HR001123S0036_HOTS_Proposers_Day_Briefs.pdf

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release

High Operational Temperature Sensors (HOTS)

Proposers Day

May 31, 2023

Agenda

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 3

High Operational Temperature Sensors (HOTS) Benjamin Griffin, MTO

Proposers Day

May 31, 2023

High performance analog sensor microelectronics technology that operate at extreme high temperatureHigh performance analog sensor microelectronics technology that operate at extreme high temperature

What is a sensor?

Signal-conditioning microelectronicsTransducer

IntegrationInfineon Technologies, AG

High operating temperature sensor applications

Turbine engines

Oil-and-gas

Hypersonic systems

Automotive Geothermal

Hexagon MOOG

Brookhaven National Laboratories

Federal Aviation Administration

F-35

X-51 HTV-2

Program goal

High performance analog sensor microelectronics technology that operates at high temperatureHigh performance analog sensor microelectronics technology that operates at high temperature

†Performance = Dynamic Range · Bandwidth (dB re 1 MHz)

HOTS

High Performance High Temperature Integrated

High-speed flow dynamics

Pe rfo rm an ce

(d B)

PCB Micro 422M PCB Micro 176A

Program Metrics Operating Temperature* °C 800 Lifetime at Temperature Hr > 1 Dynamic Range** dB > 90 Bandwidth MHz > 1

*without active cooling **1 Pa/√Hz pressure resolution

Low Performance High Temperature Disaggregated

PCB Micro 132B High Performance Low Temperature Integrated

Failure mechanisms of microelectronics at elevated temperatures

Material degradation

Mechanical cracking

P. G. Neudeck, et al. (2019)

Electrical breakdown

Northrop Grumman (2022) drain source gate

Leakage source draingate substrate

Technical challenges for high operating temperature sensors

Technical Challenge 1

Achieving both long lifetime and large bandwidth transistors at high temperature

Technical Challenge 1

Achieving both long lifetime and large bandwidth transistors at high temperature

Technical Challenge 2

Achieving a high sensitivity transducer at high temperature

Technical Challenge 2

Achieving a high sensitivity transducer at high temperature

Technical Challenge 3

Integrating a high operating temperature sensor without degrading performance

Technical Challenge 3

Integrating a high operating temperature sensor without degrading performance

AlGaN/GaN Transistors Top-Gated SiC Transistors

Technical Challenge #1 Achieving both long lifetime and large bandwidth transistors at high temperature

Lifetime

• Lifetime at 800 °C projected to be << 1 second

• Example limitation: stress-induced microcracks

Bandwidth

• Large operating frequency

Lifetime

• Demonstrated > 1 hour at 800 °C

Bandwidth

• Limited operating frequency

• Topology limits frequency scaling source n+ drain n+ p n p+ gate

Top view Cross-section source n p+ gate p p-type SiC substrate

AlGaN = Aluminum Gallium Nitride 2DEG = 2D Electronic Gas

SiN = Silicon Nitride SiC = Silicon Carbide

C. Zeng, et al. (2015) P. G. Neudeck, et al. (2017)

High-Electron-Mobility Transistor (HEMT) Junction Field Effect Transistor (JFET)

GaN

AlGaN

S DG

2DEG

drain

HOTS is open to diverse transistor approaches aligned with the program metrics and timelineHOTS is open to diverse transistor approaches aligned with the program metrics and timeline

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 11

• the innovation(s) that address the transistor-related technical challenge

• the complete transistor technology (i.e., semiconductor, epi-stack, gate electrode, source and drain contacts, dielectrics, routing metallization, encapsulation, etc.)

• the process flow, process development strategy, and fabrication facilities

• characterization methods proposed to validate high-temperature operation

• proposed signal conditioning circuits with projected performance correlated to sensor operation

• test structures and circuits to support technology development, including structures for design validation, failure analysis, functionality debugging, etc.

• performance projections to achieve program metrics at 800 °C

• assertions that the proposed technology maintain integrity and operation at 800 °C for a minimum of 1 hour*

For TC1, detail…

Support assertions and projections with preliminary experiments and/or modeling results whenever possibleSupport assertions and projections with preliminary experiments and/or modeling results whenever possible

*implies mean-time-to-failure >> 1 hour

Technical Challenge #2 Achieving a high sensitivity transducer at high temperature

High Temperature Wide-Bandgap TransducerHigh Sensitivity Transducer

Temperature Limit

• PZT: depolarizes above 250 °C

Sensitivity

• PZT: ~50% energy coupling

Temperature Limit

• GaN: > 800 °C

• SiC: > 1200 °C

Sensitivity

• GaN: ~1.5% energy coupling

• SiC: ~0.5% energy coupling

GaN SiC PZT

T. P. Comyn, et al. (2021) M. Rais-Zadeh, et al. (2014)

PZT = Lead Zirconate Titanate (Pb[ZrxTi1−x]O3) SiC = Silicon Carbide GaN = Gallium Nitride 12

HOTS is open to diverse transducer approaches aligned with the program metrics and timelineHOTS is open to diverse transducer approaches aligned with the program metrics and timeline

For TC2, detail…

• the innovation(s) that address the transducer-related technical challenge

• the comprehensive transducer technology (i.e., transduction type, material, structure, metal contacts, passivation and dielectrics, etc.)

• the fabrication process flow, process development strategy, and fabrication facilities

• characterization methods proposed to validate high-temperature operation

• performance projections to achieve transducer program metrics at 800 °C

• assertion of sensor module performance that combines transducer with signal conditioning circuitry to achieve sensor module metrics

• test structures to support transducer technology development, including structures for design validation, failure analysis, functionality debugging, etc.

• risks associated with transducer selectivity (e.g., pyroelectric response)

• assertions that the proposed technology maintain integrity and operation at 800 °C for a minimum of 1 hour*

*implies mean-time-to-failure > 1 hour

Support assertions and projections with preliminary experiments and/or modeling results whenever possibleSupport assertions and projections with preliminary experiments and/or modeling results whenever possible

Technical Challenge #3 Integrating a high operating temperature sensor without degrading performance

Conventional Heterogeneous IntegrationMulti-Chip Module Integration

Temperature Performance

• Material interfaces limit operating temperature

CMOS Wafer

Interface Direct interconnects

Deposited transducer material

Wirebond failure

G. Esteves, et al. (2019)

Ozark IC (2020) P. G. Neudeck, et al. (2017)

CMOS = Complementary Metal-Oxide Semiconductor MCM = Multi-Chip Module

Temperature Performance

• Wirebond failure between discrete components

HOTS is open to diverse intimate integration approaches aligned with the program metrics and timelineHOTS is open to diverse intimate integration approaches aligned with the program metrics and timeline

500 600 700 800

Le ak ag e

Cu rre nt (n

A)

Temperature (°C)

Substrate leakage

For TC3, detail…

• the innovation(s) that address the integration-related technical challenge

• the comprehensive integration technology and compatibility of the proposed transistor and transducer technologies with the selected approach

• the fabrication process flow, process development strategy, and fabrication facilities

• interconnect design and performer defined metrics for parasitic loads (i.e., resistance, capacitance, etc.) that support performance of the sensor module to achieve metrics at 800 °C

• any passive circuit elements and impedance matching if applicable

• characterization methods proposed to validate high-temperature operation

• test structures to support integration technology development, including structures for design validation, failure analysis, functionality debugging, etc.

• general concepts for packaging of the sensor module

• assertions that the proposed technology maintain integrity and operation at 800 °C for a minimum of 1 hour*

Support assertions and projections with preliminary experiments and/or modeling results whenever possibleSupport assertions and projections with preliminary experiments and/or modeling results whenever possible

Program Structure

Program structure

FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 FY28

Phase 1 (18 months) Phase 2 (18 months) Phase 3 potential expansion

Design review Fabrication complete

Go / No-Go

Discrete transducers and transistors

(TC1, TC2)

Integrated sensor platform

(TC3)

Sensor demonstrators

Anticipated period-of-performance start – January 2024

Program metrics

ION/IOFF = transistor current ratio MDStransducer = transducer limited minimum detectable signal

Metric Phase 1 (18 months) Discrete components

Phase 2 (18 months) Integrated sensor module

Environment(1) > 1 hr at 800 °C in air > 1 hr at 800 °C in air

Sensor Dynamic range(2) > 90 dB (simulated*) > 90 dB (integrated) Bandwidth(3) > 1 MHz (simulated*) > 1 MHz (integrated)

Transistors

(TC1)

Unity-gain bandwidth (𝑓 ) > 100 MHz

ION/IOFF

(4) > 1000 Threshold voltage variability < ±10%

Transducers

(TC2)

MDStransducer(5) < 1 Pa/√Hz Linear pressure(6) > 33 kPa Bandwidth(3) > 1 MHz

Integration(7)

(TC3)

Interconnect parasitic load(8) Performer defined Interconnect survivability(9) at 800 °C

*simulations are based on measured discrete device results

(1) All metrics are to be reported at 1 hr operation at 800 °C in air

(2) 1 Pa/√Hz pressure resolution measured at 1 kHz

(3) Bandwidth defined as the upper frequency range at which sensitivity is constant to within ≤ 3 dB

(4) ION/IOFF = transistor current ratio

(5) MDStransducer = transducer limited minimum detectable signal

(6) < 1 dB deviation from linear device sensitivity

(7) Integrated total sensor surface area (i.e., sensing element plus other support structure flush with the sensing element) < 30 mm2

(8) Expected performer defined parasitic loads include resistance and capacitive loads, with quantitative metrics derived and supported by baseline model and simulation as well as test structures

(9) Survivability based on meeting or exceeding the interconnect parasitic load metrics for 1 hour

Metrics notes

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 20

• There is a single technical area. All proposals must address all three technical challenges (TCs)

• The BAA solicits technical and cost proposals solely for Phase 1 and Phase 2. While Phase 3 proposals are not being requested at this time, proposers must ensure that the Phase 1 and Phase 2 technical proposal demonstrates foresight for successful transition to Phase 3.

• The Government intends to issue a Statement-of-Objectives (SOO) detailing Phase 3 goals to performers where Phase 2 has been exercised. It is anticipated that the SOO will be provided in Month 12 of Phase 2.

• Proposals should address the availability and access to any required specialized fabrication equipment as well as the development of test capabilities.

• While not required, DARPA is open to teaming amongst the community as appropriate and when strategic to achieve program outcomes.

• Proposals should specifically address schedule risks associated with fabrication equipment, test capabilities, and teaming agreements that impact meeting program milestones on schedule.

Notes on program structure

Further details in the BAA

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 21

• Testing at 800°C will present unique challenges

• All submitted proposals should outline technical tasks regarding developing test plan and capability to demonstrate meeting or exceeding the metrics

• Innovations in test to support demonstration of program metrics are acceptable where proposals demonstrate necessity

• Direct experimental demonstrations of program metrics are strongly encouraged

• Where appropriate, proposers may propose to leverage government test facility capabilities

• Performers will be required to deliver test articles with sufficient documentation to support testing to the Government IV&V team, one quarter before the conclusion of each phase

Test and evaluation

Further details in the BAA

HOTS security overview

• Protect architecture, hardware, and performance data at UNCLASSIFIED

• Protect performer proprietary data at CUI or higher as appropriate

• DARPA/MTO General CUI guide applies

UNCLASSIFIED CUI

Name of Program: High Operational Temperature Sensors (HOTS)

Performer owned intellectual property (IP) that may be used in their technology development effort

Architecture, hardware, and performance data

BAA Details

Elements of a successful proposal

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release

Overall:

o Provide a detailed analysis that explicitly states how the proposed approach will overcome all three technical challenges to meet the program goals and objectives.

o Provide a Statement of Work delineating the tasks and activities supporting the proposed approach. Each phase of the program must be separately defined in the Statement of Work.

Include a SOW for each subcontractor and/or consultant in the Cost Proposal Volume.

In addition:

o Proposers should provide an abbreviated discussion of anticipated sensor demonstrators and application impact projection for potential Phase 3 expansion.

Evaluation criteria (in order of importance)

1. Overall Scientific and Technical Merit o Demonstrate that the proposed technical approach is innovative, feasible, achievable, and complete.

o Describe how the proposed approach will achieve each program metric with sufficient detail and supporting experimental measurements, modeling, calculations, and/or simulations.

2. Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission o Discuss how the proposed effort addresses the DARPA goals of technology transition and facilitates access to HOTS technologies for DoD applications.

3. Cost Realism o Ensure proposed costs are realistic for the technical and management approach and accurately reflect the goals and objectives of the solicitation.

o Verify that proposed costs are sufficiently detailed, complete, and consistent with the Statement of Work.

Proposal Timeline

• BAA Posting Date: May 16, 2023

• Proposers Day: May 31, 2023

• Abstract Due Date: June 22, 2023 at 2:00 PM EST

• FAQ Submission Deadline: August 1, 2023 at 2:00 PM EST o DARPA will post a consolidated Question and Answer (FAQ) document on a regular basis. To access the posting go to: http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities.

• Proposal Due Date: August 15, 2023 at 2:00 PM EST

• Estimated period of performance start: January 2024

Questions: HR001123S0036@darpa.milQuestions: HR001123S0036@darpa.mil

• Proposers are highly encouraged to submit an abstract

• It allows DARPA to provide feedback to proposers on whether a proposed approach or technology fits within the BAA

• It also helps prevent effort spent by proposers on assembling a proposal that may not be successful

• Please, adhere to page limits for the technical volume

• There is no page limit on the cost volume

• When in doubt refer to the BAA for guidance

• If you still have questions after thoroughly reviewing the BAA, please submit questions to the BAA

Coordinator: HR001123S0036@darpa.mil

Reminders

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release

Get familiar with the submission web site!

Keep your password handy!!

Submit early!!!

www.darpa.mil

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 28

Proposer’s Day Agenda

Contracting Overview

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 30

Brian D. Nuckols - Contracting Officer

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 31

• A copious amount of information is made available to potential proposers to clarify program goals/objectives and proposal preparation instructions.

However:

• Only the information and instructions in the BAA count

• Proposals will only be evaluated in accordance with the instructions provided in the BAA

• Any response provided by the Government in the FAQ that’s different than what is provided in the BAA will be made formal by an amendment to the BAA

• Such responses will make note of an impending BAA amendment

Only a duly authorized Contracting Officer may obligate the Government

Proposers’ Day Disclaimer

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 32

• Described in Federal Acquisition Regulation Part 35:

• For the acquisition of basic and applied research

• FAR 35.016 (a): Shall only be used when “meaningful proposals with varying technical/scientific approaches can be reasonably anticipated.”

• BAAs allow for a variety of technical solutions

• The BAA defines the problem set, the proposer defines the solution (and SOW)

• DARPA Scientific Review Process

• Proposals are evaluated on individual merit and relevance as it relates to the stated research goals/objectives rather than against one another

• Selections will be made to proposers whose proposals are determined to be most advantageous to the

Government, all factors considered, including potential contributions to research program and availability of funding

Government may select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of the proposals received Government may accept proposals in their entirety or select only portions thereof Government may elect to establish portions of proposal as options

BAA Overview

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 33

• Multiple Awards Anticipated

• Multiple award instrument types:

• Procurement contract

• Cooperative Agreement

• Other Transaction

• Phase 1 (Base Period):

• Demonstrate individual devices and integration methods addressing the technical challenges at 800 °C and design full circuits and simulate performance of the integrated sensor system based on measured component results.

• 18 months

• Phase 2 (Option Period):

• Demonstrate full sensor module integration meeting the performance goals at 800 °C.

• 18 months

• Phase 3 (Future Proposal):

• While Phase 3 proposals are not being requested at this time, proposers must ensure that the Phase 1 and Phase 2 technical proposal demonstrates foresight for successful transition to Phase 3

BAA Overview, Cont’d

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 34

1. BAA published: May 16, 2023

2. Proposers Day: May 31, 2023

3. Abstracts Due: June 22, 2023

4. Government Abstract Responses: ~ early July 2023

5. FAQ Submission Deadline: August 1, 2023

6. Proposals Due: August 15, 2023

7. Proposals are checked for BAA compliance

• Non-conforming proposals are not reviewed (and cannot be selected)

8. Government conducts Scientific Review Process

• Clarification requests may be sent to various proposers

9. Government sends out notification letters: ~ September 2023

10. Contracts negotiated & awarded (performance start): ~ January 2024

(can assume 1 Jan 2024 for Pricing)

See BAA for complete date/time information Monitor SAM.gov for any BAA amendment(s)

BAA Process/Timeline

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 35

• All interested/qualified sources may respond subject to the parameters outlined in BAA

• Foreign participants/resources may participate to the extent allowed by applicable Security Regulations, Export Control Laws, Non-Disclosure Agreements, etc.

• FFRDCs and Government entities:

- Are not prohibited by the BAA from proposing

- Are, however, subject to applicable direct competition limitations

- Are, however, required to demonstrate eligibility (sponsor letter)

The burden to prove eligibility for all such team members rests with the proposer

All elements of a proposal (tech and cost, prime and subs – even FFRDC team members) must be included in the prime’s submission

• Real and/or Perceived Conflicts of Interest:

- Identify any conflict/s

- If any are identified, a mitigation plan must be included

Eligibility Issues

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 36

• Abstracts are strongly encouraged:

1. They minimize unnecessary effort in proposal preparation and review

2. They reduce the potential expense of preparing an out of scope proposal

• The abstract provides a synopsis of the proposed project (tech and budget)

• Government will reply by letter with one of two possible responses:

1. Encourage full proposal, and may provide feedback

2. Discourage full proposal, and will provide feedback

• Regardless of DARPA’s response to an abstract, proposers may submit a full proposal

DARPA will review all full proposals submitted without regard to abstract recommendation/feedback

Abstracts (1 of 2)

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 37

• Abstracts must include the following components:

• Cover Sheet

• Innovative Claims

• Technical Approach

• Deliverables

• Cost and Schedule

• Submit UNCLASS submissions to the DARPA BAA Website (https://baa.darpa.mil) per the instructions in Section IV.C.2, “Abstract Submission Information,” of the BAA.

Abstracts (2 of 2)

Max of 5 pages

The total page limit does not include the cover sheet (required) or a submission letter (optional)

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 38

• KEY POINTS:

• Three Technical Challenges: TC1, TC2, and TC 3

All three technical challenges must be addressed in the proposal

• Both Phases must be proposed (Base and priced Option)

• An organization/company/individual can be on multiple proposals

• Submit unclassified proposals ONLY to the DARPA BAA Website (https://baa.darpa.mil)

• Click “Finalize Full Proposal” button (otherwise you have not submitted) Do not submit classified proposals/information to the DARPA BAA Website If unsure, please follow the instructions in the BAA for inquiring

Propose to the program (goals, objectives, metrics, schedule, deliverables) the BAA has defined, not to the program you desire

Full Proposal Ground Rules

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 39

• Volume 1: Technical/Management Proposal

- Be mindful of the page limitations (22 pages)

- Be sure to respond to all 12 of the required “Detailed Proposal Information” items

• Technical Approach – is the centerpiece of the technical proposal

• Statement of Work – Organize by Phase/Option, then by Tasks. Define all tasks (what you are doing, not how you are doing it) and deliverables (data, software, and material items, as applicable).

- Pay attention to key technical elements in the “Funding Opportunity Description” that must be addressed in all proposals

• Volume 2: Cost Proposal

- No page limitations

- DARPA Standard Cost Proposal Spreadsheet (required for all instrument types)

- Fully detailed cost build-ups/estimates (Prime & Subcontractors)(All instrument types)

• Summary Cost Build-up: By phase and performer fiscal year

• Detailed Cost Build-up: By phase, technical task, and month

- Subcontractor proposals are required (to include SOW)

- No Rough Order of Magnitudes (ROMs)

- Certificate of Current Cost/Pricing Data will be required for any procurement contract award meeting the prescribed threshold (i.e., the adequate price competition exemption does not apply to BAAs)

Full Proposal Preparation

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 40

• Volume 2: Cost Proposal

DARPA Standard Cost Proposal Spreadsheet The Government requires that proposers use the provided MS ExcelTM DARPA Standard Cost Proposal Spreadsheet in the development of their cost proposals. A customized cost proposal spreadsheet may be an attachment to this solicitation. If not, the spreadsheet can be found on the DARPA website at http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management (under “Resources” on the right-hand side of the webpage). All tabs and tables in the cost proposal spreadsheet should be developed in an editable format with calculation formulas intact to allow traceability of the cost proposal. This cost proposal spreadsheet should be used by the prime organization and all subcontractors. In addition to using the cost proposal spreadsheet, the cost proposal still must include all other items required in this announcement that are not covered by the editable spreadsheet. Subcontractor cost proposal spreadsheets may be submitted directly to the Government by the proposed subcontractor via e-mail to the address in Part I of this solicitation. Using the provided cost proposal spreadsheet will assist the Government in a rapid analysis of your proposed costs and, if your proposal is selected for a potential award, speed up the negotiation and award execution process.

Use the single TA spreadsheet Do not make changes that are specifically prohibited by the instructions Questions are welcomed. Please direct them to costproposal@darpa.mil

Full Proposal Preparation, cont’d

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 41

• Government desires as few restrictions as possible

• If asserting less than Unlimited Rights (e.g., Restrictions):

• Provide and justify basis of assertions using the prescribed format

• Explain how each item will be used to support the proposed research project

• Explain how the Government will be able to reach its program goals (including technology transition)

The proposer (prime) must submit a Data Rights Cert covering the entire team (prime and subcontractors), as applicable

Provide a Data Rights Cert no matter the instrument type being proposed

• This information is assessed during evaluations (barriers to transition)

Data Rights

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 42

• Failure to submit proposal on time – non-conforming!

• Proposal due date and BAA closing date are the same – so, late is late!

• Failure to submit using the correct mechanism – non-conforming!

• Unclassified proposals ONLY to DARPA BAA website

• Classified proposals/information ONLY per “Security Information” section of the BAA

• Failure to submit both proposal volumes – non-conforming!

• OT proposals must also include a full cost volume (Cost Realism is an evaluation criterion for all proposals)

• OT proposals must also include a detailed list of payment milestones (Milestone Plan)

• Pages beyond the page limitation (tech prop) – additional pages will not be reviewed

• ROM/s instead of full subcontract cost proposal/s – non-conforming!

• “I didn’t have time to get the subcontract proposal(s)” will not change the outcome

• “My subcontractor/s would not give me a proposal” will not change the outcome

• Missing FFRDC or Government Entity cost proposal – non-conforming!

Non-Conforming Proposal Determinations

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 43

• Prior to Receipt of Proposals (Solicitation Phase): Follow instructions in BAA

• Typically handled through the FAQ, but see BAA exceptions (e.g., security)

• After Receipt of Proposals/Prior to Selections (Scientific Review Phase): Limited to Contracting Officer or BAA Coordinator (with approval) to address clarifications requested by the review team

• Proposal cannot be changed in response to clarification requests

• After Selection/Prior to Award (Negotiation Phase): Negotiations are conducted by the Contracting Officer

• PM and/or COR typically tasked with finalizing the SOW (with PI)

• PM and/or COR typically involved in any technical discussions (i.e., partial selection discussions)

• Pre-award costs will not be reimbursed unless a pre-award cost agreement is negotiated prior to award

• Informal Feedback Sessions (Post Selection): May be requested/provided once the selection(s) are made

• If made on a timely basis (~2 wks after letter), all requests will be accepted

Communications

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 44

• http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#SolicitationContracting (General DARPA contract management information) (DARPA Standard Cost Proposal Spreadsheet)

• http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa (general BAA info pertaining to all instrument types)

• http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/procurementcontracts (info pertaining to contracts)

• https://acquisitioninnovation.darpa.mil/ (info pertaining to OTs)

• http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/reps-certs (DARPA-specific reps and certs for all instrument types)

Referenced Links

Distribution A: Approved For Public Release 45

Agenda

Working with DARPA Benjamin Griffin

Briefing prepared for HOTS proposer’s day

May 31, 2023

Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited

Breakthrough Technologies and Capabilities for National Security

Create breakthrough, paradigm-shifting solutions

Accept and manage significant technology risk

Disrupt or massively accelerate technology roadmaps

1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s 2030s

UAVs IR Night Vision

Precision Guidance & Navigation

Stealth

M ili ta ry

C ap ab ili tie s

Investing today for the next generation

Communications/Networking

En ab lin g

Te ch no lo gi es

Materials Science Information Technology

ARPAnet/Internet Microelectronics

Nucleic Acid-Based VaccinesPAL/Siri

Artificial Intelligence Self-Driving Cars

DARPA’s Role: Pivotal Early Investments that Change What’s Possible

Biological Technologies

Office

• Threat detection and characterization

• Rapid, scalable protection and countermeasures

• Warfighter overmatch

• Non-traditional platforms and capabilities

Defense Sciences

Office

• Novel materials and structures

• Sensing and measurement

• Computation and processing

• Operations enablement

• Collective intelligence

• Global Change

Information Innovation

Office

• Proficient AI

• Advantage in cyber operations

• Confidence in the information domain

• Resilient, adaptable, and secure systems

Microsystems Technology

Office

• Local processing

• Spectrum dominance

• Microsystems manufacture

• Disruptive microsystems

Strategic Technology

Office

• Advanced sensing and effects

• Autonomous system of systems

• Command, control, and communications

Tactical Technology

Office

DARPA Technical Offices

• Tactical systems

• Platforms, systems, and technologies that enable new warfighting constructs

• Reimagination of missions across maritime, ground, air, and space domains

3Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited

Contracting

PM discusses idea with Office Director and Deputy Director

PM preps formal briefing

PM presents formal briefing to DARPA leadership

DARPA Director and Deputy decide to fund the program

BAA is published

Proposals arrive

Proposals are evaluated

Office Leadership approves proposals for funding

• All program ideas originate with a program manager

• PMs identify opportunity to make a difference

• DARPA PMs typically serve 3 – 5 year terms

• This means approximately 25% turnover annually

• New PMs mean new ideas and potentially investments in different research areas

The Path from Idea to Program

The Heilmeier Catechism

H1: What problem are you trying to solve?

H2: What are the key technical challenges that prevent that problem from being solved today?

H3: What is the new approach and how can it overcome these technical challenges?

H4: Why would solving that problem have a large impact (to the DoD)?

H5: What is the program plan to solve the problem?

George H. Heilmeier, Director of ARPA (1975-1977) IEEE Spectrum, June 1997

Proposal Tips

• Submit drafts early…and often

• Follow the instructions

• Address each of the technical challenges (TCs)

• Clearly articulate the innovation of your approach applied to the TCs

• Provide evidence of assertions within the proposal

• Develop a compliance matrix to ensure completeness

• Use cost realism

Proposal tips the…

• “a la carte”

• “miracle-multiplied”

• “unassociated favorite topic”

• “just believe me”

• “know better”

• “explorer”

• “buzzword bingo”

• “reflection”

Classic proposal missteps

August 22-24, 2023 | Seattle, WA https://eri-summit.darpa.mil

Join us in person as we focus on reinventing microelectronics manufacturing

Approved For Public Release; Distribution Unlimited

Registration Now Open!

DARPA Program Outline

These four questions establish the framework of a DARPA program

Heilmeier Question Description

H1: What problem are you trying to solve?

• (or, “What desired/needed capability are you trying to achieve?”)

• Explicitly state the problem – not the technical approach to solve the problem

• Propose well-defined, quantitative program goals

• The problem is usually explained best in a chart or graph that shows current state-of-the-art, any known limits, and the (key) program goal(s)

H4: Why would solving that problem have a large impact to the DoD?

• Quantifiable impact related to emerging or future DoD mission need

• Should be disruptive, not incremental

• The potential impact must be commensurate with the level of investment

• Who would use the technology both inside and outside the DoD?

H2: What are the key technical challenges that prevent that problem from being solved today?

• Provide key insight(s) into the problem

• Avoid “engineering” challenges – those that have known solutions, regardless of their cost or complexity

• A list is necessary, but this alone is not sufficient

• Beware of challenges that only pertain to a single approach

H3: What is the new approach and how can it overcome these technical challenges?

• Emphasis should be on the new idea or capability which explains why the challenges can be overcome today (the “why now?” story)

• A high-level summary of the potential solution

• Start with: www.darpa.mil

• Identify (if you can) the right PM

• Then, contact them (web page, email, visit)

Talk to a Program Manager

Some Advice PMs are motivated by finding new and highly disruptive problems that will be the basis of new programs

Generally, you should discuss ideas that might lead to new programs, not present your approaches for ongoing programs

PMs will be thinking about the Heilmeier catechism…so you should, too

PMs are most receptive when you do their homework for them

Listen to them!

62Distribution Statement A - Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited