expenditures, and any potential issues requiring the attention of the Government team.

This report shall be provided within 10 days from the end of each month.

5. Final Report

After the end of each phase, the report shall summarize the effort in a comprehensive text document.

G. Government Furnished Equipment/Property/Information

None

H. Intellectual Property

It is expected that the data/software developed under SPCE will have the following minimum data rights:

Government desires no less than Government Purpose Rights for TA1 and TA2.

See also Section IV.B.2, “Section III. Other Transaction Request, if applicable” and Section IV.B.11, “Intellectual Property.”

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

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.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.

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/

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.

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 and to select the award instrument type. Appropriate language will be included in resultant awards for non-fundamental research to prescribe publication requirements and other restrictions, as appropriate. This language can be found at http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa.

For certain research projects, it may be possible that although the research to be performed by a potential awardee is non-fundamental research, its proposed subawardee’s effort may be fundamental research. It is also possible that the research performed by a potential awardee is fundamental research while its proposed subawardee’s effort may be non-fundamental research.

In all cases, it is the potential awardee’s responsibility to explain in its proposal which proposed efforts are fundamental research and why the proposed efforts should be considered fundamental research.

III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants

All responsible sources capable of satisfying the Government's needs may submit a proposal that shall be considered by DARPA.

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

a) FFRDCs

FFRDCs are subject to applicable direct competition limitations and cannot propose to this solicitation in any capacity unless they meet the following conditions. (1) FFRDCs must clearly demonstrate that the proposed work is not otherwise available from the private sector. (2) FFRDCs must provide a letter, on official letterhead from their sponsoring organization, that (a) cites the specific authority establishing their eligibility to propose to Government solicitations and compete with industry, and (b) certifies the FFRDC’s compliance with the associated FFRDC sponsor agreement’s terms and conditions. These conditions are a requirement for FFRDCs proposing to be awardees or subawardees.

http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa

b) Government Entities

Government Entities (e.g., Government/National laboratories, military educational institutions, etc.) are subject to applicable direct competition limitations. Government Entities must clearly demonstrate that the work is not otherwise available from the private sector and provide written documentation citing the specific statutory authority and contractual authority, if relevant, establishing their ability to propose to Government solicitations and compete with industry. This information is required for Government Entities proposing to be awardees or subawardees.

c) Authority and Eligibility

At the present time, DARPA does not consider 15 U.S.C. § 3710a to be sufficient legal authority to show eligibility. While 10 U.S.C.§ 4892 may be the appropriate statutory starting point for some entities, specific supporting regulatory guidance, together with evidence of agency approval, will still be required to fully establish eligibility. DARPA will consider FFRDC and Government Entity eligibility submissions on a case-by-case basis; however, the burden to prove eligibility for all team members rests solely with the proposer.

2. Other Applicants Non-U.S. organizations and/or individuals may participate to the extent that such participants comply with any necessary nondisclosure agreements, security regulations, export control laws, and other governing statutes applicable under the circumstances.

B. Organizational Conflicts of Interest

FAR 9.5 Requirements In accordance with FAR 9.5, proposers are required to identify and disclose all facts relevant to potential OCIs involving the proposer’s organization and any proposed team member (subawardee, consultant). Under this Section, the proposer is responsible for providing this disclosure with each proposal submitted to the solicitation. The disclosure must include the proposer’s, and as applicable, proposed team member’s OCI mitigation plan. The OCI mitigation plan must include a description of the actions the proposer has taken, or intends to take, to prevent the existence of conflicting roles that might bias the proposer’s judgment and to prevent the proposer from having unfair competitive advantage. The OCI mitigation plan will specifically discuss the disclosed OCI in the context of each of the OCI limitations outlined in FAR 9.505-1 through FAR 9.505-4.

Agency Supplemental OCI Policy In addition, DARPA has a supplemental OCI policy that prohibits contractors/performers from concurrently providing Scientific Engineering Technical Assistance (SETA), Advisory and Assistance Services (A&AS) or similar support services and being a technical performer.

Therefore, as part of the FAR 9.5 disclosure requirement above, a proposer must affirm whether the proposer or any proposed team member (subawardee, consultant) is providing SETA, A&AS, or similar support to any DARPA office(s) under: (a) a current award or subaward; or (b) a past award or subaward that ended within one calendar year prior to the proposal’s submission date.

If SETA, A&AS, or similar support is being or was provided to any DARPA office(s), the proposal must include:

The name of the DARPA office receiving the support;

The prime contract number;

Identification of proposed team member (subawardee, consultant) providing the support; and An OCI mitigation plan in accordance with FAR 9.5.

Government Procedures In accordance with FAR 9.503, 9.504 and 9.506, the Government will evaluate OCI mitigation plans to avoid, neutralize or mitigate potential OCI issues before award and to determine whether it is in the Government’s interest to grant a waiver. The Government will only evaluate OCI mitigation plans for proposals that are determined selectable under the solicitation evaluation criteria and funding availability.

The Government may require proposers to provide additional information to assist the Government in evaluating the proposer’s OCI mitigation plan.

If the Government determines that a proposer failed to fully disclose an OCI; or failed to provide the affirmation of DARPA support as described above; or failed to reasonably provide additional information requested by the Government to assist in evaluating the proposer’s OCI mitigation plan, the Government may reject the proposal and withdraw it from consideration for award.

C. Cost Sharing/Matching

Cost sharing is not required; however, it will be carefully considered where there is an applicable statutory condition relating to the selected funding instrument. Cost sharing is encouraged where there is a reasonable probability of a potential commercial application related to the proposed research and development effort.

For more information on potential cost sharing requirements for Other Transactions for Prototype, see http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management and https://acquisitioninnovation.darpa.mil.

D. Other Eligibility Criteria

1. Collaborative Efforts

Collaborative efforts/teaming are encouraged.

IV. Application and Submission Information

PROPOSERS ARE CAUTIONED THAT EVALUATION RATINGS MAY BE LOWERED

AND/OR PROPOSALS REJECTED IF PROPOSAL PREPARATION (PROPOSAL FORMAT,

CONTENT, ETC.) AND/OR SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS ARE NOT FOLLOWED.

A. Address to Request Application Package

This announcement, any attachments, and any references to external websites herein constitute the total solicitation. If proposers cannot access the referenced material posted in the announcement found at www.darpa.mil, contact the administrative contact listed herein.

http://ww…