HR001126S0014.pdf

This publication constitutes a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) as contemplated in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016 and 2 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 200.203. Any resultant award negotiations will follow all pertinent law and regulation, and any negotiations and/or awards for procurement contracts will use procedures under FAR 15.4, Contract Pricing, as specified in the BAA.

Broad Agency Announcement Information Processing Techniques

Office

Lightweight Universal Codec (LUC)

HR001126S0014

July 06, 2026

Table of Contents

1. Overview Information

2. Program Description

2.1 Program Goal

2.2 Program Background

2.3 Program Introduction

2.4 Program Structure

2.5 Program Metrics

2.6 Program Schedule, Meetings, and Milestones

2.6.2 Program Meetings

2.6.3 Program Milestones

2.7 Anticipated Deliverables

2.8 Intellectual property and Data Rights

2.8.1 Purpose and Limited Scope of the LUC Program Research

2.8.2 Limitation to Test (Prototype) Articles and Experimental Use

2.8.3 No Government Reliance; No Production of LUC Program Technology

2.8.4 No Implied License or Future Use Rights for the Government

2.8.5 Separate Agreement Required for Production of LUC Program Technology

2.8.6 Limited Government Benefit; No Operational Capability for LUC Program Technology

2.8.7 Non-Exclusivity and Evaluation of Alternative Technical Approaches

2.8.8 Evaluation of Intellectual Property (IP) Risk

2.8.9 Offeror Acknowledgment

2.8.10 Performer Freedom-to-Operate (FTO) Responsibility

2.8.11 Patent Risks Disclosure and IP Management Plan

2.8.12 Offeror Representation of Rights to Use Background IP

2.8.13 Patent Indemnification by Performers

2.8.14 Flow-Down to Subcontractors and Lower-Tier Participants

3. Security

3.1 CUI

3.2 Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Requirements

3.3 DARPA Fundamental Research Risk-Based Security Review (FRRBS) Background..13

3.3.1 DARPA FRRBS Required Documents

4. Submission Information

5. Informed Budget

6. Abstracts (Required)

6.1 Abstract Submission Requirements

6.2 Abstract Basis of Evaluation

6.3 Abstract Feedback

7. Oral Presentations

8. Oral Presentation Evaluation Criteria

9. Special Considerations

1. OVERVIEW INFORMATION

Federal Agency Name: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Information Processing Techniques Office (IPTO) Funding Opportunity Title: Lightweight Universal Codec (LUC) Funding Opportunity Number: HR001126S0014 Announcement Type: Initial Announcement Assistance Listing Number:

Dates/Time: All Times are Eastern Time Zone (ET) o Posting Date: July 06, 2026 o Proposers Day: July 8, 2026 o Question Submittal Closed: July 17, 2026, at 2:00 PM o Proposal Abstract Due Date: July 22, 2026, at 2:00 PM o Proposal Submission Closing Date: By Government invitation only. August 28, 2026, at 5:00 PM o Oral Presentations: By Government invitation only. Estimated to begin September

1, 2026, but the Government will confirm date in writing.

Anticipated Individual Awards: Multiple awards are anticipated.

Types of Instruments that may be Awarded: Procurement Contract, Research Other

Transaction (OT) (10 U.S.C. § 4021), OT for Prototype Agreement (10 U.S.C. § 4022), Cooperative Agreement, Grant

Resource Sharing Requirements: In accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 4021 and 4022, resource sharing may be required for Research OT or OT for Prototype Agreements

NAICS Code: 541715 Questions and Answers (Q&As): All administrative, technical, and award questions should be emailed to the Agency Point of Contact (POC) stated below. All questions must be written in English and must include the name of a designated point of contact.

Q&A documents will be published on the #Announcement Title program page at:

https://www.darpa.mil/research/programs/lightweight-universal-codec

Agency POC: The BAA Coordinator for this effort may be reached at: LUC@darpa.mil

DARPA / IPTO

ATTN: HR001126S0014

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114

Attachments:

o LUC CUI Guide o LUC Abstract Template https://www.darpa.mil/research/programs/lightweight-universal-codec

2. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

DARPA is soliciting innovative proposals for the development and integration of error-correcting codecs that use novel techniques to enable dynamic error correction code switching during operation and updateability to facilitate new codes without implementation redesign. 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.

2.1 PROGRAM GOAL

Under the LUC (“luck”) program, DARPA IPTO seeks to develop a universal, adaptive encoder-decoder (codec) capable of sending and receiving information using any known communication error correction code and any developed in the future.

2.2 PROGRAM BACKGROUND

Modern computing, communication, and other information activities rely upon forward error correction or channel coding to mitigate errors caused by unreliable media, interference, or noise encountered within the channel. By introducing patterns of redundant data to the information (known as error-correcting codes or “codes”), communicants can attempt to reduce the need for information retransmission with a transmitter providing a receiver with enough redundancy to reconstruct lost information caused by channel error.1

In most systems today, the implementation of error correction between communicants is predetermined prior to communication with a static code or a small set of codes due to the high computational cost of identifying the correct code through reconstruction of the original message subject to an unknown amount of noise. Code changes between classes of code occur only with changes to the modulation2.

Researchers on DARPA’s Guessing Random Additive Noise Decoding (GRAND) study invented a novel method of decoding various families or classes of codes using a single algorithm – a “universal” decoder. The study also developed methods for modeling the effects of noise on a channel and for algorithmically subtracting those effects from a received signal, enabling an efficient, parallelizable search through all known codes using reference codebooks.3 This approach results in a new type of decoder that is universal, low-latency, and power-efficient – characteristics that LUC assumes.4

2.3 PROGRAM INTRODUCTION

Leveraging the decoder advances of DARPA’s GRAND study or novel technologies with similar characteristics, the LUC program seeks to create an adaptive error correction codec capable of multiple on-the-fly selection of error correction codes. LUC assumes that the set of codes over which its codecs will adapt is known a priori; on-the-fly generation of novel codes is out of scope.

1 R. W. Hamming, "Error detecting and error correcting codes," in The Bell System Technical Journal, vol. 29, no. 2,

pp. 147-160, April 1950, doi: 10.1002/j.1538-7305.1950.tb00463.x.

2 Benedetto, Sergio, et al. "Combined coding and modulation: Theory and applications." IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 34.2 (1988): 223-236.

3 K. R. Duffy, J. Li and M. Médard, "Capacity-Achieving Guessing Random Additive Noise Decoding," in IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 65, no. 7, pp. 4023-4040, July 2019, doi: 10.1109/TIT.2019.2896110.

4 A. Riaz et al., "A Sub-0.8-pJ/bit Universal Soft-Detection Decoder Using ORBGRAND," in IEEE Journal of Solid-State Circuits, vol. 60, no. 7, pp. 2645-2659, July 2025, doi: 10.1109/JSSC.2024.3502240.

https://granddecoder.mit.edu/

This capability enables transceivers to optimize performance with respect to codes in dynamic environments, enabling significantly improved communications.

The program aims to achieve this by developing an encoder capable of utilizing a highly diverse suite of easily updateable error-correcting codes, including various code classes (e.g., Reed- Solomon, Polar, etc.). The encoder will pair with a GRAND-implementing or similar decoder and the resulting codec will be designed such that the encoder incorporates the decoder’s noise model as well as other operating factors into its code selection process for link budget and task/mission optimization. Integration of these codecs into various existing communication technologies will demonstrate improved efficiency, security, throughput, and interoperability achieved through record-setting low-power decoding and adaptive, dynamic forward error correction.

2.4 PROGRAM STRUCTURE

LUC is a two-phase, thirty-nine (39) month program with one technical area. There will be government test and evaluation (T&E) partners supporting assessment of candidate LUC technology. DARPA is only soliciting performers for Technical Area 1 (TA1). The program’s 12-month base Phase 1 focuses on codec and system design, modeling, and simulation while the 27-month optional Phase 2 focuses on system development, integration, and field testing.

TA1: Codec Design and Integration TA1, Codec Design and Integration performers will aim to:

1. Develop and demonstrate an encoder that can leverage multiple classes of codes to adaptively improve communications in real time (a “universal” encoder),

2. Integrate the encoder with a “universal” decoder (e.g., a decoder capable of decoding many classes of codes using a single algorithm, such as a GRAND implementation) to create a universal codec, and

3. Integrate that codec into an existing, performer-nominated communication system.

In Phase 1, TA1 performers will design and simulate their codec systems, which DARPA and its T&E partners will assess at least twice for progress and solution viability – first at six months after program start with the initial codec design review and then at eleven months with the end of phase evaluation using the metrics described below in Table 1. Performer submission of all deliverables and successful completion of all criteria, as validated by the Government, may result in early and immediate advancement to Phase 2.

In optional Phase 2, TA1 performers whose option is exercised will integrate their codec designs with transceivers and conduct field tests in multiple locations. The teams will be formally assessed against the metrics with the end-of-phase evaluation but will be informally assessed for progress at the field tests and designs reviews with one of each occurring in year two and year three of the program.

During Phase 2, each performer will be expected to provide at least two (2) LUC-enhanced communication devices and two (2) unmodified devices (i.e. “base” or “stock” models without LUC enhancement) to the Government T&E team. These devices must be amenable to A/B testing with respect to size, weight, and power (SWaP). LUC-enhanced devices, in addition to meeting the metrics later described in this announcement, must be full-rate, real-time implementations for given, fixed codes (i.e. operate as quickly as non-enhanced devices when not switching codes).

2.5 PROGRAM METRICS

DARPA and its T&E partners will assess TA1 performers with the following target program metrics (Table 1). Comparative metrics will be relative to the performer’s selected technology platform.

5 SoTA comparisons against codecs in identical systems without LUC enhancement. Platform changes such as software defined codecs to chip codecs within the same communication device are out of scope.

6 is signal-to-noise ratio normalized to noise power in a 1 Hertz bandwidth.

𝐸𝑏 𝑁𝑜

7 Examples of classes or families of codes include Turbo, Reed-Solomon, LDPC, etc.

Technical Area Metric Phase 1 (12 months) Phase 2 (27 months)

1. Codes supported on a single algorithm

• Catalogued Polar Codes for control channels (i.e. downlink control information [DCI], uplink control information [UCI]) as specified in 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) Technical Specifications (TS) 38.212 v19.3.0

• 5 representative Reed-Solomon or Turbo Codes

• An example of Modular Polar Long Codes

• Catalogued Polar Codes for control channels (DCI, UCI) as specified in 3GPP TS 38.212 version 19.3.0

• 2 examples of Advanced Modular Polar Long Codes

• 5 representative Reed-Solomon or Turbo Codes

• 1 representative artificial intelligence (AI)-enabling 3GPP Low-Density Parity- Check (LDPC) code selected from TS 38.212 v19.3.0

• 100 Additional codes as provided by mission partners

2. Channel latency 25% reduction in latency on error-corrected channels compared to state-of-the-art (SoTA)5 (as tested in multiple types of error-laden environments)

50% reduction in latency on error-corrected channels compared to SoTA5 (as tested in multiple types of error-laden environments)

3. Signal gain in dynamic noise environments

1 dB gain compared to SoTA5 6 dB gain compared to SoTA5

4. Block Error Rate6 (BLER) at

= 5 dB 𝐸𝑏

𝑁𝑜

BLER = 1% BLER = 0.1%

5. Receiver decoder power requirements (power/bit vs goodput)

10x better than SoTA5 15x better than SoTA5

TA1 –

Codec Design and Integration

6. Time to switch code classes7

1s after initial complete comms frame

100ms after initial complete comms frame

Table 1: Program Metrics

2.6 PROGRAM SCHEDULE, MEETINGS, AND MILESTONES

2.6.1 Program Schedule

LUC’s two-phase (base + option), 39-month program is tentatively expected to follow the schedule illustrated below (Figure 1).

Kickoff Meeting

End of Phase Evaluation

PI Meeting

Design Review Design Reviews

Field Test Field Tests

Reference Delivery PI Meetings

Reference Delivery

Phase 1 Initial Designs and Models

Phase 2 Integration and Field Testing

Q8 Year 1

Q5 Year 2 Year 3 Yr 4

TA2

Reference Designs and ECC Development

Government Test and Evaluation

TA1

Codec Design and

Integration

Q9Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q6 Q7Q4

PI

KO

KO

KO

KO

KO

PI

PI

PI

PI

PI

PI

KO

KO

KO

KO

Figure 1: Program Schedule

TA1 (codec design and integration) performers and our supporting government T&E partners will participate in the events depicted in Figure 1.

The Government will specify the locations for all in-person program events including kickoffs, evaluations, and field tests. For budgeting purposes, assume locations for the aforementioned events alternate between Washington, DC and San Diego, CA starting in Washington, DC.

Kickoffs will be one day in duration. Field tests will be five to seven days in duration. The evaluation meeting for Phase 1 will last three days and the evaluation at the end of Phase 2 will last five days. Principal Investigator (PI) meetings and design reviews will be conducted virtually.

2.6.2 Program Meetings

In addition to the events detailed in the schedule above, performers will be expected to meet virtually with DARPA no less frequently than once every two weeks via MS Teams or similar method chosen by DARPA to report on technical progress and administrative matters. These meetings are anticipated to take approximately one-half hour but may be shorter or longer as required to communicate recent efforts by the performer.

DARPA may also, at its discretion, conduct site visits of the performers’ operating locations and facilities to observe interim progress, prototype solutions, and testing activities.

2.6.3 Program Milestones

As specified in the program schedule, the major milestones for the LUC program include the design reviews, field tests, and the end of phase evaluations. Each of these milestones presents a discrete point in the program at which DARPA will assess each of the performers’ solutions and compare interim or final demonstrated activity to the program metrics. It is anticipated that these milestones will produce data and outcomes that DARPA or, with DARPA’s authorization, the performers may publish on LUC progress. These milestones and the progress demonstrated at each, or lack thereof, may result in the advancement or descoping of a program performer.

2.7 ANTICIPATED DELIVERABLES

All performers will be required to provide, at a minimum, the following deliverables:

1. Any technical documents and products derived from work funded by this program

2. Prototype Hardware instances produced by TA1 with documentation, including electrical requirements, mechanical details, and other details as needed for installation, reliable operation, and diagnosis

3. Commented source code, any other necessary data, build scripts, and documentation (including at minimum user manuals and a detailed software design document) necessary for the government to reproduce any executable software and test results developed on this program

4. Software modules (to include binaries, models, data files, commented source code, and other items as listed in Deliverable 3) for Phase 1 testing

5. Prototypes: Two (2) LUC-enhanced and two (2) stock (i.e. non-LUC-enhanced) communication systems (and supporting materials as listed in Deliverable 2) for Phase 2 testing

6. Annotated slide presentations, delivered within one (1) week after each PI meeting, development workshop, or other program events

7. Quarterly technical status reports detailing progress made, tasks accomplished, major risks, planned activities, trip summaries, changes to key personnel, and any potential issues or problem areas that require the attention of the Government Team must be provided within fifteen (15) calendar days of the end of each quarter

8. Monthly financial status reports, provided within fifteen (15) calendar days of the end of each month in format provided by DARPA

9. A post-exercise report for each field test and end of phase evaluation that details the solution as exercised, demonstrated activity under exercise parameters, comparison to phase metrics, achievements within the exercise, and observed gaps in the solution will be due 30 calendar days following each field test and end of phase evaluation

10. A final phase report for each program phase that concisely summarizes the effort conducted, technical achievements, and remaining technical challenges will be due 30 calendar days after the end of each phase

11. A final report at the end of the overall period of performance that summarizes the project

2.8 INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DATA RIGHTS

2.8.1 Purpose and Limited Scope of the LUC Program Research

This Solicitation supports basic and applied research and development under the LUC Program.

DARPA’s objective is to advance scientific and technical knowledge, increase understanding, and evaluate feasibility through experimentation, prototyping, demonstration, and testing. This Solicitation is not a procurement for a specific production system, hardware solution, commercial product, or fielded operational capability, but for scientific study and experimentation directed toward advancing the SoTA or increasing knowledge or understanding rather than focusing on a specific system or hardware solution.

Under this Solicitation, and any resulting award, DARPA does not intend to produce, manufacture, commercialize, field, deploy, or otherwise exploit any device, process, system, software, material, or article of manufacture for operational or commercial use. Any future production, acquisition, fielding, deployment, or commercialization will require a separate authorization, procurement action, agreement, or transaction with independently negotiated terms, including intellectual property rights and compensation as appropriate.

2.8.2 Limitation to Test (Prototype) Articles and Experimental Use Any systems, components, software, technical processes, devices, prototypes, or articles developed, fabricated, assembled, modified, or evaluated under this Solicitation are test articles only. Such test articles shall be produced or used only in the limited quantities and configurations reasonably necessary to accomplish the research objectives, including feasibility evaluation, laboratory testing, controlled demonstration, verification, validation, and related scientific or technical assessment. Test prototypes and test articles produced under this Solicitation will not be procured as end items. The production or use of test articles under this Solicitation shall not be construed as production-scale manufacturing or as acquisition of a fielded capability.

2.8.3 No Government Reliance; No Production of LUC Program Technology The Government does not rely upon, and does not intend to rely upon, any invention, technology, design, method, process, material, software, device, system, or article developed, incorporated, demonstrated, or evaluated under this Solicitation for production, procurement, operational deployment, sustainment, fielding, commercial exploitation, or mission execution. No research result, prototype, demonstration, test article, report, or other output under this Solicitation shall be construed as establishing that the Government has adopted, selected, relied upon, or committed to any LUC technology for production, deployment, or operational use. Any such decision, if made, will occur only through a separate action with separate terms.

2.8.4 No Implied License or Future Use Rights for the Government Nothing in this Solicitation, any proposal, any funding award, any technical exchange, any demonstration, any test, any prototype activities, or any DARPA review shall be construed as granting the Government an express or implied license to make, use, sell, offer to sell, import, commercialize, produce, field, deploy, or otherwise exploit any patented invention beyond the limited research purposes expressly authorized under the award. No course of dealing, course of performance, technical interchange, test event, demonstration, prototype activities, data delivery, or Government evaluation shall expand the rights expressly granted in the funding award.

2.8.5 Separate Agreement Required for Production of LUC Program Technology If the Government determines that any technology, test article, prototype, process, software, material, or other result developed or evaluated under this Solicitation may warrant transition, production, procurement, deployment, fielding, sustainment, commercialization, or use beyond the research purposes of the award, the Government will solicit additional or future requirements under separate cover that may result in a separate agreement, contract, transaction, license, or other instrument.

Any such future instrument may address, as appropriate, patent rights, data rights, software rights, licenses, royalties, sublicensing, indemnification, manufacturing rights, supply-chain rights, export controls, security requirements, and other terms necessary for the contemplated use. No right to production, deployment, fielding, sustainment, or commercialization is established by this Solicitation unless expressly stated in a resulting award.

2.8.6 Limited Government Benefit; No Operational Capability for LUC Program Technology

DARPA’s use of any technology, prototype, test article, process, software, material, data, or other result under this Solicitation is limited to research, experimental validation, test, demonstration, prototyping, evaluation, and technical assessment. Such use does not constitute acquisition of an operational system, fielded capability, production article, supply item, sustainment solution, or commercial product. No research result under this Solicitation shall be construed as providing the Government with an operational benefit beyond the limited knowledge, data, observations, and technical understanding obtained through the research.

2.8.7 Non-Exclusivity and Evaluation of Alternative Technical Approaches DARPA may fund, evaluate, pursue, or adopt multiple technical approaches under this Solicitation or under separate research, development, acquisition, or assistance instruments. The Government is not dependent upon any single performer, technical approach, patent, invention, prototype, platform, or solution. No statement in this Solicitation, any resulting award, any program review, or any technical exchange shall be construed as establishing that any particular patented invention or performer technology is uniquely required, technically essential, or the only practicable means of meeting Government objectives.

2.8.8 Evaluation of Intellectual Property (IP) Risk

In accordance with Sections 6 and 8, DARPA considers IP as part of abstract submission and oral presentation.

2.8.9 Offeror Acknowledgment

By submitting an abstract or proposal under this Solicitation, the Offeror acknowledges that: (1) this Solicitation is limited to research and experimentation; (2) prototypes and test articles are limited to quantities and configurations necessary for research; (3) no production, commercialization, sale, fielding, deployment, or operational use is contemplated under the Solicitation; (4) the Offeror is responsible for identifying and managing patent risks within its control; and (5) any future production or deployment of LUC technology will require a separate action with separately negotiated terms.

2.8.10 Performer Freedom-to-Operate (FTO) Responsibility

The performer shall be responsible for identifying, evaluating, and mitigating Freedom-To- Operate risks associated with its technical approach, including risks arising from third-party patents, patent applications, licenses, background IP, subcontractor technology, open-source software, manufacturing methods, data, software, and tools used in performance.

The performer shall obtain, or ensure that it has access to, all rights, licenses, permissions, and authorizations necessary for its performance under the funding award. The performer shall not knowingly incorporate third-party IP in a manner that would prevent performance, delivery, testing, demonstration, Government evaluation, or other authorized research use under the award.

2.8.11 Patent Risks Disclosure and IP Management Plan

Each Offeror shall identify in its proposal any known or reasonably foreseeable third-party patent rights, licenses, background IP restrictions, or other IP constraints that may affect the proposed technical approach, performance, testing, demonstration, delivery, or Government evaluation.

Each Offeror shall submit an IP Management Plan and a Software Bill of Materials (S-BOM) with their proposal describing: (1) background IP to be used; (2) known third-party patents or patent applications; (3) licenses or permissions obtained or required; (4) proposed design-around, substitution, or mitigation strategies; (5) subcontractor and supplier IP dependencies; (6) procedures for monitoring patent risk during performance; and (7) procedures for notifying the Government of infringement allegations or newly identified risks.

2.8.12 Offeror Representation of Rights to Use Background IP

By submitting a proposal to this Solicitation, and accepting a resulting award, the performer represents, to the best of its knowledge after reasonable inquiry, that it owns, controls, has licensed, or will obtain the rights necessary to perform the proposed work and to permit the Government to conduct the research, testing, demonstration, evaluation, and other limited uses authorized under the award.

The Performer shall not knowingly propose or incorporate technology subject to third-party restrictions that would materially impair performance or the Government's authorized research use unless such restrictions are fully disclosed in the proposal or otherwise approved in writing by the DARPA Agreements Officer.

2.8.13 Patent Indemnification by Performers

To the extent permitted by law and agreed in the resulting award, the performer shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the Government, its officers, employees, and agents from third-party patent claims, damages, costs, and expenses arising from: (1) commercial products, commercial services, or non-developmental technology supplied by the performer; (2) performer background technology incorporated without adequate rights; (3) unauthorized use outside the scope of Government-directed research; or (4) the performer's failure to disclose known patent restrictions or obtain licenses it agreed to obtain.

The indemnity shall not apply to infringement caused solely by Government-furnished designs, Government-mandated specifications, or Government-directed use of a specific patented invention where the performer did not have discretion to avoid the alleged infringement, unless otherwise agreed.

2.8.14 Flow-Down to Subcontractors and Lower-Tier Participants

The Performer shall include the substance of the patent-risk disclosure, notice-and-assistance, IP Management Plan, Freedom-To-Operate, indemnification, limited-scope clauses, and confidentiality provisions in all subcontracts, supplier agreements, teaming agreements, and lower-tier arrangements to the extent necessary to preserve the Government's rights and protect the Government's interests under the award.

3. SECURITY

The LUC program anticipates work will be performed at the unclassified and Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) levels. Classified abstract and/or proposal submissions will not be accepted.

3.1 CUI

For unclassified submissions containing CUI, applicants will ensure personnel and information systems processing CUI security requirements are in place. If an unclassified submission contains CUI or the suspicion of such, as defined by Executive Order 13556 and 32 CFR Part 2002, the information must be appropriately and conspicuously marked CUI in accordance with Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 5200.48. Identification of what is CUI will be detailed in the attached LUC CUI Guide.

Submissions involving the pursuit and protection of DARPA information designated as CUI must have, or be able to acquire prior to contract award, an information system authorized to process CUI information in accordance with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SP) 800-171, Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations (DFARS) 252.204- 7021, and DoDI 8582.01.

3.2 CYBERSECURITY MATURITY MODEL CERTIFICATION (CMMC) REQUIREMENTS

The Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Program, established in 32 CFR Part 170, applies to the protection of Federal Contract Information (FCI) and Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) processed, stored, or transmitted on performer information systems.

The required CMMC level for this solicitation is Level 2.

To be eligible for an award under this solicitation, the CAGE code associated with the proposal must have a valid, unexpired Final Level 2 for TA1 CMMC status recorded in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS). Additionally, the proposer must have a current annual CMMC affirmation submitted by an authorized Affirming Official and recorded in SPRS.

Proposers must demonstrate compliance with the applicable CMMC level at the time of award and maintain that level throughout award performance.

CMMC requirements must be flowed down to all subcontractors whose performance involves processing, storing, or transmitting FCI or CUI on unclassified contractor or university systems.

For awards after November 10, 2026, proposers shall implement Phase 2 CMMC requirements prior to contract award, including a CMMC Third-Party Assessment posted in SPRS for contractors handling CUI information that requires Level 2 certification.

Note: SPRS is accessed through the Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) (https://piee.eb.mil/). See SPRS FAQs and SPRS-CMMC Reference Materials (https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/cmmc.htm) for additional information.

https://piee.eb.mil/ https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/cmmc.htm

3.3 DARPA FUNDAMENTAL RESEARCH RISK-BASED SECURITY REVIEW (FRRBS)

BACKGROUND

It is Department of War (DoW) 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. For additional information on fundamental research, please visit Proposer Instructions: General Terms and Conditions.

3.3.1 DARPA FRRBS Required Documents

Applicable to awards under this BAA that will result in OT awards made to educational institutions

- as part of the proposal response to this solicitation the proposer will provide the Government with the forms listed below for all key personnel identified in the proposal:

Common Form for Biographical Sketch Common Form for Current and Pending (Other) Support

Instructions for how to fill out the Common Disclosures Forms can be found through NSF.gov.

4. SUBMISSION INFORMATION

This announcement allows for multiple award instrument types to be awarded including Procurement Contracts, and Other Transactions. Some award instrument types have specific cost-sharing or documentation requirements. The following websites are incorporated by reference and contain additional information regarding overall proposer instructions, general terms and conditions, and templates for each specific award instrument type.

Proposers are strongly encouraged to review the following links:

Proposer Instructions: General Terms and Conditions: https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/proposer-instructions

Procurement Contracts: https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/procurement-contracts Other Transaction Agreements: https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/other-transaction-agreements https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/proposer-instructions https://ddmdraft.darpa.mil/work-with-us/proposer-instructions https://nsf.gov/

5. INFORMED BUDGET

DARPA intends to make multiple awards to pursue various innovative approaches. Budget and/or cost submission should be tightly calibrated to the proposed technical approach. Submissions that simply propose a budget without evidence linking the technical level of effort to the proposed budget are strongly discouraged and will be reflected in the evaluation results of the scientific review process.

6. ABSTRACTS (REQUIRED)

Proposers are required to submit an abstract in advance of a full proposal submission.

6.1 ABSTRACT SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Abstracts are due by the date and time stated in Section 1 (Overview Information).

Abstracts must be submitted to the DARPA Broad Agency Announcement Tool (BAAT).

Please visit Proposer Instructions and General Terms and Conditions for specific information regarding submission methods through BAAT. Submissions sent through other mediums, channels, or after the prescribed deadline will not be accepted.

Abstracts must be at the unclassified or CUI level.

Proposers are responsible for identifying proprietary information. Submissions containing proprietary information must have the cover page and each page containing such information clearly marked with a label such as "Proprietary" or "Company Proprietary."

NOTE: "Confidential" is a classification marking used to control the dissemination of U.S.

Government National Security Information as dictated in Executive Order 13526 and should not be used to identify proprietary business information.

6.2 ABSTRACT CONTENT AND FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS

All abstracts submitted in response to this announcement must comply with all content and formatting requirements stated in the attached LUC Abstract Template.

6.2 ABSTRACT BASIS OF EVALUATION

Abstracts will be evaluated using the following criteria listed in descending order of importance:

Technical Comprehension: The proposed solution clearly outlines a feasible universal encoding-decoding approach, a means of inferring channel characteristics based on decoder data, and efficient, scalable methods for both code selection and code convergence.

The proposed solution describes the target communications platforms/systems for feasible integration during the program along with concrete plans for supporting backwards compatibility and field device updates. Key technical challenges and risks are identified.

Technical Ability: The proposed team shows significant, verifiable expertise in the critical areas of error-correcting codes, decoders, and communications platforms/systems.

IP Considerations: The abstract clearly identifies proposed data, software, and patent rights associated with the effort and any risk that third-party restrictions that may impair performance or Government research use and proposed mitigation strategies.

https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/proposer-instructions

Cost Considerations: The proposers demonstrate an understanding of an appropriate level of effort required to achieve the program objectives with proposed efficiencies in code selection, system integration, and scalability logically aligned with the resource allocation.

6.3 ABSTRACT FEEDBACK

DARPA anticipates sending notification letters via email to all designated Technical and Administrative POC(s) for conforming abstract submissions. Each letter will communicate one of two outcomes:

Invitation to Proceed: Selected proposers will be invited to submit a full proposal and participate in an oral presentation. An Invitation to Proceed letter may include:

Full proposal templates with content and formatting requirements Submission requirements, deadlines, and procedures Non-conformance consequences Oral presentation logistics and expectations Program Manager (PM) feedback on the abstract evaluation

Only proposers receiving an Invitation to Proceed may advance to the oral presentation phase.

Proposers should understand that an Invitation to Proceed does not guarantee final selection or a resultant award.

Non-selection notification: Proposers will be informed that their abstract was not selected for advancement, and they will not be permitted to submit a full proposal or participate in oral presentations.

7. ORAL PRESENTATIONS

Proposers invited to the oral presentation stage will receive an Invitation to Proceed, which serves as the formal request for full proposal submission.

Proposers can assume the following in advance of an Invitation to Proceed:

A presentation slide deck in English, a specified cost proposal spreadsheet(s), a cost proposal narrative, and the FRRBS Common Forms will be required and may constitute a full proposal submission. For proposals requesting an OT award, include a redlined sample agreement.

Oral presentations will be conducted in-person at DARPA (675 N Randolph St., Arlington, VA 22203).

Oral presentations and presentation material will be submitted and presented at the unclassified or CUI levels.

Oral presentations should focus on technical content rather than promotional material.

Proposers should ensure that essential technical personnel who can effectively explain the proposed methodology and respond to detailed inquiries are present. Upon notification of https://acquisitioninnovation.darpa.mil/samples-and-resources/samples https://acquisitioninnovation.darpa.mil/samples-and-resources/samples an Invitation to Proceed, proposers should plan accordingly to guarantee the availability of all critical technical personnel for in-person attendance.

Each oral presentation session may be structured as follows:

Total duration: 1 hour, 15 minutes

DARPA Opening Remarks: 5 minutes Oral Presentation: 30 minutes Break: 10 minutes Q&A Session: 30 minutes

NOTE: DARPA will record all presentations.

8. ORAL PRESENTATION EVALUATION CRITERIA

The Government will evaluate the information provided in the full proposal submission / oral presentation. Proposals will be evaluated using the following criteria listed in descending order of importance:

Overall Scientific and Technical Merit: The proposed technical approach is innovative, feasible, achievable, and complete. Task descriptions and associated technical elements provided are complete and in a logical sequence with all proposed deliverables clearly defined such that a final outcome that achieves the goal can be expected as a result of award. The proposal identifies major technical risks, and planned mitigation efforts are clearly defined and feasible.

Proposer’s Capabilities or Related Experience: The proposer's prior experience in similar efforts clearly demonstrates an ability to deliver products that meet the proposed technical performance within the proposed budget and schedule, to include the ability to meet all security requirements described in Section 3. Similar efforts completed/ongoing by the proposer in this area are fully described.

Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission: The potential contributions of the proposed effort bolster the national security technology base and support DARPA’s mission to make pivotal early technology investments that create or prevent technological surprise. The proposer clearly identifies known or reasonably foreseeable patent IP risks and proposes adequate mitigation strategies. The proposer clearly identifies proposed data, software, and patent rights associated with the effort, any risk that third-party restrictions may impair performance or Government research use, and their approach to Freedom-To-Operate.

Schedule and Cost Realism: The proposed schedule aggressively pursues performance metrics in an efficient time frame that accurately accounts for the anticipated workload.

The proposed costs are realistic for the technical and management approach and accurately reflect the technical goals and objectives of the solicitation. The proposed costs are consistent with the proposer’s Statement of Work and reflect a sufficient understanding of the costs and level of effort needed to successfully accomplish the proposed technical approach. The costs for the prime proposer and proposed sub-awardees are substantiated by the details provided in the proposal (e.g., the type and number of labor hours proposed per task, the types and quantities of materials, equipment and fabrication costs, travel, and any other applicable costs and the basis for the estimates). It is expected that the effort will leverage all available relevant prior research in order to obtain the maximum benefit from the available funding.

Unless otherwise specified in this announcement, for additional information on how DARPA reviews and evaluates proposals through the Scientific Review Process, please visit: Proposer Instructions: General Terms and Conditions.

9. SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS

This announcement, stated attachments, websites, and the aforementioned Invitation to Proceed incorporated by reference constitute the entire solicitation. In the event of a discrepancy between the announcement, attachments, or websites, the announcement takes precedence.

All responsible sources capable of satisfying the Government's needs, including both U.S. and non-U.S. sources, may submit a proposal that shall be considered by DARPA. Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Small Businesses, Small Disadvantaged Businesses and Minority Institutions are encouraged to submit proposals and join others in submitting proposals; however, no portion of this announcement will be set aside for these organizations’ participation due to the impracticality of reserving discrete or severable areas of this research for exclusive competition among these entities. 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.

DARPA encourages technical solutions from all responsible sources capable of satisfying the government’s needs. To ensure fair competition across the ecosystem, DARPA prohibits contractors/performers from concurrently providing Systems Engineering Technical Assistance (SETA), Advisory and Assistance Services (A&AS), or similar support services and being a technical performer, unless the DARPA Deputy Director grants a written waiver.

Due to their specialized roles and longstanding regulatory relationships with the Government, Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs), University Affiliated Research Centers (UARCs), and Government Entities to include National Laboratories present potential conflicts and advantages that would compromise fair and open competition. These entities typically may only receive funding through existing awards they hold with their sponsoring agencies. If these entities are proposed as subawardees, their costs must be clearly segregable in cost proposals. If scientifically merited, DARPA may fund work proposed by these entities with the following caveats:

FFRDCs: (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. DARPA, under this solicitation, will not award separate contracts to

FFRDCs as prime or subawardees but will instead leverage their existing sponsors' agreements.

UARCs: While UARCs typically have statutory authority to compete with industry, internal DARPA policy views them as trusted advisors who are only eligible to act as performers in fields where they do not serve in an advisory role. Even in those situations, DARPA still considers UARCs as having organizational conflicts of interest (OCI) when applying for a performer role. Proposals with UARCs as prime or subawardees must include an OCI mitigation plan.

For this solicitation, DARPA will not establish new contractual agreements for their participation. Accordingly, any proposal submitted directly by these entities in a prime contractor capacity may be deemed non-conforming and not evaluated. Proposals that include a UARC, FFRDC, Government entities, or National Laboratory as a subcontractor may also be deemed non-conforming unless: (1) their role is clearly defined in the technical proposal with a point of contact, and (2) a rough order of magnitude cost is provided in the technical proposal only—cost proposals must exclude their funding, as DARPA will not fund them through the prime. It is important to note that if funded, these organizations will be required to share their work and findings with other performers also supporting the same program. Additionally, DARPA may contact these entities directly to discuss proposed activities.

This program is subject to LUC CUI Guide signed June 30, 2026. All individuals accessing CUI agree to protect CUI in accordance with DoDI 5200.48 CUI and NIST SP 800-171 Protecting CUI in Nonfederal Systems and Organizations.

This solicitation does not anticipate Human Subjects Research (HSR) in submissions. Proposers that anticipate involving HSR or animal use in the proposed research must contact the Agency POC stated in the Overview Information prior to submitting a proposal with an explanation for why HSR or animal use is necessary to successfully complete the proposed research objectives.

Proposers that anticipate involving human subjects or animals in the proposed research must comply with the approval procedures detailed at https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/humanresearch to include providing the information specified therein as required for proposal submission.

The APEX Accelerators program, formerly known as the Procurement Technical Assistance Program (PTAP), focuses on building strong, sustainable, and resilient U.S. supply chains by assisting a wide range of businesses that pursue and perform under contracts with the DoW, other federal agencies, state and local governments, and government prime contractors. See www.apexaccelerators.us for more information.

APEX Accelerators helps businesses:

Complete registration with a wide range of databases necessary for them to participate in the government marketplace (e.g., SAM).

Identify which agencies and offices may need their products or services and how to connect with buying agencies and offices.

Determine whether they are ready for government opportunities and how to position themselves to succeed.

Navigate solicitations and potential funding opportunities.

https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/humanresearch https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/humanresearch http://www.apexaccelerators.us/

Receive notifications of government contract opportunities on a regular basis.

Network with buying officers, prime contractors, and other businesses.

Resolve performance issues and prepare for audit, only if the service is needed, after receiving an award.

Project Spectrum is a nonprofit effort funded by the DoD Office of Small Business Programs to help educate the Defense Industrial Base (DIB) on compliance. Project Spectrum is vendor-neutral and available to assist businesses with their cybersecurity and compliance needs. Their mission is to improve cybersecurity readiness, resilience, and compliance for small/medium-sized businesses and the federal manufacturing supply chain. Project Spectrum events and programs will enhance awareness of cybersecurity threats within the manufacturing, research and development, and knowledge-based services sectors of the industrial base.