Parkinson’s Disease Therapeutics Pipeline Program (MJFF)

Below is a brief summary. Please check the full RFA before applying (link in resources section).

Executive Summary:

The Parkinson’s Disease Therapeutics Pipeline Program is a rolling funding program run by the Michael J. Fox Foundation (MJFF) that provides $250,000 to over $2 million in nondilutive funding to industry and industry-academia teams advancing Parkinson’s disease therapeutics. Funding supports pre-clinical and early clinical development of pharmacological, biological, and non-pharmacological interventions with clear potential to slow, stop, or delay disease progression or meaningfully reduce symptom burden. Companies can submit pre-proposals at any time, with reviews typically completed within three weeks, and invited full proposals reviewed on a quarterly cycle.

How much funding would I receive?

Award amounts typically range from $250,000 for smaller, targeted projects to upwards of $2 million for larger, multi-stage pre-clinical or clinical development programs. Final award size is determined in consultation with MJFF based on project scope, stage of development, novelty, and unmet patient need.

What could I use the funding for?

MJFF prioritizes pre-clinical and clinical programs that may slow, stop, or prevent disease progression, efforts that address moderate-to-advanced motor or non-motor symptoms of Parkinson’s not well-managed by current treatments such as advanced gait disturbances (e.g., balance issues linked to falls, freezing) and cognitive changes. Activities within scope of this program include:

• Pre-Clinical: Identifying, validating and/or developing novel pharmacological and non- pharmacological interventions through pre-clinical development from early screening topre-clinical characterization and testing.

• Clinical: Progressing promising interventions with strong preclinical packages into/through initial clinical assessment exploring pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, safety/tolerability, or early proof of biology and/or clinical efficacy.For novel targets, MJFF is particularly interested in de-risking programs by supporting early proof of concept in patients to gain insight into the therapeutic potential, including exploration of biomarker-based or clinical endpoint-based efficacy.

Any intervention may be considered based on clear patient need, rationale and strong mechanism-of-action understanding. Interventions may be pharmacological (small molecules), biological (biologic, gene therapy) or non-pharmacological including surgical approaches, technology-enabled therapeutics and neuromodulation approaches. Competitive non- pharmacologic proposals will have compelling, existing data from human studies with strong potential for clinical adoption. Applicants may also propose testing of repurposed or repositioned therapies but should propose clear and robust biomarker-enabled testing strategies.

Are there any additional benefits I would receive?

Beyond direct funding, MJFF awards offer meaningful strategic advantages:

• Strong Scientific and Patient-Centered Validation: Selection by MJFF signals rigorous scientific merit and strong alignment with patient-driven therapeutic priorities in Parkinson’s disease.

• De-Risking for Follow-On Capital: MJFF explicitly positions this program to de-risk therapeutic programs and catalyze follow-on investment from venture capital, strategic partners, and other funders.

• Access to MJFF’s Ecosystem: Awardees gain access to MJFF’s extensive network of clinicians, researchers, industry partners, patient advisors, and proprietary research tools, datasets, and biosample repositories.

• Enhanced Exit and Commercialization Potential: Government- and foundation-validated programs often command higher valuations during licensing, acquisition, or later-stage financing due to reduced technical and clinical risk.

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding?

Pre-proposals may be submitted at any time and are typically reviewed within three weeks. If invited, full proposals are submitted during one of five annual review cycles. Funding decisions are communicated within three months of full proposal submission.

Upcoming full proposal deadlines include:

• February 22, 2026 → Funding decision May 2026

• April 23, 2026 → Funding decision July 2026

• June 25, 2026 → Funding decision September 2026

Where does this funding come from?

Funding is provided directly by the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research, a nonprofit organization dedicated to accelerating cures and better treatments for Parkinson’s disease through aggressively funded translational research.

Who is eligible to apply?

Eligibility is limited to:

• Industry applicants (biotechnology, pharmaceutical, medical device, or other for-profit companies), or

• Academic teams partnered with an industry collaborator capable of commercial development.

Both U.S. and non-U.S. entities are eligible. The for-profit entity is expected to serve as the primary grantee and commercialization lead.

What companies and projects are likely to win?

Successful applications typically demonstrate:

• A strong biological rationale for the therapeutic target, supported by genetic or in vitro/in vivo validation data.

• A clearly differentiated therapeutic approach believed to be superior to existing or pipeline therapies.

• Robust translational biomarker strategies to measure target engagement and mechanism of action.

• Clear preclinical-to-clinical translation potential with a realistic commercialization pathway.

• For clinical programs, a patient-centered development plan incorporating patient input.

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

MJFF will not fund:

• Large-scale target discovery efforts (e.g., genomic or transcriptomic screening).

• Target validation using only tool compounds with no path to drug development.

• Reformulation of commercially available drugs via new routes of administration.

• Studies evaluating dietary supplements.

MJFF does not intend to serve as the sole funder and expects applicants to pursue complementary funding sources.

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

For a first-time applicant, preparing a competitive pre-proposal for this opportunity will likely take 20–40 hours in total.

How can BW&CO help?

Our team specializes in complex federal R&D proposals and can:

• Triple your likelihood of success through proven strategy and insider-aligned proposal development

• Reduce your time spent on the proposal by 50–80%, letting your team focus on technology and operations

• Ensure you are targeting the best opportunity for your project and positioning your company for long-term growth under Federal & State R&D Initiatives.

How much would BW&CO Charge?

Fractional support is $300 per hour, with most pre-proposal projects requiring 10-20 hours of expert support from strategy through submission of full proposal.

For startups, we offer a discounted rate of $250 per hour to make top-tier grant consulting more accessible while maintaining the same level of strategic guidance and proposal quality.

Additional Resources

See Request for Applications Here.

Generative Optogenetics - DARPA BTO

Executive Summary:

DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office is awarding $1.7M–$1.99M Phase 1 awards to teams developing optically controlled, template-free DNA or RNA synthesis in living cells under the Generative Optogenetics (GO) program. The program uses a staged process beginning with 5-page abstracts due January 16, 2026, followed by invitation-only oral proposals.

How much funding would I receive?

If selected, you would receive a fixed-price Phase 1 award of $1.7M for Research Objective 1 (RO1) or $1.99M if addressing both RO1 and the optional Research Objective 2 (RO2). DARPA anticipates multiple Phase 2 awards for teams that successfully pass the Phase 1 Concept Design Review at month 9.

What could I use the funding for?

The DARPA GO program aims to develop a protein complex, referred to here as a nucleic acid compiler (NAC), that can be expressed within living cells to allow an end user to program genetic instructions into those cells, template-free, using nothing but light to transfer the genetic information to the cells (Figure 1). The central challenge of developing the NAC involves integrating protein domains / subunits for precise optical responsiveness (i.e., optogenetic domains), substrate binding, and enzymatic activity into a functional complex of proteins (i.e., a holoenzyme). While many of these domains have precedence as either engineered or naturally occurring proteins, the challenge lies in developing the interoperability and seamless integration of these domains into a functional holoenzyme, the NAC. Advances in computational design, which allow for accurate prediction of protein structures and binding interactions, are essential for optimizing substrate binding sites, allosteric interactions, and domain integration. These computational tools are crucial for designing the NAC to respond rapidly and predictably to optical signals, enabling the synthesis of long, accurate nucleic acid sequences that can precisely alter cellular function as intended. Moreover, expression of the NAC itself must not be deleterious to host cell function or viability.

To develop the NAC, the GO program consists of two Research Objectives (ROs):

• Research Objective 1 (RO1): De Novo Synthesis

  All GO performers MUST address RO1, which focuses on developing the core capability of the NAC for template-free DNA or RNA synthesis, where optical inputs precisely dictate the sequence of the nucleic acid produced by the NAC in a living cell. A NAC can be designed using a variety of architectures, ranging from extremes of a single, monolithic protein comprised of multiple domains to multi-unit complex (Figure 2). To accomplish this, performers will need to solve three critical challenges: achieving multiplexed optogenetic control, ensuring stability and the precise polymerization of the NAC-nucleic acid sequences, and successfully integrating the molecular components into the NAC.

  1.3.2.1. Multiplexed Optogenetics

  Achieving distinct multiplexed optical programming of the NAC presents a significant challenge, as it requires precise engineering of multiple protein domains capable of responding to distinct wavelengths of light. Currently optogenetic systems have been demonstrated to support up to three distinguishable wavelengths (red, green, and blue) within a cell, but expanding this capability is essential for enabling the NAC to incorporate nucleotides with high precision. This expansion may involve optimizing existing optogenetic domains or developing new ones with improved photophysical properties, such as enhanced spectral separation, faster on/off kinetics, and reduced phototoxicity. By leveraging photons as massless information carriers, these optogenetic domains must facilitate precise molecular motion and interaction, ensuring accurate nucleotide incorporation and enzymatic activity. Computational protein design tools and directed evolution approaches offer potential strategies to overcome these limitations, enabling the multiplexed optical control required for the NAC to function effectively.

  1.3.2.2. Stable and Precise Polymerization

  The NAC must achieve precise polymerization, including initiating synthesis, maintaining processivity to stabilize elongating nucleic acid sequences, and efficiently releasing the synthesized strand to meet program metrics for length and accuracy. The NAC design may need to include strategies to address the challenge of selectively binding the correct nucleotide substrate at the correct time from the mixture of these substrates that exists within the cellular environment. Overcoming this challenge will be necessary for the NAC to achieve desired sequence accuracy metrics for the GO program. Additionally, the stability of the complex formed between the NAC and the nucleic acid sequence it is synthesizing must be sufficient to avoid unwanted dissociations that will result in truncated sequences. Similarly, NACs that synthesize single-stranded nucleic acids will need to overcome issues associated with secondary structures (e.g., hairpin loops) in the DNA/RNA molecule that could interfere with continued synthesis. Achieving stable NAC-based nucleic acid synthesis may necessitate designs that incorporate accessory subunits/domains to improve processivity by holding on to the newly synthesized strand and/or single-stranded binding proteins/domains that hinder the formation of problematic secondary structure in DNA/RNA molecules. Finally, the performers will need to resolve the challenge of releasing synthesized sequences, which may involve strategies such as natural termination signals or engineering inducible cleavage mechanisms.

  1.3.2.3. Integration of Molecular Components

  A fully functional NAC must integrate optogenetic, substrate binding, catalytic, and other domains into a cohesive holoenzyme capable of precise and predictable operation. This integration presents significant challenges, as the domains must interact seamlessly to ensure accurate nucleotide incorporation and overall system functionality. For example, optogenetic domains may need to regulate substrate binding to ensure that nucleotide incorporation into the DNA or RNA sequence aligns precisely with the optical illumination pattern. Similarly, designs involving protein subunit binding must coordinate these interactions with substrate binding domains to maintain synchronization and fidelity. Addressing these challenges may involve strategies such as identifying domains that interact effectively to control the NAC, ensuring synchronous activation and deactivation of multiple NACs within a living cell, and optimizing domain interfaces for efficient communication. Potential approaches include leveraging computational tools to map allosteric pathways, modeling molecular motion to predict domain interactions, and employing high-throughput empirical methods to refine and validate integration strategies.

• Research Objective 2 (RO2): Error Mitigation

  OPTIONAL, GO performers may elect to address RO2 in addition to RO1. Note that GO performers shall not pursue RO2 without addressing RO1. RO2 addresses the challenge of achieving high-fidelity synthesis in NACs by incorporating mechanisms to detect and filter out sequence errors. Some applications of GO technology will necessitate NACs capable of synthesizing longer sequences, and it is anticipated that increasing the length of the sequence will increase the likelihood it contains errors. To this end, RO2 aims to investigate the tradeoffs involved in designing a NAC with enhanced error detection capabilities to meet stricter error tolerance requirements, including how these design choices impact overall NAC performance. There are several potential approaches to address RO2 (Figure 3), an example includes developing doublestranded synthesis methods that incorporate components such as mismatch-binding proteins (e.g., MutS homologs). These proteins can either flag errors for downstream correction or be engineered to degrade faulty sequences, ensuring that only high-fidelity nucleic acid strands are retained. Other strategies may include utilizing base editors to identify nucleotide incorporation errors or synthesizing palindromic sequences that fold onto themselves to increase error detection. RO2 provides an opportunity to explore innovative solutions to error mitigation while considering the tradeoffs in performance, complexity, and scalability inherent to these approaches.

Are there any additional benefits I would receive?

Beyond the direct award, companies benefit from:

DARPA Validation & Technical Credibility
Selection by DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office (BTO) signals exceptional technical rigor and alignment with DARPA’s high-risk, high-reward biotechnology priorities. This validation materially strengthens credibility with strategic partners, investors, and future government customers.

Non-Dilutive Advancement of Breakthrough Biotechnology
GO awards enable teams to mature foundational, high-risk biological technologies using non-dilutive capital. Companies can advance technically ambitious platforms without sacrificing equity, increasing both technical readiness and enterprise value.

Access to DARPA Program Leadership & Expert Networks
Awardees engage directly with DARPA program managers, technical reviewers, and advisory working groups throughout the program. This access provides rare insight into government priorities, technical expectations, and future transition considerations.

Commercialization Support & Structured Market Exposure
GO performers receive guidance from an Independent Commercialization and Consulting Group (ICCG) and participate in structured commercialization workshops and pitch events. These activities help teams refine business hypotheses, market positioning, and transition strategies alongside experienced investors and operators.

Enhanced Visibility Across the Biotechnology Ecosystem
Participation in a DARPA flagship biology program elevates company visibility across the defense, academic, and commercial biotech ecosystems—positioning awardees as leaders in next-generation genetic and optogenetic technologies.

Stronger Long-Term Exit & Transition Potential
By maturing core technology under DARPA sponsorship and demonstrating government-backed technical progress, companies strengthen their positioning for follow-on funding, strategic partnerships, and long-term acquisition or licensing opportunities.

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding?

The process begins with a 5-page abstract due January 16, 2026.. Selected teams are invited to present an in-person Oral Proposal Package. Phase 1 awards follow oral presentations, subject to funding availability. Phase 1 runs 12 months, with a major down-selection at month 9. Phase 2, if awarded, runs an additional 30 months

Where does this funding come from?

Funding is provided by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) within the Department of Defense, through DARPA’s Biological Technologies Office (BTO), using Other Transaction (OT) for Prototype authority.

Who is eligible to apply?

Eligible applicants include U.S. and non-U.S. companies, startups, universities, nonprofits, and research institutions, including nontraditional defense contractors and small businesses. Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and government entities may apply with additional eligibility documentation. All performers must be able to accept an OT agreement and comply with export control and CUI requirements.

What companies and projects are likely to win?

Competitive teams will demonstrate deep expertise in protein engineering, optogenetics, enzymatic nucleic acid synthesis, and computational biology, with a credible plan to integrate these into a functioning system in living cells. DARPA emphasizes technically bold, high-risk approaches that directly address program metrics rather than incremental biology research.

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

Yes. The program excludes human and animal research, embryonic stem cells, bioprospecting for new natural proteins, substantial hardware development, in vitro assembly workflows, and systems that operate outside the central dogma. Phase 2 work involves Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI), requiring NIST 800-171–compliant systems and DARPA security coordination.

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

Most teams should expect 4–6 weeks to prepare a competitive abstract, including technical framing, team formation, and compliance review. Invited teams will need additional time to prepare a detailed Oral Proposal Package, cost models, and milestone plans under DARPA’s OT structure

How can BW&CO help?

Our team specializes in complex federal R&D proposals and can:

• Triple your likelihood of success through proven strategy and insider-aligned proposal development

• Reduce your time spent on the proposal by 50–80%, letting your team focus on technology and operations

• Ensure you are targeting the best opportunity for your project and positioning your company for long-term growth under Federal & State R&D Initiatives.

How much would BW&CO Charge?

$4,000 for Abstract Submission.

Fractional support is $300 per hour.

For startups, we offer a discounted rate of $250 per hour to make top-tier grant consulting more accessible while maintaining the same level of strategic guidance and proposal quality.

Additional Resources

See solicitation on sam.gov

Space Domain Awareness Solutions CSO

Executive Summary:

The U.S. Space Force Space Acquisition & Integration Office (SAIO) is awarding up to $6 million through a multi-year Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO) to small businesses developing innovative Space Domain Awareness (SDA) solutions. Companies submit short white papers under specific Areas of Interest (AOIs), with AOI-2025_01 closing January 20, 2026.

How much funding would I receive?

Funding amounts are determined at the AOI and proposal level. For AOI-2025_01, awards are expected to come from a shared ~$1.5M funding pool across multiple AOIs. The Government may fund all, some, or part of a proposed solution, depending on mission priority, technical merit, and available funds.

What could I use the funding for?

SpOC/S33Z – SDA Capability Enhancement seeks research, development, and prototyping efforts that advance state-of-the-art methods for managing, analyzing, and exploiting space sensor data. The dynamic and challenging SDA environment requires novel approaches that go beyond traditional software development, with emphasis on experimental techniques, proof-of-concept demonstrations, and technology maturation that can transition into operational use.

Technical Focus Areas (TFAs)

Offerors may propose solutions aligned with one or more of the following TFAs. All submissions should emphasize the R&D aspect of their approach, with deliverables expected to include prototypes, models, and/or experimental frameworks rather than production-ready systems.

• TFA 1: Scalable, Adaptable Data Management Tools

  Desired Capabilities:

  • Research and prototyping of new database or data architecture approaches for storing and managing sensor observations, state vectors, and metadata.

  • Experimental tools for data format translation/conversion to enable integration across platforms or analysis pipelines.

  • Innovative methods for tagging, indexing, and organizing traditional and non-traditional sensor data (e.g., radar, EO/IR, passive RF).

• TFA 2: Modeling and Analytics for Enhanced Accuracy and Optimization

  Desired Capabilities:

  • Development and validation of new modeling techniques to determine LEO sensor performance requirements.

  • Research into space environmental models to support phased array radar performance assessments.

  • Exploration of methods for dynamic weighting of sensor observations.

  • Prototyping of modeling/simulation tools to assess the impact of sensor network topology changes.

  • Experimental accuracy assessment tools for passive RF systems, mobile sensors, or degraded data environments.

• TFA 3: Agile Software Prototyping and Transition

  Desired Capabilities:

  • Exploration of approaches to integrate or reuse government-developed astrodynamics models/toolkits in new prototypes.

  • Rapid prototyping of experimental software to address SDA operational challenges.

  • Research into refactoring methods that enable rapid prototypes to evolve into maintainable, deployable systems without full-scale redevelopment.

Are there any additional benefits I would receive?

Beyond the direct award, companies benefit from:

Government Validation & Technical Credibility
Being selected by the U.S. Space Force Space Acquisition & Integration Office (SAIO) signals strong technical credibility and alignment with Space Domain Awareness (SDA) mission priorities—significantly strengthening trust with primes, integrators, and future DoD customers.

Non-Dilutive Technology Maturation
CSO awards enable companies to advance high-risk, high-impact SDA software and analytics technologies using non-dilutive capital, preserving founder equity while increasing enterprise value and technical maturity.

Access to Space Force Operational Stakeholders
Awardees gain direct exposure to Space Force operators, technical leads, and acquisition personnel within the SDA enterprise—creating opportunities for transition paths, follow-on AOIs, and future operational adoption.

Increased Visibility & Notoriety
Participation in Space Force–funded R&D enhances visibility across the national security space ecosystem, including government stakeholders, defense primes, and the broader space technology community.

Strengthened Exit / Acquisition Potential
Demonstrating government-backed progress in SDA capabilities positions companies for strategic partnerships, follow-on contracts, or acquisition by major defense and space industry primes.

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding?

Phase I submissions consist of a white paper and short PowerPoint briefing. For AOI-2025_01, white papers close January 20, 2026. Selected companies may be invited to pitch sessions and then submit a full proposal. Award notifications typically occur within ~45 days of evaluation, with contract start dates generally ~90 days after final proposal submission.

Where does this funding come from?

This funding is provided by the U.S. Space Force, administered through the Space Acquisition & Integration Office (SAIO) under DFARS 212.70 Commercial Solutions Opening authority.

Who is eligible to apply?

Eligibility is limited to U.S. entities. AOI-2025_01 is a 100% small business set-aside under NAICS 541715. Offerors must comply with NIST SP 800-171 cybersecurity requirements and be eligible for federal contracting.

What companies and projects are likely to win?

Winning teams are typically small businesses with strong technical depth in space data, analytics, modeling, or software R&D, and a clear understanding of SDA mission needs. Competitive proposals emphasize innovation, feasibility, and operational relevance, while remaining realistic in scope, schedule, and cost.

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

Phase I submissions must be unclassified. Foreign participation is prohibited due to export control and national security restrictions. The Government will acquire only minimum necessary data rights, allowing companies to retain ownership of their core IP.

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

Most teams should expect 4–6 weeks to prepare a compliant Phase I submission, including the quad chart, PowerPoint briefing, and white paper. Founders should plan additional time if cybersecurity documentation or internal technical alignment is needed.

How can BW&CO help?

Our team specializes in complex federal R&D proposals and can:

• Triple your likelihood of success through proven strategy and insider-aligned proposal development

• Reduce your time spent on the proposal by 50–80%, letting your team focus on technology and operations

• Ensure you are targeting the best opportunity for your project and positioning your company for long-term growth under Federal & State R&D Initiatives.

How much would BW&CO Charge?

Fractional support is $300 per hour.

For startups, we offer a discounted rate of $250 per hour to make top-tier grant consulting more accessible while maintaining the same level of strategic guidance and proposal quality.

Additional Resources

See solicitation on sam.gov

DLA Military Unique Sustainment Technology III (MUST-III) Broad Agency Announcement (BAA)

Executive Summary:

The Defense Logistics Agency’s MUST-III BAA provides up to $50M over five years for R&D that improves the military’s clothing and equipment manufacturing ecosystem. Companies may apply during the initial 45-day window (through Jan 16, 2026) for IDIQ consideration, or later through rolling White Paper submissions once the BAA reopens.

How much funding would I receive?

The BAA does not specify individual award ceilings, but it does specify:

• Total available program funding: up to $50M over 5 years.

• Awards are issued as cost-type contracts, which commonly support multi-hundred-thousand- to multi-million-dollar R&D projects.

• Each Short-Term Project (STP) is typically 3–24 months.

Historically, DLA ManTech STPs are substantial technical efforts—often sized to fully execute a discrete R&D solution (e.g., digital thread capability, manufacturing prototype, supply chain modeling tool).

What could I use the funding for?

Projects must align with one of the three Technical Areas of Interest:

• Digital as an authoritative source

  Establishing a single, trusted digital version of clothing and individual equipment specifications, manufacturing data, and sourcing details to reduce errors, increase speed, and enable automation throughout the supply chain.

  o This includes transitioning from traditional technical documents to digital data as the primary source of truth, ensuring all design, sourcing, and production information is timely, accurate consistent, accessible, and secure.

  o Emphasis should be placed on integrating model-based systems engineering, digital twins, and digital thread technologies. This transformation should rely on IT architectures that support interoperability, cybersecurity, and protection of intellectual property.

  o Advanced technologies such as augmented reality, AI, and machine learning could be utilized to bridge business and technical workflows, enhancing accuracy and operational efficiency.

  o Establishing secure, “time of need” information sharing capability e.g. Application Program Interfaces to enable distribution of technical data over the product lifecycle.

• Supply chain resilience in clothing and individual equipment

  Developing and demonstrating adaptive manufacturing capabilities and buffer strategies—like material stockpiles or alternate sourcing—that help the industry continue operating during surge requirements, large-scale conflicts, disasters, or disruptions.

  o Research in this area could focus on mapping supply chains, identifying critical bottlenecks, or developing models to simulate and respond to various disruptions. Tools like digital twin simulations of the supply chain and predictive analytics could be utilized to proactively address labor shortages, material delays, and capacity issues.

  o Researchers might also examine how to incorporate surge readiness, excess capacity strategies, and prepositioned material stockpiles to ensure stability in times of crisis.

  o Supplier categorization using digital platforms could support diversified sourcing and highlight alternative production pathways when traditional channels are compromised.

  o Develop capabilities to manufacture for low-volume or “made to measure” items, cost effectively with the very short lead-time needed to meet mission requirements (e.g. training goals).

• Innovation in clothing and individual equipment

  Encouraging research and development in novel materials, garment designs, and production methods (e.g. 3D knitting, advanced wearables, automated sewing) to enhance the performance, comfort, and scalability of military clothing and individual equipment.

  o Efforts should prioritize interfacing and coordinating with the Military Services on the development of cutting-edge textile technologies, next-generation uniform systems. This includes advanced manufacturing techniques. containerized and point-of-need manufacturing capabilities that allow rapid setup and deployment in remote or austere environments.

  o Research to encourage exploration into wearable technologies, self-healing fabrics, and automated production techniques such as 3D knitting and robotics. Digital representations of product lifecycles and materials performance, paired with a workforce trained in AI and digital tools, will ensure that new capabilities are both scalable and resilient.

Are there any additional benefits I would receive?

Beyond direct funding, companies gain several strategic advantages:

Government Validation & Credibility
Selection under DLA’s Manufacturing Technology (ManTech) program is a strong technical endorsement. This validation can accelerate partnerships with primes, OEMs, and investors who trust government-vetted innovation.

Visibility & Industry Notoriety
Awardees participate in DLA working groups and may be highlighted in federal program materials—raising national profile within the defense textile and advanced manufacturing ecosystem.

Access to DLA Experts & Ecosystem Collaboration
IDIQ awardees join a 5-year Working Group, providing direct collaboration with DLA program managers, CIE stakeholders, and other innovators—unlocking future contracting and transition opportunities.

Stronger Long-Term Valuation & Exit Potential
Advancing technology under nondilutive federal funding de-risks the product roadmap and strengthens valuation in future equity rounds or acquisition discussions—especially with defense, apparel manufacturing, or automation companies.

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding?

Initial Deadline:

• Full technical & cost proposals due January 16, 2026 (45 days after Dec 2, 2025 posting).

• These proposals are for IDIQ contract consideration.

After Initial Period:

• The BAA temporarily closes for evaluation.

• It then reopens for rolling White Paper submissions for the remainder of the 5-year period.

Award Timing:

• After evaluation, DLA notifies offerors of selection.

• Task orders (STPs) may or may not be immediately issued to IDIQ holders.

• Additional STPs may be awarded after White Papers → requested proposals → evaluation cycle.

Where does this funding come from?

Funding comes from the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) under the Department of Defense (DoD) Manufacturing Technology (ManTech) Program.

Who is eligible to apply?

Any responsible U.S. source capable of meeting government requirements, including:

• Large businesses

• Small businesses (including WOSB, HUBZone, SDB, VOSB, SDVOSB)

• Nonprofits

• Universities / Minority Institutions

• HBCUs

There is no set-aside.
Must meet minimum standards in: financial resources, accounting system adequacy, technical capabilities, past performance, and compliance with FAR Part 9.

What companies and projects are likely to win?

Competitive applicants typically include companies with:

• Expertise in digital engineering, textile manufacturing, AI/ML, automation, or supply chain analytics.

• Demonstrated DoD or CIE manufacturing experience (digital data, prototyping, supply chain modeling).

• Capabilities aligned tightly to Technical Areas of Interest.

• Strong past performance and ability to transition solutions into the production environment.

Examples of strong project types:

• Digital twin implementation for apparel manufacturing

• Secure digital technical data environment (authoritative source of truth)

• Surge production capability modeling

• Automated sewing or 3D knitting demonstrations

• Wearable sensor textiles

• AI-enabled supply chain forecasting for CIE items

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

Key requirements include:

• Cybersecurity compliance (DFARS 252.204-7012, NIST SP 800-171, CMMC).

• No compensation for proposing STPs (including White Papers).

• Subcontracting plans required for large businesses on proposals > $750,000.

• Projects must be executed within U.S. regulations for export controls, IP, and data rights.

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

For a first-time applicant, preparing a full proposal under this opportunity will likely take 150-200 hours in total.

How can BW&CO help?

Our team specializes in complex federal R&D proposals and can:

• Triple your likelihood of success through proven strategy and insider-aligned proposal development

• Reduce your time spent on the proposal by 50–80%, letting your team focus on technology and operations

• Ensure you are targeting the best opportunity for your project and positioning your company for long-term growth under Federal & State R&D Initiatives.

How much would BW&CO Charge?

Our full service support is available for a flat fee of $15,000 + a 5% Success Fee.

Fractional support is $300 per hour.

For startups, we offer a discounted rate of $250 per hour to make top-tier grant consulting more accessible while maintaining the same level of strategic guidance and proposal quality.

Resources

See the full solicitation here.

ARPA-H BioStabilization Systems (BoSS)

Executive Summary:

The ARPA-H BioStabilization Systems (BoSS) program provides multi-year support for teams developing ambient-temperature cell stabilization and scalable bioprocessing systems. Performer Solution Summaries are due February 19, 2026.

How much funding would I receive?

ARPA-H anticipates multiple OT awards, with the expectation that Performer teams will be funded through multi-phase development (up to 48 months). While specific award ceilings aren't stated, ARPA-H OT programs typically support multi-million-dollar development efforts and note that several teams may be funded initially with down-selects in later phases.

What could I use the funding for?

The BioStabilization Systems (BoSS) program aims to transform how live cell-based therapies are stabilized, manufactured, and distributed. At its core, BoSS addresses a foundational bottleneck in the delivery of advanced cell and gene therapies (CGTs): the critical dependence on ultra-cold conditions (-80 to -196˚C) for storage and transport. BoSS will yield a bioprocessing system that enables scalable production of thermally stable cells, paving the way for a new era of efficient and resilient manufacturing and distribution of biologics without any need for cold storage. BoSS-developed technologies will also accelerate many other avenues in biotechnology that directly impact healthcare, including bio-surveillance, regenerative medicine, large-scale genetic testing, blood product supply, and wound repair, in addition to improving access to a wide range of existing biotherapeutics.

This ISO is intended to solicit:

1) Performer teams that can pioneer breakthrough cell stabilization technologies and integrate these technologies into a commercially viable system for producing cell therapy products at scale. Strategic partnerships are encouraged to best position technologies for commercialization success, such as assembling multidisciplinary teams that may include experts from academic, industry, regulatory, commercialization, and non-traditional backgrounds.

2) An Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) partner to reliably provide well-characterized, clinically relevant, government-selected cells to Technical Area Performers. This partner will also assess cell viability and system performance at critical junctures throughout the program.

• Background

  This year approximately 150 million Americans will use at least one thermally unstable biologic, such as a monoclonal antibody, vaccine, or cell therapy. The instability of these medicines necessitates a reliance on cold chain, which jeopardizes product effectiveness, escalates costs, and limits access due to complex, temperature-dependent manufacturing and distribution schemes. Furthermore, costly ultra-cold cryopreservation is the standard approach to extending shelf-life stability for life saving biologics such as CGTs. However, demand for CGTs continues to surge, powered by their transformative impact on healthcare and reflected in rapid market expansion. Globally, there are now >3000 CGTs in the development pipeline, ranging from pre-clinical through pre-registration phases. Innovative solutions that relieve cold chain requirements while preserving shelf-life stability are crucial to meeting this rising demand, as FDA approval and widespread patient access to CGTs rely on maintaining product quality throughout storage and distribution.

  BoSS aims to develop innovative technologies that preserve cells at ambient temperatures, a breakthrough approach we will subsequently refer to as biostabilization. Achieving biostabilization remains a two-fold challenge that has yet to be overcome. The first challenge requires cellular interventions to preserve the integrity and function of vital elements prior to undergoing stabilization, enabling cells to withstand physical changes that would otherwise cause irreversible damage. This could include delivering protectants into cells and/or altering cells in other ways to improve processing and storage resilience. To maintain the clinical utility of cell products, cellular interventions to prepare and deploy biostabilization must be both biocompatible and reversible. The second challenge involves implementing aseptic, cell-friendly handling instrumentation to deploy stabilization techniques across various production scales.
  
  One approach to address the first challenge is to adopt nature’s strategies to accomplish biostabilization. For example, ‘anhydrobiotes’ can tolerate extreme loss of water and persist in a dehydrated state for years (e.g., tardigrades, rotifers, brine shrimp), quickly regaining full function after rehydration. Molecular contributors to this resilience have been elucidated such as amorphous trehalose glass and special classes of intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs). Recent studies have revealed cell structure re-arrangements and stress-induced formation of molecular condensates that may be essential for surviving the stresses of dry processing. Other discoveries from the genomic to the organismal scale form the natural basis of desiccation tolerance and may be adapted or improved upon for biostabilization. Solutions inspired by chemistry and materials science advances are also encouraged along with approaches that employ biocompatible polymers, scaffolds, multi-organic frameworks, or cell encapsulation to protect and stabilize cells.

  Addressing the second challenge requires development of new processing approaches and potentially new instrumentation that can yield products suitable for ambient storage. Current gold standard methods for batch processing like lyophilization (freeze-drying) are energy-intensive, slow, and challenging to apply to complex biologics. While appropriate for proteins, antibodies, and even some vaccines, lyophilization is a risky and unproven approach for high-value cell products that are widely used in the biopharma industry as starting materials, manufacturing intermediates, host cells, and cell-based therapies. Nascent technologies like microwave-assisted vacuum foam-drying, thin film freeze-drying, and polymerization gelation exhibit potential for processing complex biologics but remain at a low manufacturing readiness level (MRL), i.e., early-stage development and requires significant development to establish full-scale production. Established technologies with high MRL, such as spray-drying, commonly used for food production, offer the advantage of continuous processing and may have potential for adaptation to biologics.
  

  Successful completion of BoSS will yield a bioprocessing system designed as a platform technology for stabilizing cell biologics capable of easy integration into biomanufacturing pipelines. The bioprocessing system will enable scalable production and distribution of thermally stable cells benefiting the biopharmaceutical ecosystem that uses cells as starting materials, manufacturing intermediates, and CGTs. Breakthroughs from BoSS are expected to yield biostabilization innovations including intracellular and extracellular protectants and stabilizers, enabling bioprocessing technologies, and re-animation products. Together, BoSS bioprocessing system and biostabilization technologies will be commercially viable solutions that will establish a new paradigm for biomanufacturing designed to reduce costs and ensure that biological medicines are accessible to patients, including those living in the most remote and resource-limited communities.

• Technical Areas

  BoSS envisions that successful solutions will converge from extremophile biology, biomaterials science, biomanufacturing, pharmaceutical formulation, process engineering, and device development to unlock new bioprocessing and biostabilization solutions, bridging historical silos in biostasis science and advancing biological medicines. Proposals are required to address solutions to both technical areas:
  
  Technical Area 1 (TA1): BioPrep

  Approaches to BioPrep include preparing, protecting, and other methods of intervention to allow cells to endure and recover from biostabilization at room temperature. BioPrep solutions should be reversible interventions that support the suspension of biological activity while ensuring cellular health and integrity upon reanimation. BioPrep solutions may also include the development of re-animation techniques and solutions that rapidly restore biological activities after biostabilization.
  
  Technical Area 2 (TA2): Bioprocessing

  Bioprocessing technologies (e.g., instruments, devices) should enable the deployment of biostabilization concepts at scale. Activities may include the scale-up of an early MRL, cell-friendly processing technology, or the adaptation of scaled systems that can be re-designed to safely and gently handle cells. The proposed solution should mitigate stress on cells while achieving biostabilization with preserved quality and function for extended durations at ambient temperatures.
  
  Proposers must submit proposals to both TAs. A conforming proposal will account for all program requirements outlined in this ISO, both TA-specific and overall program milestones and metrics.

• Program Overview

  Technology commercialization is a critical part of achieving the ARPA-H mission to improve health outcomes for all Americans. To support this goal, progress will be measured by strategic metrics and milestones that must be met to advance through subsequent phases. Technologies will advance across three integrated phases designed to drive both technical advancement and commercial translation:

  •

  Phase 1 focuses on establishing the scientific feasibility of ambient biostabilization. This proof-of-concept stage includes developing innovative cell preparation approaches with enabling instrumentation that, together, are capable of inducing biostabilization as well as re-animation methods to restore function after biostabilization.

  •

  Phase 2 emphasizes integrated capability demonstrations, converging biological and manufacturing innovations into a cohesive bioprocessing system that can produce stabilized cells under simulated commercial conditions.

  •

  Phase 3 advances to scaled solution development and industry transition, preparing the bioprocessing system for market entry through GMP-compliant production, strategic industry partnerships, and validation in real-world use cases.

  Performer teams must meet increasingly stringent technological capability requirements and stabilized cell quality metrics during each phase to demonstrate progress on biostabilization technology development. Performers will choose cells used for end of phase demonstrations from a list of government-selected cell types, which will be identified at the start of the performance period. Sub-phase milestones may be demonstrated on cell types chosen by the Performer, with consideration to the restrictions identified in Table 1. In later stages, end of phase demonstrations will be permitted on cells that are aligned with Phase 3 transition partners. Ideal transitional partners for Performers are organizations equipped with established distribution networks to seamlessly integrate the developed bioprocessing system into their existing biomanufacturing pipelines for cell biologics, accelerating the path from innovation to implementation.

  At the end of the program, biostabilization technologies will demonstrate capability, scalability, and applicability of commercially viable platform technologies that enable room temperature storage and distribution of stabilized cells agnostic of cell type, supporting widespread access to biologic medicines. The ideal bioprocessing system will integrate seamlessly with biomanufacturing and fill-finish systems. Ultimately, partnerships will culminate into early adoption of a new commercially viable bioprocessing system capable of scalable production of stabilized cell products that meet Good Laboratory Practice (GLP) and GMP standards with a path paved for commercialization to support broad industry adoption.

Are there any additional benefits I would receive?

Beyond the primary funding, BoSS awardees gain several indirect strategic advantages:

Government Validation & Credibility
Selection by ARPA-H establishes strong scientific legitimacy and positions your technology as a potential national-level biomanufacturing platform.

Enhanced Visibility & Notoriety
Awardees are featured through ARPA-H communications, Proposers’ Day events, and industry engagement, increasing recognition among biotech investors, health systems, and biopharma manufacturers.

Access to a National Innovation Network
BoSS includes structured engagement with an Independent Verification & Validation (IV&V) partner, FDA interactions, and optional commercialization support—creating opportunities for partnerships, pilot studies, and eventual technology adoption.

Stronger Exit, Growth, and Acquisition Potential
Nondilutive development of platform technologies can significantly improve valuation, especially for companies working in CGT manufacturing, biosurveillance platforms, or enabling bioprocessing technologies. Government validation reduces perceived technical risk for acquirers and later-stage investors.

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding?

Key dates:

• Proposers’ Day: January 29, 2026

• Performer Solution Summary: February 19, 2026

• Performer Pitch: March 26, 2026

• IV&V Solution Summary: April 17, 2026

• IV&V Pitch: May 15, 2026

Where does this funding come from?

Funding is issued through the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H), under the Scalable Solutions Office, using Other Transaction (OT) authority for high-risk, high-impact biomedical innovation.

Who is eligible to apply?

Universities, Nonprofits, Small and large commercial businesses, Non-U.S. entities (with restrictions; must not be from foreign entities of concern), Must conduct work in the U.S., FFRDCs and U.S. Government entities cannot participate as Performers.

What companies and projects are likely to win?

See full solicitation for details. Strong candidates include companies with capabilities in:

• Cell & gene therapy engineering

• Bioprocessing & biomanufacturing instrumentation

• Biomaterials, polymers, encapsulation, or intracellular protectants

• Cell preservation technologies (cryopreservation alternatives, desiccation biology)

• Microfluidics, closed-system processing, or continuous manufacturing

• Regulatory-ready biologics or device development expertise

• Advanced analytical platforms (cell viability, potency, functional assays)

Winning projects will propose integrated TA1 + TA2 solutions capable of achieving:

• Room-temperature stability (14 days → 3 months)

• Reanimation <1 hour by Phase 3

• High viability, function, and potency metrics across multiple cell types

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

Key restrictions include:

• No genetic manipulation of cells

• No dangerous gain-of-function research (per EO 14292)

• No demonstrations on RBCs or microbial species

• No slow (>4 hr prep or >1 day processing) methods

• No methods that cannot scale or meet GMP requirements

• No traditional lyophilization

• Teams must maintain SAM.gov registration for Step 2

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

For a first-time applicant, preparing a solution summary under this opportunity will likely take 50-70 hours in total.

How can BW&CO help?

Our team specializes in complex federal R&D proposals and can:

• Triple your likelihood of success through proven strategy and insider-aligned proposal development

• Reduce your time spent on the proposal by 50–80%, letting your team focus on technology and operations

• Ensure you are targeting the best opportunity for your project and positioning your company for long-term growth under Federal & State R&D Initiatives.

How much would BW&CO Charge?

Our full service support is available for a flat fee of $4,000 to submit a solution summary.

Fractional support is $300 per hour.

For startups, we offer a discounted rate of $250 per hour to make top-tier grant consulting more accessible while maintaining the same level of strategic guidance and proposal quality.

Resources

See the full solicitation here.

Autonomous Interventions and Robotics (AIR) – ARPA-H-SOL-26-146

Below is a summary. Please see the official solicitation on sam.gov for details (link in Resources Section).

Executive Summary:

The AIR program will award multiple OT agreements to teams developing autonomous endovascular robotic systems and interventional microbots that can perform key parts of surgical and interventional procedures without direct human control. The program runs for five years (two-year Phase 1 and three-year Phase 2). Companies must submit a Solution Summary by January 26, 2026 and a Full Proposal by March 30, 2026.

How much funding would I receive?

The ISO does not specify a minimum or maximum award amount. ARPA-H states only that it expects to make multiple OT awards under this opportunity; budgets will be driven by the scope, risk, and duration of each proposed 5-year effort (2-year Phase 1 + 3-year Phase 2).

What could I use the funding for?

The Autonomous Interventions and Robotics (AIR) program aims to catalyze the development of autonomous robotic surgery—an intervention during which a robot performs part, or all, of the procedure without direct human input. AIR encompasses two (2) technical areas: Technical Area 1 (TA1)—endovascular robotics, and Technical Area 2 (TA2)—microbots. Technical Area 1 comprises sub-areas TA1-A—endovascular robotic systems and TA1-B—endovascular simulation environment.

• Background

  During an endovascular procedure, the surgeon reviews the pre-operative CT of the patient’s vasculature, makes a small incision in the patient’s skin, then manually navigates guidewires and catheters from the femoral or radial artery up into the patient’s brain, using occasional guidance from intra-operative 2D fluoroscopy images. The surgeon steers the distal tip of the catheter around tortuous anatomy by pushing, pulling, and twisting the catheter at the entry point—a challenging process requiring dexterity, mental mapping, and an understanding of the physical properties of catheters. Often, the surgeon must try multiple types of catheters, restarting the navigation from the beginning and losing precious time in the process. Once the target is reached, additional challenges await. For example, during a mechanical thrombectomy—the removal of a stroke-inducing blood clot from the brain—once the catheter reaches the clot, there is ambiguity around contact and suction; with little tactile feedback beyond translated resistance, the surgeon needs to make a seal and suction the clot. In addition, endovascular surgeons receive high yearly doses of radiation during procedures, increasing their risk of cancer and other sequelae such as cataracts1.

  Thrombectomies are a critical unmet need in the United States and worldwide. Every year, approximately 335,000 Americans experience an ischemic stroke caused by a large vessel occlusion (LVO), a situation in which a major blood vessel in the brain is blocked by a clot. The standard of care is to mechanically remove the clot via thrombectomy; unfortunately, only ~40,000 Americans per year—about 10% of the patients with LVOs—receive thrombectomies2. There are only 311 thrombectomy-capable centers in the United States as of 20223, and they are unevenly distributed, with 50% of Americans living more than one hour away from one. Time to procedure is crucial; every 10-minute delay in revascularization lowers a patient’s disability-free lifetime by ~40 days and increases health care costs by $10,0004. While thrombectomies are currently recommended for patients within six hours from stroke onset, recent clinical studies have shown benefit to 24 hours and beyond5.

  More broadly, other specialized or highly invasive procedures are often the only way to obtain disease diagnostics and treat pathological conditions. These include biopsies of suspicious tissue, ablations of uterine fibroids, and destruction of kidney stones, among numerous others. Overall, surgery remains dangerous: more than one in three patients experience adverse events during surgical care. Furthermore, surgery requires specialist care, which can involve extensive travel and waiting times.

  Automated systems such as microbots (small, mechanical, electronic or hybrid devices) have the potential to dramatically increase access to interventions. However, surgical microrobot research and development is largely at an early stage and mostly devoted to biosensing and microrobot motion; the smaller the entity, the more difficult it is for the entity to propel itself directionally. Implementation of end-to-end clinical solutions is notional at best, except for pill-sized gastro-intestinal (GI) imaging devices, which are specifically excluded from accepted AIR solutions. Autonomous endovascular systems also currently do not exist; although complex robotics elements have been developed in industry and academia, autonomous navigation and control algorithms are still in their infancy.

• Program Goals

  AIR aims to make endovascular procedures available at hospitals everywhere through autonomous robotic systems; it is understood, though, that the transition from the current state of clinical care to this audacious goal is likely to involve multiple practical evolutionary steps. They will likely include: a) clinical trials during which endovascular surgeons present in the room will be ready to take over at any moment from the autonomous endovascular robotic system; b) a first deployment phase, in which local general surgeons and remote endovascular surgeons will oversee the procedure; and ultimately, c) a phase in which only local general surgeons (or other medical professionals) will oversee the operation of thoroughly validated autonomous systems.

  AIR microbots are intended to create a paradigm shift in interventional procedures, transforming these invasive procedures—currently performed in advanced care settings and requiring skilled practitioners—into minimally invasive procedures performed in a general practitioner’s office. Microbots are expected to simplify existing procedures, enable completely new procedures, reduce complications rates and costs, and increase procedure availability.

• Technical Area 1

  Technical Area 1 (TA1) of AIR aims to develop fully autonomous robotic endovascular intervention systems. After a medical professional inserts the catheter system into the femoral or radial artery, the robot will complete an endovascular procedure without human intervention. The system capabilities will be demonstrated in several procedures, including 3D rotational angiogram imaging, vascular embolization, and, most importantly, thrombectomy. Autonomous endovascular systems developed in TA1-A will encompass:

  1) Robotic control systems that can manipulate catheters and guidewires

  2) Navigation algorithms based on pre-operative imaging and real-time sensing

  3) Steerable catheters and guidewires (if required)

  4) Solutions for autonomous clot removal and vascular embolization

  In addition, TA1-B will develop an in silico testing and validation environment for these robots, an activity that will include the collection of fluoroscopic videos of endovascular procedures, CT angiograms, and other imaging modalities as needed for training.

  Note that autonomous blood vessel access is out of scope for the AIR program; a surgeon or surgical technician will obtain vessel access.
  
  Additional details are available in the solicitation.

• Technical Area 2

  Technical Area 2 (TA2) of AIR aims to develop a set of interventional microbots. Performers will specify a target clinical indication and develop microbots that move, sense, and act to diagnose or treat this condition by means of more precise targeting and/or less invasive access. TA2 teams will address:

  a. Microbot locomotion

  b. Anatomy/pathology targeting methods

  c. Miniaturization or externalization of power supplies and computational processing

  d. Autonomous or automated action

  e. Microbot removal or deactivation

  Gastrointestinal/ingestible pill microbots that only image, stimulate, and/or deliver cargo are out of scope for the AIR program.

  Although the technologies for both TAs are developed and validated for a target indication, it is expected that they will serve as platforms for multiple interventions and procedures.
  
  Additional details are available in the solicitation.

Are there any additional benefits I would receive?

Beyond direct funding, AIR awards can provide strategic benefits typical of ARPA-style programs:

• Government technical validation: Being selected by ARPA-H signals that your approach is technically ambitious and nationally relevant in health innovation and surgical autonomy, which can help in discussions with strategics, hospital systems, and investors.

• Positioning for regulatory and ecosystem engagement: AIR is structured with parallel FDA collaboration (for TA1) and explicit regulatory milestones (e.g., simulation frameworks, Q-submissions) that can de-risk later clinical and commercialization steps.

• Access to a high-end performer network: Performers will interact with other top robotics, imaging, and microbotics teams, plus FDA scientific collaborators and ARPA-H program staff—often leading to follow-on partnerships and future solicitations.

• Nondilutive growth capital: Because funding is nondilutive, successful teams can mature high-capex platforms (robotics, microfabrication, imaging) while preserving equity and potentially driving higher valuations and stronger exit options down the line.

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding?

1. Proposer’s Day: December 16, 2025

2. Q&A deadline: January 20, 2026, 5:00 PM ET

3. Solution Summaries due: January 26, 2026, 5:00 PM ET

4. Full Proposals due: March 30, 2026, 5:00 PM ET

Where does this funding come from?

The Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H), a federal R&D agency within HHS, issuing awards under the authority of 42 U.S.C. § 290c(g)(1)(D) via OT agreements.

Who is eligible to apply?

• Universities and other educational institutions

• Non-profit organizations

• Small businesses

• Other-than-small businesses

What companies and projects are likely to win?

1. Overall Scientific & Technical Merit:
   Companies proposing highly innovative, technically rigorous, and fully executable plans with well-defined milestones, clear risk-mitigation strategies, and IP structures that enable commercialization are most competitive. Winning projects will demonstrate a credible path to achieving AIR’s demanding 5-year technical milestones.

2. Proposer’s Capabilities & Related Experience:
   Teams with deep, directly relevant expertise—including experienced robotics engineers, imaging specialists, microbot developers, and required clinicians (e.g., an endovascular neurosurgeon for TA1-A)—are most likely to win. Prior success delivering complex R&D programs on time and on budget is a major advantage.

3. Assessment of Proposed Cost/Price:
   ARPA-H will favor proposers who submit realistic, well-justified budgets that reflect the true complexity of autonomous surgical robotics or microbot development. Costs must align with the technical plan, leverage past research efficiently, and avoid artificially low budgets or staffing junior personnel simply to reduce cost.

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

• Key restrictions from the ISO include:

  • Scope restrictions

    • TA1 excludes autonomous vascular access and closure; a human must obtain vessel access.

    • GI “pill camera–only” devices and ingestible microbots that only image, stimulate, or deliver cargo are out of scope; GI microbots must at least sense and biopsy, or sense/biopsy/ablate, to qualify.

    • Purely biological, purely chemical, or chem-bio-only delivery concepts (no mechanical/electronic component) are not acceptable microbots. Nanoparticles alone are out of scope.

  • Team composition and application rules

    • TA1-A teams must include at least one endovascular neurosurgeon.

    • A given team may propose to either TA1-A or TA1-B, but not both

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

For a first-time applicant, preparing a competitive solutions summary under this BAA will likely take 40–60 hours in total.

How can BW&CO help?

Our team specializes in complex federal R&D proposals and can:

• Triple your likelihood of success through proven strategy and insider-aligned proposal development

• Reduce your time spent on the proposal by 50–80%, letting your team focus on technology and operations

• Ensure you are targeting the best opportunity for your project and positioning your company for long-term growth under Federal & State R&D Initiatives.

How much would BW&CO Charge?

Our full service support is available for a flat fee of $4,000 to submit a solution summary.

Fractional support is $300 per hour.

For startups, we offer a discounted rate of $250 per hour to make top-tier grant consulting more accessible while maintaining the same level of strategic guidance and proposal quality.

Additional Resources

Check the full solicitation here.

DIU Project Janus – Advanced Nuclear Microreactor Power Plant Prototyping

Executive Summary:

Project Janus is soliciting commercial solutions to design, prototype, and deploy advanced nuclear Microreactor Power Plants (MPPs) that can provide continuous, resilient power across Army installations. Awarded vendors will prototype both a First-of-a-Kind (FOAK) and a Second-of-a-Kind (SOAK) MPP, leading to potential follow-on production and long-term power purchase agreements. Solution Briefs are due December 15, 2025, so companies should begin preparing ASAP.

How much funding would I receive?

DIU does not publish fixed award amounts, but nuclear prototyping OTAs typically fall within the multi-million to tens-of-millions range, depending on complexity and vendor contributions.

Importantly, DIU OTAs can lead directly to large follow-on production contracts or long-term electricity PPAs without further competition, enabling far greater lifetime contract value.

What could I use the funding for?

Problem Statement

Ensuring consistent, resilient energy across military installations and operational theaters has become an increasingly complex challenge for the U.S. military. Aging infrastructure, dependence on vulnerable civilian power grids, complex liquid fuel logistics, and rising energy demands from advanced technologies all threaten mission assurance. Frequent electricity outages, grid disruptions, and limited backup capacity jeopardize critical systems responsible for command, control, communications, and logistics. This directly undermines readiness, training, and operational effectiveness. These vulnerabilities underscore the urgent need for secure, scalable, and independent energy solutions that ensure continuous power for the warfighter to operate anytime, anywhere, regardless of external grid instability or supply chain disruptions.

The U.S. Army, alongside the Defense Innovation Unit, seeks to prototype Microreactor Power Plant(s) (MPPs) capable of developing a suite of advanced nuclear power plant energy solutions to meet the needs of the U.S. Department of War (DoW). These MPPs will leverage recent advances in the nuclear industry to provide continuous and reliable power in all DoW scenarios and will be demonstrated on a military installation within the United States by 2030.

Background

On 23 May 2025, four executive orders (EOs) were issued that aimed at modernizing America’s nuclear energy posture, with direct implications for the Army and the broader DoW. In particular, EO 14299 Deploying Advanced Nuclear Reactor Technologies for National Security, states that “it is the policy of the United States to ensure the rapid development, deployment, and use of advanced nuclear technologies to support national security objectives, such as the protection and operation of critical infrastructure, critical defense facilities, and other mission capability resources.” These orders represent a strategic shift towards immediately and impactfully leveraging advanced nuclear technologies. Meeting the objectives of EO14299 requires a focus on both installation and operational energy goals through a coordinated prototype program that leverages MPP technologies to address the Department of War’s energy needs. 

Project Approach

The broader Department of the Army’s Janus program objective is to develop a suite of prototype solutions for MPPs that can supply power for both installations and non-permanent operations. The Janus project approach under the DIU CSO will use an iterative prototype development process to provide a clear path to transition of the successful commercially demonstrated technology solutions. “Suite” refers to the DoW’s intent to select multiple reactor designs for the OTA Agreement, each to be paired with an Army installation by the Army after contract award. This will involve prototyping a First of a Kind (FOAK) MPP under the Army’s regulatory authority, followed shortly after by a Second of a Kind (SOAK) MPP, also using the Army’s regulatory authority. The Department is seeking fission-based solution sets for installation and defense purposes. 

Vendors will be paired with Army installations after the OTA contract award. Vendors will develop their FOAK prototype for demonstration on that installation and commence design of the SOAK prototype near the end of FOAK design. The SOAK prototype is expected to build on lessons learned from the FOAK and include design changes from the FOAK prototype, through iterative prototyping. 

Vendor solutions submitted under the AOI are highly encouraged to use the FOAK and SOAK approach in their proposals, and discuss the path from SOAK to Nth-of-a-kind production. Solutions may utilize the operating life of both the FOAK and SOAK MPPs in series to reach the 30-year lifetime power generation, assuming continuity of power across the 30-year period. 

The Army will be announcing the selection of the initial group of installations for the Janus project MPP prototypes at a later date. Vendors are prohibited from contacting or responding to queries from the installations regarding any aspect of CSO HQ084520SC001 or the Janus project. Vendors who do not comply with the prohibition may be removed from participation in the Janus Project. 

Project Objectives

The Department is seeking solution briefs for the full lifecycle of MPPs that would notionally start operations at an Army installation located in the United States before the end of calendar year 2030. Solution briefs should include all stages of an MPP’s lifecycle: design, testing, regulation, construction, operations, deconstruction, and returning the site to an unrestricted release status.

The objectives of the prototype include: 

• Provide mission assurance through energy resilience for a range of defense applications. 

• Assemble and operate prototype MPPs on military installations within the United States to demonstrate the capability of the MPP designs to provide safe, secure, reliable, and environmentally compliant electricity and thermal energy (if needed) in support of readiness goals for mission critical assets.

• Engage with the government and privatized distribution providers, transmission providers, and commodity providers currently serving U.S. Military installations to facilitate seamless and resilient energy regardless of commercial grid conditions.

Final solutions will follow a process under the U.S. Army Regulatory Authority for the entire lifecycle. The U.S. Army’s regulatory authority is derived from section 91b of the Atomic Energy Act (42 U.S.C. § 2121(b)), as implemented pursuant to the Presidential Directive of 23 September 1961. Vendors will follow the Army regulatory process as documented in AR 50-7 (2016), although additional guidance will be provided during Phase 2 and throughout the FOAK design. AR 50-7 can be found at: https://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/DR_pubs/DR_a/pdf/web/r50-7_Web_FINAL.pdf. 

Awarded vendors will be given opportunities to provide feedback on gaps in Army regulatory processes as additional regulatory guidance is provided. Additional regulatory requirements, such as transportation of nuclear material on public highways, should be addressed by Vendors during their proposals.

Reviews and implementation during the MPP prototype development process will include an integrated and phased approach to compliance with planning and design, planning and construction, architecture and engineering, building construction, environmental, operating, safety and physical/cyber protection, emergency response planning, deconstruction, and spent fuel management requirements. 

A successful MPP prototype will provide a sound and demonstrated technological solution for commercial operations. A successful prototype will complete fuel load and testing phases and will be permitted by the Army Regulator to begin normal operations. The OTA prototype will transition to unrestricted operations as a COCO MPP with a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA), production OTA, or other Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) based contract.

Desired Solution Features 

Desired solution features include the following attributes and capabilities: 

• Incorporates nuclear fuel that is enriched to 20% or less U-235 and that is legal for defense purposes. The fuel must be qualified, available, and fabricated on a timeline that will meet program timelines.  

  • Defense-purpose feedstock may be made available as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) for FOAK and SOAK MPPs through an Army fuel allocation process. If feedstock is provided as GFE, vendors will be responsible for transportation, blending, and fabrication of the fuel. 

  • Vendors should address the implications of a) the Government not providing feedstock as GFE, b) of the Government providing feedstock as GFE for only the first fueling, and c) the Government providing feedstock as GFE for the operational life of the MPP.

• Capable of producing electrical power in the range of kW-level up to 20MWe (up to 60 MWth). Capable of local control and dispatch and integrated to the greatest extent practicable into existing infrastructure, operations centers (if applicable), workflows, and operations and maintenance systems. 

• Capable of startup/shutdown and monitoring operations both with and without commercial power availability (both black start and grid-connected start capability). 

• Capable of MPP operations with a commercial power connection, and an alternative credited independent power source as a backup. 

• The MPP should be operated only from the control room located within the Army installation (remote or wireless operation is not allowed). 

  • MPPs with remote maintenance and diagnostics capabilities that comply with relevant cybersecurity U.S. Government standards, e.g., NIST 800-171 Rev. 2 for Federal Contractors, may be considered. 

  • The MPP control room must be designed to accommodate two operators, with space for an additional person, at a minimum. 

• The MPP design should include passive safety features to the extent practical to ensure MPP key safety functions are satisfied under all conditions, states, and modes. 

• Radiation exposure at the MPP site boundary should not exceed the limits provided in 10 CFR 20 during routine operations. Proposals must sufficiently account for relevant factors, including sky shine, emissions from activated site materials, and surrounding buildings at various elevations around the site boundary. 

• The MPP design must address Natural Hazard Phenomena, including seismic loads, external floods, and other potential hazards.

• The MPP design must have clearly articulated systems and safety case approaches, including an initial set of proposed design criteria and design safety strategy.

• Vendor strategy and capability to continuously provide full power supply for up to 30 years, including operations, maintenance, sustainment, and refueling activities. 

  • There are no restrictions on the proposed strategy to achieve 30-years of continuous power (e.g., refueling or ‘replaceable’ modules to maintain continuity of operations). 

  • The overall lifecycle strategy of the MPP by the Vendor will be evaluated and must include associated costs/risks with the proposed strategy for long-term operations.

• Non-core irradiated material should be removed or qualified for unrestricted release within 2 years upon completion or termination of the power production contract. An initial irradiated material disposal plan, along with an associated finance structure, must be approved by the Army before design permitting. 

• Irradiated core material should be removed from the site notionally within 5 years of completion or termination of the power production contract, or as otherwise agreed upon by the Army. An initial core decommissioning plan, along with an associated finance structure, must be approved by the Army before MPP operations are permitted. 

• A target site area should be sized appropriately for FOAK (and SOAK if co-located) to ensure compliance with Federal radiation limits in 10 CFR 20 and the anticipated Seismic Design Category. Selected Vendors will be paired with an installation post-OTA award.

• Reasonable and appropriate safety, physical, cyber, and safeguards measures should be implemented in the design consistent with best practices. Army-specific requirements will be provided to vendors invited to participate in Phase 2 Pitches. 

• In addition to the above desired solution features, solutions must address the aspects below: 

  • A nuclear supply chain for nuclear-grade equipment that is clearly identified and credibly available to supply equipment to meet the notional timeline. The nuclear supply chain identified must meet defense-purpose limitations; any part of the nuclear supply chain reliant on international sources must be identified and mitigated with a plan approved by the Army.

  • Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) for equipment included in the design. The TRL and MRL readiness levels will be evaluated in depth during Phase 2 Pitches. 

  • Identified gaps in available Computational analytical tools, Codes, or Standards accepted for nuclear use. Identified analytical tools, Codes, or Standards for which the design will operate outside the approved range 

  • (e.g., the MPP operates at a higher temperature than existing foundational data).

  • Identified gaps in available material performance data for safety or reliability-related equipment under anticipated operating conditions.

  • Plans and approaches to move from FOAK to SOAK, to Nth-of-a-Kind development and production. Plans to commercialize or develop commercial versions of proposed MPP prototype designs.

  • Long-term plans for fuel acquisition and manufacturing, including the status of negotiations or agreements with miners, enrichers and/or fabricators. 

Are there any additional benefits I would receive?

Beyond direct prototype funding, awardees gain substantial strategic advantages:

Government Validation & National Credibility
Winning a DIU/Army nuclear award signals unmatched credibility in defense nuclear innovation. This accelerates alignment with primes, utilities, and capital markets.

Path to Long-Term, Non-Dilutive Revenue
Successful prototypes can transition into 30-year Power Purchase Agreements, production OTAs, or FAR contracts, representing massive long-term revenue potential.

Increased Market Visibility
Awardees gain visibility across DoD, DOE, and national energy/security communities—often resulting in media coverage and faster customer traction.

Supply Chain & Regulatory Acceleration
Participation provides exposure to Army regulators, national labs, nuclear fuel providers, and defense-focused supply chain partners—accelerating commercialization beyond the defense market.

Higher Exit and Valuation Potential
Nondilutive support for FOAK/SOAK nuclear builds significantly increases company valuation, technical defensibility, and acquisition potential for defense, energy, and infrastructure buyers.

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding?

• Solution Brief Due: December 15, 2025

• DIU Review: ~30 days for down-select

• Phase 2 Pitch: Invitation-only, early 2026

• Full Proposal (Phase 3): Following successful pitch

• Prototype Awards: Rolling upon approval and funding availability

• FOAK Operation Goal: Before end of 2030

• SOAK Development: Begins near completion of FOAK design

Where does this funding come from?

Project Janus is funded through the U.S. Army and executed under the Defense Innovation Unit's Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO) process. Awards are made using Other Transaction Agreements (OTAs) under 10 U.S.C. § 4022 (formerly § 2371b).

Who is eligible to apply?

U.S. and foreign-owned commercial companies

• Companies proposing fission-based microreactor designs

• Teams including reactor designers, fabricators, integrators, fuel cycle partners

• Vendors able to provide private financial contributions (projects relying solely on government funds are not eligible)

• Vendors able to comply with Section 889 and Army nuclear regulatory requirements

Multiple submissions and teaming arrangements are allowed.

What companies and projects are likely to win?

Competitive applicants will:

• Demonstrate credible, deployable microreactor designs at TRL/MRL levels suitable for FOAK prototyping

• Present a robust plan for 30 years of operations, including refueling or replaceable module strategies

• Show credible nuclear supply chain access for fuel, components, and safety-critical systems

• Provide a realistic path from FOAK → SOAK → Nth-of-a-kind commercialization

• Demonstrate ability to meet Army regulatory requirements under AR 50-7

• Provide private cost share or financial contributions, as required in Phase 2

• Address cybersecurity, safety, passive safety features, and natural hazard requirements

• Show strong corporate viability and commercial market strategy (a key DIU evaluation factor)

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

• Remote or wireless operation of the MPP is not allowed; control room must be on-installation

• Vendors may not contact Army installations

• All proposals must be unclassified; CUI is not allowed

• Foreign-owned firms must be able to secure necessary clearances

• Vendors must address implications of fuel as GFE vs. vendor-supplied

• Submissions must comply with Army radiation exposure limits and 10 CFR 20

• Private financing participation is required to advance to Phase 2 and Phase 3

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

For a first-time applicant, preparing a competitive solutions brief will take 50-75 hours in total.

How can BW&CO help?

Our team specializes in complex federal R&D proposals and can:

• Triple your likelihood of success through proven strategy and insider-aligned proposal development

• Reduce your time spent on the proposal by 50–80%, letting your team focus on technology and operations

• Ensure you are targeting the best opportunity for your project and positioning your company for long-term growth.

How much would BW&CO Charge?

Our full service support is available for the Solution Brief for $5000. Pitch & Full proposal quoted upon invitation.

Fractional support is $300 per hour.

For startups, we offer a discounted rate of $250 per hour to make top-tier grant consulting more accessible while maintaining the same level of strategic guidance and proposal quality.

Additional Resources

View the Solicitation Here.

Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) – Mines & Metals Capacity Expansion – Piloting Byproduct Critical Minerals and Materials Recovery at Domestic Industrial Facilities (DE-FOA-0003583)

Executive Summary:

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management, through NETL, is offering up to $275 million under DE-FOA-0003583 to fund large pilot facilities that recover byproduct critical materials from coal-based and other industrial feedstocks, mine waste, and process wastes. Projects will design, construct, and operate 1:50-scale or larger pilots that produce market-ready critical material products and generate the data needed for near-term commercial facilities in the United States. Applications are due December 15, 2025, at 5:00 pm EST.

How much funding would I receive?

For this NOFO, funding is structured by topic area:

• Topic Area 1 – Mines & Metals Pilots – Coal-Based Industry

  • Total funding: up to $75 million.

  • Approximate number of awards: 0–3.

  • Approximate award size: $10 million–$50 million per project.

  • Minimum cost share: 20% of total project costs.

  • Approximate project period: 48 months.

• Topic Area 2 – Mines & Metals Pilots – All Industries

  • Total funding: up to $200 million.

  • Approximate number of awards: 0–10.

  • Approximate award size: $10 million–$75 million per project.

  • Minimum cost share: 20% of total project costs.

  • Approximate project period: up to 48 months.

Actual award sizes and number of awards will depend on appropriations, application quality, and DOE priorities.

What could I use the funding for?

Program Goals and Objectives:

This NOFO invests in American industrial facilities that have the potential to produce valuable critical materials from existing industrial processes and legacy waste streams. Industries such as mining and mineral processing, power generation, coal, oil and gas, specialty metals, and basic materials have the potential to recover valuable materials that will address many of America’s most severe mineral vulnerabilities. The goal of this NOFO is to increase domestic critical material production.

American industrial facilities have enormous potential to recover valuable mineral coproducts and byproducts from ongoing operations and legacy waste streams such as mine tailings, impoundments, and coal ash. To de-risk industry investments, the technology for recovering these materials must be piloted under real-world conditions and at a scale relevant to each industry.

This NOFO will support the design, construction, and operation of large (1:50 scale or larger), ‘right-sized’ pilot processing systems at domestic industrial facilities. Successful pilots may produce a wide variety of critical material products, including oxides, salts, metals, alloys, and non-critical material value-added products.

DOE envisions that the large pilots will generate critical information resulting in near-term commercial project viability. Successful pilots will reduce technical uncertainty and financial risk prior to commercial deployment. Should funding and DOE goals align, NOFO award recipients may be considered eligible for possible follow-on scale-up funding opportunities, should DOE pursue such ventures.

Expected Performance Goals:

Performers will design, construct, and operate large pilot facilities (1:50 scale or larger) to produce critical materials necessary for our energy, defense, and economic security and to de-risk commercial scale production technologies to grow new economic and manufacturing opportunities.

Projects will produce qualified market-ready critical material products and other value-added materials with potential offtake agreements. Projects will show they are on track to meet their pilot objectives by producing defined quantities of critical materials at the proposed scales in each phase, subject to evaluation through go/no-go milestones. In addition, projects will generate the critically needed information and operational data required for the development of a near-term commercial facility within the U.S.

Two topic areas are defined based on eligible feedstock and the technology readiness level (TRL). See the attached Technology Readiness Level Reference for TRL definitions.

• Topic Area 1: Mines & Metals Pilots—Coal-Based Industry

  Small pilot-scale facilities (TRL 5) that have demonstrated the capabilities of producing REE and other critical materials from coal-based resources shall be scaled for design, construction, and operation as large, ‘right-sized’ pilot-scale facilities (TRL 7) for the production of market-ready REE and other critical materials, and for generation of critically essential design information and operational data necessary for near-term, future operation of a commercial processing facility (TRL 8) by no later than 2030.

  Topic Area 1 requires the use of coal and coal byproducts as feedstocks with minor or limited emphasis on the use of other (non-coal) industrial-based mining materials. Domestic coal-based feedstock materials (e.g., lignite, refuse tailings, etc.) and/or industrial coal-based wastes (e.g., prep plant wastes, power generation fly/bottom ash, coal-based AMD, etc.) shall be utilized. REE recovery is the required focus of Topic Area 1, preferably with co-recovery of other critical materials and other value-added materials; Critical materials recovery without REE recovery and other value-added material production without REE recovery are not of interest.

• Topic Area 2: Mines & Metals Pilots—All Industries

  This topic area broadly supports piloting the recovery of valuable critical material byproducts and other value-added products from industrial feedstocks, processes, and process wastes including mine waste. Example projects in Topic Area 2 could include critical material recovery from bauxite residue processing, valorization of zinc processing byproducts (e.g., indium from zinc smelting), and valorization of numerous critical materials from ongoing processing of titanium, phosphorous, lead, oil & gas or other industry wastes or production processes. Impounded or stockpiled waste materials are in scope. Modular, mobile, or fixed sites are in scope.

  In Topic Area 2, the applicant will establish large, pilot-scale facilities for production of valuable critical material byproducts from industry operations and/or wastes at the specific TRL ranges described in the subtopics below. These facilities will generate data and information needed for validation of future, near-term domestic commercial production of market-ready critical materials.

  Topic Area 2 requires the use of feedstocks from industrial feedstocks, processes, or process wastes including mine waste. For example, this may include (1) residual material from processing; (2) process streams, process byproducts, secondary materials, and/or waste materials that are produced by industry’s production; or (3) conventional ore (including monazite, bastnaesite, and/or other domestically mined materials) processing waste or waste materials such as residues, slimes, or below-cutoff grade ore or other mined material.

  Feedstocks for Topic Area 2 can come from all industry sources other than coal-based industry and feedstock materials related to post-consumer and manufacturing scrap recycling.

  Subtopic 2a: Mines & Metals Pilots—All Industries—Prior Bench-Scale Facilities

  Subtopic 2a is focused on industrial processes for critical materials recovery that have been developed at a bench-scale TRL of 4 or 5. The objective of Subtopic 2a is to accelerate technology development that leverages industry’s existing bench-scale (TRL 4) or small pilot-scale (TRL 5) process design concepts and scales those processes or systems for design, construction, and operation of a large, ‘right-sized’ pilot-scale facility (TRL 7).

  Subtopic 2b: Mines & Metals Pilots—All Industries—Prior Pilot-Scale Facilities

  Subtopic 2b is focused on industrial processes for critical materials recovery that have been developed at a pilot-scale TRL of 6 or 7 (7 preferred). The objective of Subtopic 2b is to accelerate technology development that leverages industry’s existing pilot-scale facility (TRL 6 or 7, 7 preferred) process design concepts and scales those processes or systems for design, construction, and operation of a large, ‘right-sized’ pilot-scale mineral production facility (TRL 7 or 8, 8 preferred).aterial byproducts and other value-added products from industrial feedstocks, processes, and process wastes including mine waste. Feedstocks for Topic Area 2 can come from all industry sources other than coal-based industry and feedstock materials related to post-consumer and manufacturing scrap recycling.

  Previously developed bench-scale efforts identified for Subtopic 2a are expected to advance the TRL of their process/system from 4 or 5 to 7. Previously developed pilot-scale efforts identified for Subtopic 2b are expected to advance the TRL of their process/system from 6 or 7 to 7 or 8.

  Applications to Topic Area 2 can recover any critical material.

• Information and Requirements for both Topic Areas

  The following information applies to all Topic Areas and Subtopics.

  The overall objective is to design, construct, and operate large pilot critical material production facilities (1:50 scale or larger) in the U.S. that will produce critical material byproducts from industrial processes. These pilots will deliver critical data needed for near-term commercial scale-up by using real-world industrial feedstocks and materials for verification and validation of the commercial potential of their processes/system, including, but not limited to:

  • data on the performance of individual processing circuits/systems and their overall integration,

  • process models,

  • capital and operating costs,

  • scaling factors, and

  • feedstock and end-product characterization
  
  Critical Material Byproduct Targets at Domestic Industrial Sites

  Applications must focus on the development of fully operational processing systems, located at and integrated with a domestic industrial site, that will be operated in a continuous/semi-continuous manner to produce market-ready critical materials. DOE Critical Materials include all minerals on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) List of Critical Minerals plus additional materials for energy. It is within scope to produce any market-ready critical material including critical material concentrates, high purity materials, or material commodities such as mixed oxides, salts, alloys, etc.

  Applicants are encouraged to consider production of materials that support both energy security and national defense needs. Applicants are also encouraged to reference the DOE Critical Materials List12 and USGS 2025 Mineral Commodity Summaries Report.13 Of particular interest are the production of critical materials with low or zero current domestic production. Critical materials with limited domestic production include arsenic, antimony, bismuth, chromium, fluorine, gallium, germanium, graphite, indium, manganese, magnesium, niobium, scandium, tantalum, tin, tungsten, rare earth elements, and yttrium.

  Large Pilot-Scale Facility Size and Operational Information

  The large (1:50 scale or larger) pilot-scale systems of interest in this NOFO should be ‘right-sized’ to demonstrate production of critical materials in quantity and purity specifications to support and establish the basis for near-term commercial production of saleable critical materials. The ’right-sized’, large pilot must have a critical material production capacity target of at least 2% (1:50 scale) of a commercial-scale system. For example, if the targeted critical material production of a large pilot-scale facility is 25 metric tons per year (tpy), and it is identified that commercial-scale systems for that targeted material generally produce 300 tpy, then the large pilot-scale facility would produce 25/300 = 8.3% of a commercial-scale system.
  
  Feedstock and Byproduct Critical Material Target

  The intent is to pilot potential byproduct material valorization at industrial sites including ongoing industrial production streams and waste impounded at active sites or sites of former industrial activity. The use of domestic feedstocks is preferred. Any feedstock located within the U.S. is considered domestic regardless of its original source. For example, mine waste at a U.S. facility that was originally mined from foreign territory is considered a domestic feedstock. No federal funding can be used to procure foreign feedstock.

  Applications proposing feedstock materials related to post-consumer and manufacturing scrap recycling are specifically not of interest.

  Applicants must identify the feedstock and quantify the feedstock throughput and critical material production, in terms of metric tons per year, that:

  • has been successfully demonstrated in their existing bench-scale or pilot-scale system on actual (non-simulated) feedstocks,

  • is targeted for their proposed large pilot-scale facility,

  • is generally targeted in ideal commercial-scale systems, and

  • is targeted for future commercial-scale operation at the site.

  Applicants must state the purity specification of the commercial market-ready critical materials to be produced. The large pilot projects must aim to meet specific quantity and purity standards for the critical material(s) produced or explain why that is not technically, operationally, or economically feasible or appropriate for this project.

  In addition, applicants must describe the overall impact of the large pilot-scale system, as well as a potential future commercial-scale system, on the foreign import reliance for each critical material produced. For example, the large pilot-scale system may reduce import reliance of a specific critical material from 90% to possibly 85% and a future commercial-scale system may further reduce the import reliance to possibly 50%.

  Projects must utilize feedstock materials that are sufficiently abundant to support the awarded project and maintain future pilot operational capacity for a minimum of five years. Applicants must provide evidence of material availability in the quantity needed to fulfill this 5-year requirement. A letter of support should be included in the application from all companies, agencies, or other parties that have ownership/rights to any proposed feedstock materials to allow large pilot-scale facility operation for the performance of the award (e.g., if utilizing coal ash, please provide a letter of support from the power or coal company who is producing the ash). If no letters of support can be obtained, applicants must provide an explanation in the Technical Volume as to why they are not necessary, or how the necessary feedstock is intended to be obtained.

  Large pilot-scale facilities are encouraged to exhibit feedstock flexibility, enabling them to process multiple feedstock types (e.g., bauxite red mud, kaolinite clay, and/or phosphate wastes) within the same facility, though not necessarily concurrently. Strategies that bolster pilot facility resilience by processing diverse feedstocks or offering modularity or mobility are particularly encouraged. Pilot production of multiple critical materials is also encouraged.

  Facility Technical Feasibility and Prior Work

  Applicants are required to:

  • Provide information that demonstrates the technical feasibility of their existing technology for processing the proposed feedstock to produce the critical material(s) of interest at their application’s starting TRL. Actual (non-simulated) feedstock materials must have been used with processes operated in a continuous/semi-continuous manner.

  • Submit photographs of existing systems to demonstrate existing process scale and capabilities.

  • Provide an estimate of the time to acquire any required site permits and time for construction. These estimates will be revised with actual timelines during project execution.

  Applicants should include information relevant to costing, such as Feasibility Studies (pre-Front End Engineering and Design (FEED) based on an AACE Class 4 Cost Estimate25) in the Application Package. Each large-scale pilot is required to be designed, constructed, and operated in a manner to generate relevant new information to aid future development of a commercial system (TRL 8, FEED Study based on an AACE Class 3 Cost Estimate). Development of a FEED Study for the future commercial system is not within scope of this NOFO.

  Where separation, extraction, and recovery processes have been developed by industry, process flowsheets (to the extent that non-proprietary information can be made available) and critical material recovery performance should be described.

Are there any additional benefits I would receive?

Beyond direct funding, this NOFO offers several strategic advantages for companies advancing large pilot-scale critical mineral recovery technologies:

Market Readiness and Investor Confidence
DOE-supported pilot facilities are positioned as a critical bridge to commercialization. Successfully operating a DOE-funded pilot—using real industrial feedstocks at meaningful scale—signals to customers, strategic partners, and investors that your technology is technically validated, financially de-risked, and ready for larger commercial deployment.

Risk Reduction and Safer Scale-Up
The program is structured to help teams identify technical, operational, and integration risks before committing to full-scale capital build-out. Generating continuous or semi-continuous operational data under DOE oversight gives companies greater certainty around project feasibility, cost structure, and long-term performance.

National-Level Visibility and Ecosystem Access
Participation in a DOE-funded pilot often increases visibility within federal agencies, national labs, and the broader critical minerals sector. Awardees are well-positioned for future federal contracting, R&D collaboration, and follow-on scale-up opportunities—subject to DOE priorities and merit review.

Technology Validation that Strengthens Supply Chain Positioning
Producing tonnage-level critical material outputs under DOE-supported conditions enhances credibility with downstream processors and manufacturers. This validation helps companies form off-take relationships, strategic partnerships, and potential commercial agreements.

Workforce, Skills, and Operational Capabilities
Standing up a pilot facility develops advanced operational expertise within your organization—expertise that becomes a competitive advantage when transitioning to full commercial-scale deployment and building long-term U.S.-based critical materials infrastructure.

Collectively, these benefits reinforce domestic supply chain resilience and strengthen a company’s strategic position in the emerging U.S. critical minerals and materials ecosystem.

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding?

• Application Deadline: December 15, 2025, 5:00 pm EST

• Anticipated Selection Notification Date: January 16, 2026

• Anticipated Conditional Award Date: January 23, 2026

• Anticipated Award Date: June 15, 2026

• Estimated Period of Performance: June 15, 2026 – June 14, 2030 (up to ~48 months)

Where does this funding come from?

Funding for DE-FOA-0003583 comes from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), specifically Section 41003(b)-(c), and uses FY 2024–2026 funds. The NOFO is issued by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy and Carbon Management (FECM), and administered by the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL).

Who is eligible to apply?

The NOFO is open primarily to domestic entities as recipients or subrecipients, including:

• Institutions of higher education

• For-profit organizations

• Nonprofit organizations

• State and local governmental entities

• Indian Tribes (as defined in 25 U.S.C. § 5304)

To qualify as a domestic entity, an organization must:

• Be organized, chartered, incorporated, or otherwise formed under the laws of a U.S. state or territory.

• Have its principal place of business in the United States.

• Have majority U.S. ownership and control.

• Have a physical place of business in the United States.

What companies and projects are likely to win?

Proposals will be scored according to the following criteria:

Scientific and Technical Merit (50%) – Projects that demonstrate strong scientific grounding, a clear understanding of critical materials recovery, a credible pilot concept, and a realistic commercialization pathway. Competitive proposals show how the pilot is “right-sized” for near-term scale-up and may leverage multiple feedstocks or produce multiple critical material products.

Technical Approach (30%) – Proposals with a well-structured SOPO and Project Management Plan, the ability to begin operations quickly, and a clear path to steady-state critical material production. High-scoring projects show meaningful tonnage potential, robust risk mitigation, and a logical workplan tied to impactful commercial outcomes.

Team Capabilities (20%) – Applicants with strong financial stability, the ability to meet the 20% cost share, and demonstrated experience operating pilot facilities or complex processing systems. Competitive teams typically include industry partners, off-take relationships, established roles, and adequate facilities and equipment.

Additional Selection Factors – Projects that diversify feedstocks or regions, contribute meaningfully to the DOE critical materials portfolio, create high-quality U.S. jobs, align with Buy America preferences, and show a credible path to a future commercial facility are more likely to be selected.

Projects that can stand up large, U.S.-based pilot operations and demonstrate a high-confidence pathway to commercial deployment will be the strongest contenders.

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

DOE anticipates awarding cooperative agreements under this NOFO, which include a statement of DOE’s “substantial involvement” in the work performed under the resulting awards. For cooperative agreements, DOE does not limit its involvement to the administrative requirements of the award. Instead, DOE has substantial involvement in the direction and redirection of the technical aspects of the project. DOE’s substantial involvement in resulting awards may include the following:

A. DOE shares responsibility with the recipient for the management, control, direction, and performance of the project.

B. DOE may intervene in the conduct or performance of work under this award for programmatic reasons. Intervention includes the interruption or modification of the conduct or performance of project activities.

C. DOE may redirect or discontinue funding the project based on the outcome of DOE’s evaluation of the project at the Go/No-Go decision point(s).

D. DOE participates in major project decision-making processes.

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

For a first-time applicant, preparing a competitive submission will likely take 160–200 hours in total.

How can BW&CO help?

Our team specializes in complex federal R&D proposals and can:

• Triple your likelihood of success through proven strategy and insider-aligned proposal development

• Reduce your time spent on the proposal by 50–80%, letting your team focus on technology and operations

• Ensure you are targeting the best opportunity for your project and positioning your company for long-term growth under Federal & State R&D Initiatives.

How much would BW&CO Charge?

Flat Fee + Success Fee rate can be quoted depending on the size of the project.

Fractional support is $300 per hour, with most projects requiring 80–100 hours of expert support from strategy through submission of full proposal.

For startups, we offer a discounted rate of $250 per hour to make top-tier grant consulting more accessible while maintaining the same level of strategic guidance and proposal quality.

Additional Resources

• See the solicitation here.

Making Obstetrics Care Smart (MOCS) – ARPA-H

Executive Summary:

ARPA-H’s Making Obstetrics Care Smart (MOCS) program, run by the Scalable Solutions Office (SSO), is soliciting proposals under ISO ARPA-H-SOL-26-143 to develop new placenta health tests and noninvasive, wireless, AI-backed monitoring tools that can better predict fetal oxygen status and guide intervention during labor and delivery. Pre-proposal discussions are required between December 15–19, 2025, and full proposals are due by 12:00 PM ET on January 21, 2026 via the ARPA-H Solutions Portal.

How much funding would I receive?

Specific funding amounts are not listed so practically, you should assume that budgets must be tailored to the technical scope required to:

• Develop and validate placenta risk-stratification tools, and/or

• Design, build, and test noninvasive, wireless fetal monitoring technologies integrated with AI/ML decision support.

What could I use the funding for?

Based on the stated technical objectives, allowable work is expected to focus on R&D activities according to these guidelines:

The Problem

• The United States has the highest rate of maternal and infant morbidity and mortality of any wealthy country, despite spending more per capita on maternal care.

• This unacceptable status quo is largely the result of a 50-year-old, imprecise tool used during labor and delivery to monitor babies and determine whether they are getting enough oxygen—a tool called the fetal electronic monitor.  

• Without reliable data, confusion prevails and it’s tough to make smart, informed decisions. Women end up having unnecessary cesarean sections and babies are born with low oxygen levels, which sometimes cause lifelong complications.  

• This confusion leads to the dissolution of trust between patients and the medical system, massive lawsuits, and ultimately can cause medical providers to quit obstetrics, exacerbating the healthcare provider shortage.   

The Solution

• The Making Obstetrics Care Smart (MOCS) program aims to address this combination of problems by developing technology to help families and care teams plan for and have safe deliveries.  

• Our goal is ambitious: use advanced diagnostics and smart technology to make births safe. The program seeks to generate tools to predict both chronic and acute fetal status and provide the best recommendations for intervention, giving peace of mind to the care providers, mothers, and families making choices for critical labor and delivery care.

• MOCS will develop better ways to track a baby’s status during labor. First, developing a new test that will assess the health of the placenta to understand which patients are at high risk for complications during labor. Second, designing new types of noninvasive, wireless sensors and AI-backed technology to gain real-time information about a baby’s oxygen levels and make smart decisions during delivery.  

• If successful, MOCS will enable safe deliveries for all, drastically improving the health of women and children.

Are there any additional benefits I would receive?

Beyond direct funding, competitive ARPA-H programs like MOCS typically create several strategic benefits for companies and teams:

• Government validation and credibility
  Being selected by ARPA-H signals strong technical merit and alignment with high-priority national health goals in maternal and infant outcomes. That endorsement can de-risk you in the eyes of hospitals, payers, strategic partners, and investors.

• Visibility in a critical health domain
  MOCS targets one of the most pressing and visible failures in U.S. healthcare: maternal and infant morbidity and mortality tied to inadequate fetal monitoring. Demonstrated progress here can drive significant attention from media, advocacy groups, and professional societies.

• Access to a curated ecosystem
  The program explicitly aims to convene “the best researchers and collaborators in labor and delivery, including healthcare providers, hospitals, payers, attorneys, and families,” creating a structured network of stakeholders that can accelerate pilots, studies, and adoption.

• Non-dilutive capital to mature your product
  ARPA-H support is non-dilutive, enabling you to build and validate high-risk capabilities—advanced diagnostics, sensors, and AI—without giving up equity. That can translate into stronger valuations in later private rounds or at exit.

• Stronger exit and partnership potential
  A validated, government-funded platform for safer labor and delivery can be attractive to medical device manufacturers, hospital system partners, payers, and women’s health platforms looking to expand into perinatal safety and monitoring.

These strategic benefits are not guaranteed, but they are typical of successful participation in high-profile federal health R&D programs.

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding?

From the publicly available materials:

• Proposers’ Day: December 11, 2025 (hybrid; Washington, DC + virtual).

• Required pre-proposal discussions: December 15–19, 2025 (request via ARPA-H Solutions Portal).

• Full Proposal Due: January 21, 2026 at 12:00 PM ET (submitted via ARPA-H Solutions Portal).

The documents provided do not specify:

• Exact dates for selection decisions,

• Award announcement dates, or

• When funds will be obligated or projects will start.

Where does this funding come from?

Funding is provided by the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H), specifically through its Scalable Solutions Office (SSO), under ISO ARPA-H-SOL-26-143 for the Making Obstetric Care Smart (MOCS) program.

Who is eligible to apply?

Academia, non-profit organizations, for-profit entities, hospitals, community health centers, and non-federal research centers. Non-U.S. entities may participate if compliant with all applicable laws.

What companies and projects are likely to win?

Official scoring criteria have not been released but typical criteria for ARPA-H opportunities are below (in descending importance):

1. Scientific/technical merit—innovative, complete plans with clear deliverables, risks, and mitigations;

2. Contribution & relevance to ARPA-H’s mission—transformative potential, unmet need, commercialization/transition thinking, and IP/software approaches that enable adoption (preference for open standards/OSS where appropriate);

3. Team capabilities/experience—track record delivering similar efforts on budget/schedule;

4. Cost/budget alignment with the technical approach. ARPA-H encourages proposing the best technical solution over low-risk/minimal-uncertainty concepts.

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

• Attendance at Proposers’ Day is optional.
  It is not required for submission or selection, though ARPA-H notes it may help with teaming.

• Pre-proposal discussions are required.
  Pre-proposal discussions between December 15–19, 2025 must be scheduled via the ARPA-H Solutions Portal and are a required step before full proposal submission.

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

For a first-time applicant, preparing a competitive full proposal will likely take 120–160 hours in total.

How can BW&CO help?

Our team specializes in complex federal R&D proposals and can:

• Triple your likelihood of success through proven strategy and insider-aligned proposal development

• Reduce your time spent on the proposal by 50–80%, letting your team focus on technology and operations

• Ensure you are targeting the best opportunity for your project and positioning your company for long-term growth under Federal & State R&D Initiatives.

How much would BW&CO Charge?

Our support is available for $300 per hour.

For startups, we offer a discounted rate of $250 per hour to make top-tier grant consulting more accessible while maintaining the same level of strategic guidance and proposal quality.

Kronos Program – Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO)

Executive Summary:

Space Systems Command’s Kronos CSO is soliciting commercial prototype solutions that strengthen Space Force command and control (C2). Submissions must align to Areas of Interest (AOIs) (Operational C2, Battle Management, Space Intelligence). Phase I requires a brief overview deck (5 slides) and a 5-page white paper; selected offerors may be invited to Phase II for full proposals. Phase I materials are due Dec 11, 2025 at 12:00 pm MT.

How much funding would I receive?

The CSO does not specify dollar amounts but likely in the millions of dollar range. The Government may issue OTA or FAR-based prototype awards; follow-on production is possible if the prototype is successful, subject to available funding and approvals.

What could I use the funding for?

Prototype development aligned to an Area of Interest below:

AOI 01: Operational Command and Control

The Kronos PMO is seeking innovative solutions that enable end-to-end C2 functionality, including planning, preparation, execution, and assessment, within a unified, interoperable framework. Key capabilities include developing and prioritizing commander’s intent; supporting both deliberate and dynamic target development and effects-based operations; conducting capability and feasibility analysis; facilitating commander’s decision-making and force assignment; monitoring real-time mission execution with adaptability to changing conditions; performing combat assessment; and providing comprehensive shared situational awareness across joint, and allied partners. The innovative solution must be scalable, modular, and extensible to support evolving mission needs and emerging technologies. Cloud-native design, DevSecOps practices, AI/ML integration, advanced data management, and zero trust cybersecurity principles are highly desired. Submissions should demonstrate how the proposed solution delivers a cohesive, resilient, and adaptable C2 capability aligned with U.S. Space Force operational priorities and enables agile, data-driven decision-making across the Kronos Enterprise.

AOI 02: Battle Management

The Kronos PMO is seeking an integrated Space Attack Planning Toolkit to enable advanced effects-based planning and coordination across the Kronos Enterprise. The desired solution will support the ability to match space resources to effects-based requirements by synthesizing commander’s guidance, effects, and operational priorities with real-time resource status, including tactical units and ISR assets. The solution should expedite C2 planning and enhance coordination between operational and tactical levels. Key capabilities include integration of tactical C2 assessment tools to enable rapid course of action development, feasibility modeling, probability of success analysis, and collateral impact assessment. The solution should support tactical C2 planning by providing real-time status, warnings, and orders to tactical units, while capturing and managing CONOPs and CONEMPs to ensure coherent command relationships and execution pathways. Additionally, the toolkit must enable tactical C2 monitoring and visualization of ongoing effects, support dynamic guidance updates, and facilitate responsive coordination with tactical units within established rules of engagement. The solution must be modular, scalable, and designed for seamless integration with the broader Kronos C2 architecture, with an emphasis on agility, real-time data integration, and operational relevance.

AOI 03: Space Intelligence

The Kronos PMO is seeking an integrated Intelligence solution to enhance decision advantage for joint and coalition forces across the Kronos Enterprise. The desired solution must unify three core intelligence capabilities: battlespace characterization, collection operations, and targeting. Battlespace characterization should enable continuous understanding and prediction of adversary capabilities, tactics, dispositions, centers of gravity, and courses of action, with dynamic assessments that inform targeting and operational decision-making. Collection operations must support the tasking and synchronization of ISR assets and exploitation resources to acquire actionable data on the operational environment, adversary activity, and infrastructure, closing intelligence gaps and enhancing situational awareness. The targeting component must provide a continuous, analytic process to select, prioritize, and engage targets in alignment with commander objectives, integrating intelligence at every stage of the targeting cycle. The solution must facilitate seamless coordination across functional disciplines and between operational and tactical levels. Scalability, modularity, and interoperability with the broader Kronos C2 architecture are essential, with emphasis on real-time data integration, dynamic visualization, and AI/ML-driven analytic capabilities. Submissions should clearly demonstrate how the solution enhances intelligence-driven operations and supports timely, informed, and effective decision-making across the joint force.

Are there any additional benefits I would receive?

Beyond the direct funding, participation offers major strategic advantages:

Government Validation and Credibility:
Selection through the CSO process signals that your company’s industrialized construction approach meets urgent defense infrastructure modernization goals. That endorsement strengthens credibility with defense primes, base infrastructure offices, and private investors.

Enhanced Market Visibility and Notoriety:
Awardees gain visibility through announcements, government communications, and defense industry press—establishing your firm as a recognized innovator in resilient military housing and off-site manufacturing.

Follow-On Production Opportunities:
Successful prototypes can transition directly to follow-on production agreements without further competition, potentially unlocking multi-installation, multi-year build programs.

Nondilutive Growth and Exit Value:
Winning an OT award provides nondilutive capital and validation, often leading to higher valuations and stronger acquisition potential for defense and construction-tech firms.

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding?

• Phase I (Initial Submission): Overview briefing (≤5 slides plus required Quad Chart) and a 5-page white paper; optional pitch session may be requested.

• Phase II (By Invitation): Technical Approach, Statement of Work, and Price proposal per RFP instructions.

• Awards/Timing: The Government may fund all, some, part of, or none of the proposals and may incrementally fund awards; timing is subject to availability of funds.

Where does this funding come from?

Space Systems Command, Kronos Program of Record, using primarily Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) authority under 10 U.S.C. §§ 4021-4022, with potential for FAR-based contracts where appropriate

Who is eligible to apply?

Offerors proposing innovative commercial prototypes addressing the AOIs (page 5).

What companies and projects are likely to win?

Solutions that show Government interest and technical merit, align with AOIs, demonstrate integration feasibility, modern software practices, and offer reasonable pricing. Vendor viability and security posture are also considered.

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

• Prototype focus; follow-on production not guaranteed.

• All Phase I & II submissions unclassified; Phase II performers should hold required clearances if classified work is proposed.

• Data/IP rights negotiated per DFARS (FAR-based) or via OTA; Government intends to acquire only necessary rights.

• Export controls (ITAR/EAR) and FOCI disclosure apply.

• Non-Government advisors (FFRDC/SETA/SE&I/A&AS) may review under NDAs.

• OCI analysis/mitigation required at Phase II.

• CRWL considerations per FY25 NDAA may affect award eligibility.

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

For a first-time applicant, preparing a competitive powerpoint and white paper will take 75-100 hours in total.

How can BW&CO help?

Our team specializes in complex federal R&D proposals and can:

• Triple your likelihood of success through proven strategy and insider-aligned proposal development

• Reduce your time spent on the proposal by 50–80%, letting your team focus on technology and operations

• Ensure you are targeting the best opportunity for your project and positioning your company for long-term growth.

How much would BW&CO Charge?

Our full service support is available for the Overview Briefing and White Paper for $7000. Pitch & Full proposal quoted upon invitation.

Fractional support is $300 per hour.

For startups, we offer a discounted rate of $250 per hour to make top-tier grant consulting more accessible while maintaining the same level of strategic guidance and proposal quality.

Additional Resources

View the Solicitation Here.

DARPA Track at Big Distances with Track-Before-Detect (TBD2)

Executive Summary:

DARPA’s Strategic Technology Office (STO) is funding the Track at Big Distances with Track-Before-Detect (TBD2) program to develop advanced algorithms and payload designs for real-time space situational awareness in cislunar space. Selected teams may receive multi-million-dollar OTAs to build prototypes over a 15-month effort. Abstracts are due December 4, 2025, and companies should begin preparing materials now to meet the deadline.

How much funding would I receive?

DARPA anticipates multiple OTA prototype awards ranging from approximately $500K to $5M+, depending on technical scope, cost realism, and contribution to program goals. Larger awards are possible for high-complexity payload and algorithm development efforts.

What could I use the funding for?

1.Background

The goal of the TBD2 program is to enable continuous space-based detection and tracking of objects in cislunar space on relevant timelines. This effort will increase the safety of cislunar commercial and civilian traffic contributing to the peaceful use of space for the benefit of all nations and enabling a sustainable space ecosystem. To accomplish this, TBD2 seeks to advance the state of the art for signal processing algorithms so that when combined with commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) or quasi-COTS optical sensors and/or focal plane arrays (FPAs), they can a) detect and track faint objects at gigameter (Gm) distances, b) operate using available onboard processing capabilities, and c) do so on relevant timelines (within hours).

Figure 1: TBD2 seeks to extend space situational awareness beyond GEO to cislunar space

Existing space situational awareness (SSA) capabilities are primarily focused on objects in geosynchronous orbit (GEO) or closer. Extending SSA to cislunar space presents unique challenges as the distances are much greater and the volume of space needing to be scanned is ~1,200 times greater than GEO. Ground-based systems can combine large optics with complex, resource-intensive algorithms to enable cislunar detections, but are limited by their fixed location on the ground, inability to detect or track objects during hours of sunlight, and having to contend with weather and the Earth’s atmosphere. TBD2 seeks to solve this by moving the sensor to space, specifically to the Sun-Earth Lagrangian point 1 (SEL1) in order to negate any blinding of the sensor by the sun and enable a continuous view of most of cislunar space via a single sensor. To achieve this, TBD2 will require a novel approach to signal processing to detect faint objects (magnitude 23) at distances up to 2 Gigameter (Gm), while also minimizing processing time to the point that all cislunar space can be scanned within 12 hours. For a sensor at SEL1, sending image data to the ground for processing would require a continuous high-rate downlink that is impractical, if not infeasible, due to limitations in bandwidth, latency, energy budgets, and relative positions of the sensor and Earth. Therefore, TBD2 aims to develop or adapt signal processing algorithms that can be run in quasi-real time via onboard processing.

In addition to signal processing, TBD2 will also develop two distinct payload designs that optimize the combination of the signal processing with sensors/space-based compute platforms for two distinct scenarios: SEL1 and beyond GEO orbits. While SEL1 is of particular interest, alternate employment options could potentially enable a closer view of certain cislunar areas while also allowing for the detection and tracking of <1-meter objects that could endanger government, commercial or civil space operations. TBD2 will have three final deliverables:
1. The low complexity algorithm software implementation

2. Two payload designs that include the optics/sensor and compute platform combinations to be used for:

a. placement in SEL1.

b. placement in beyond GEO/cislunar orbits.

If successful, TBD2 will improve early warning capabilities for defense and civilian agencies who track potential threats and objects of interest originating from or transiting cislunar space, contributing to the safe and peaceful use of space for all nations. The fully developed signal processing algorithms capable of meeting program metrics and program goals and payload designs approved through Systems Requirements Review (SRR) constitute the Prototypes developed under the TBD2 Program.

TBD2 is a 15-month single-phase effort with two tasks.

Task 1 is to reduce the computational needs (and associated power consumption) of signal processing algorithms needed to detect faint moving objects at distances of millions of kilometers (km), and

Task 2 is to develop a payload design trade study that optimizes quasi-COTS sensors, onboard processors, and algorithms to achieve overall TBD2 goals.

1.2. Program Description/Scope
While many limitations of current approaches for cislunar SSA can be mitigated by placing sensors far from Earth (such as at SEL1), this introduces several technical challenges. Primarily, detecting and tracking faint moving resident space objects (RSOs) of 1 meter from SEL1 requires sensitivity levels capable of detecting objects as faint as 23 visual magnitude.

Achieving such sensitivity with quasi-COTS optics/sensors requires carefully optimized signal processing algorithms, which would traditionally be run via terrestrial compute platforms.

One theoretical path to achieving high sensitivity is through long integration times, stacking hundreds or thousands of image frames to boost signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), but this approach introduces latency which undermines achieving detection within appropriate timelines. While current synthetic tracking and track-before-detect algorithms can theoretically reach these sensitivities, they are computationally expensive—requiring around 300 Trillion Floating-Point Operations Per Second (TFLOPs) (FP32) to operate effectively from SEL1 with limited SNR loss. Addressing this compute need without compromising performance is the main goal of the TBD2 program.

There are several algorithms, generally belonging to the Track-Before-Detect family of Algorithms (TBDAs), developed for or adapted to the detection of faint moving objects in deep space – including near-Earth asteroids, main belt asteroids, and cislunar RSOs. While some methods linearly scale with the number of frames, pixels, and motion hypotheses, alternative strategies may yield sublinear or logarithmic scaling in some dimensions. TBD2 encourages the development of such efficient architectures to enable quasi–real-time onboard detection capability while also maintaining adequate performance.

TBD2 actively encourages exploration of innovative techniques, including but not limited to:

• Coarse-to-fine search methods (e.g., motion-aware pyramidal stacking).

• Radon transforms and their efficient approximations such as the Fast discrete X-ray Transform (FaXT).

• Probabilistic voting schemes to prune velocity hypothesis space over time.

• Techniques developed in the broader Infrared Search and Track (IRST) community combined with cislunar SSA algorithms to reduce complexity, e.g., exploiting their capability of treating hypothesized trajectories stochastically and pruning them early keeping complexity bounded, and their capability to operate at low SNR.

• Multi-sensor per platform designs, as multiple telescopes lower revisit time and reduce computational needs by reducing the number of pictures, shortening integration time, and reducing the number of hypothesized velocities.

DARPA is interested in the performance of TBD2 algorithms in several areas, and the government will provide data sets to test each of these areas individually as well as together. Some of the data sets provided will be real data from an optical sensor, others will be partially synthetic (i.e., real data with fake moving objects added to the data), and others will be totally synthetic data sets.

Data sets will be provided to each performer for “practice” with their approach, while additional data sets will be used for evaluating the algorithms. In general, the number of data sets provided for "practice" will not be sufficient for training Artificial Intelligence (AI)/Machine Learning (ML) algorithms, so AI/ML proposers are responsible for the training of their algorithms. If requested, the government team can provide guidance to each team on how to insert their own “fake” objects for training AI models. It is expected that, over the program period of performance, thousands of data cubes will be analyzed to collect performance statistics. The government has not finalized the data format yet, and the final data format may address discussions between selected performers and the government team.

At the midpoint and conclusion of the period of performance, performer algorithms will be evaluated on a government team-hosted platform to assess accuracy of detection and tracking of dim targets of various magnitudes and required computational power for quasi real-time execution. Each performer will need to provide an executable code that will be run on a common computer they will have access to. At the midpoint and final evaluations, approaches will be evaluated according to the program metrics (Section 1.5), but additional attributes will also be considered:

• Sensitivity vs. integration time tradeoffs.

• Peak TFLOPs and memory (gigabytes) required to store and process intermediate results.

• Astrometric accuracy (comparing output to limits imposed by optics, point spread function (PSF), and photon statistics; RSO velocity estimation accuracy, etc.).

• Weight and rough order of magnitude (ROM) cost of payload and bus.

In addition to the signal processing approaches, performers will be expected to develop two distinct payload designs: one for employment at SEL1, and another for employment in a beyond GEO/cislunar orbit. While SEL1 may be a good location to perform continuous cislunar SSA of ~1m sized RSOs, it is important to also explore additional options, such as orbits beyond GEO and around EMLs (Earth-Moon Lagrangians). These orbits offer closer views of the Moon and the Earth-Moon corridor thus allowing detection and tracking of smaller objects of magnitude 23 (10-20 cm at 200,000-400,000 km), as well as covering the remaining part of cislunar space that is obstructed from SEL1.

Four possible missions for the placements of a few TBD2 sensors include:

1. Monitoring the Earth-Moon corridor

2. Monitoring lunar orbits, including EML1 and EML2

3. Monitoring medium earth orbit (MEO)/GEO orbits

4. The small part of cislunar space that has an obstructed view from SEL1

The payload designs should suggest optimal optics and sensor, algorithm, and compute platform combinations for use at SEL1 and these additional orbits. Pursuing a single payload solution (optics and sensor plus compute platform combination) for the four cislunar missions identified above is strongly encouraged. These payload designs should consider aspects such as:

• Number of telescopes, optical aperture size, and sensor parameters

• SNR detection regimes (background-limited vs. read-noise-limited)

• Platform requirements for imaging at various integration times

• Required computational needs

• Consumed power

• Estimate of payload size, mass, power requirements

• Weight, power consumption, and ROM cost of payload and bus

For the payload design, factors such as payload mass and power consumption are of critical importance. For example, multi-sensor per platform designs are of interest as multiple telescopes reduce the number of pictures and shorten integration time, thus lowering revisit time and reducing the number of hypothesized velocities. Any proposed multi-telescope options would need to quantifiably justify the performance increase at the cost of mass and volume.

The payload designs will be evaluated near the end of the 15-month period of performance via a Systems Requirements Review (SRR) with the government team. This SRR will include examination and evaluation of the functional and performance requirements designed for the individual components (signal processing, computer platform, sensor) and overall payload of the two employment scenarios. The intent is that at the conclusion of the TBD2 program, the SRR-approved payload designs can be used to proceed with the initial system design by a transition partner.

Overall, at the completion of the 15-month period of performance for TBD2, the government’s expectation is to have prototypes of the fully developed signal processing algorithms capable of meeting program metrics and program goals and payload designs that have been approved through SRRs. This will pave the way for designing and building the payload after the end of the program.

Are there any additional benefits I would receive?

Beyond funding, TBD2 awardees gain significant strategic and reputational advantages:

DARPA Validation and Credibility:
Selection under DARPA’s STO signals exceptional technical capability and strategic relevance in defense and space innovation—often accelerating follow-on funding, partnerships, and investor confidence.

Enhanced Market Visibility:
DARPA-funded projects receive national-level attention in defense and aerospace circles, elevating recipients’ profiles as leading-edge space technology providers.

Ecosystem Access:
Participants collaborate with top experts in signal processing, optical sensing, and SSA, building direct connections to DoD transition partners and primes seeking flight-ready technologies.

Nondilutive Growth and Exit Value:
Because TBD2 is nondilutive federal funding, awardees retain IP ownership (with limited government-use rights), strengthening their valuation and commercial leverage for future acquisitions or private investment.

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding?

• Abstracts Due: December 4, 2025, 12:00 PM ET

• Oral Presentation Invitations: by government request, estimated four weeks after abstract submission.

• Awards Announced: Early 2026

• Program Start: Upon award of OTA (15-month duration)

  Funding is typically issued shortly after OTA negotiation and execution, following DARPA’s oral presentation evaluations and selections.

Where does this funding come from?

Funding is provided by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) under its Strategic Technology Office (STO) through Other Transaction Agreements (OTAs) authorized under 10 U.S.C. § 4022 for prototype projects.ds.

Who is eligible to apply?

Eligible applicants include:

• Large and small businesses

• Nontraditional defense contractors (per 10 U.S.C. § 3014)

• Academic and research institutions (per 15 U.S.C. § 638(e)(8))

What companies and projects are likely to win?

DARPA will prioritize teams that demonstrate:

• Proven expertise in signal processing, AI/ML, or SSA algorithms.

• Ability to run real-time detection on space-qualified compute platforms with limited power (≤600W).

• Designs that integrate quasi-COTS optics and sensors with innovative onboard processing.

• Clear performance metrics and feasible payload trade studies for SEL1 and beyond-GEO orbits.
  Collaborations between algorithm developers, optical engineers, and hardware integrators are strongly favored.

1.5. TBD2 Goals, Metrics, and Constraints

The objective of TBD2 is to enable continued space-based detection and tracking of objects in cislunar space within appropriate revisit timelines, thereby increasing the safety of cislunar commercial and civilian traffic and contributing to the peaceful use of space for all nations. The proposed concept is to place optical sensor(s) beyond GEO and use algorithms with reduced computational needs that run on available onboard processing to achieve this, and the program metrics are focused on key parameters for achieving space situational awareness. This includes metrics for detection range and sensitivity, revisit times, and onboard processing power consumption, combined with the ability to achieve positive detections while minimizing the chance of false detections.

In addition to the metrics, several constraints are provided in order to guide proposer solutions. The first constraint is that performers should assume a value of 20% albedo or less (i.e. assume no more than 20% of light is reflected from the RSO’s surface) for all potential RSOs. The second is to have performers assume that their processing time must be equal or less than the integration time when developing their payload trade studies. The third constraint limits any proposed optical aperture to a maximum diameter of 0.5 meters.

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

• All work must be unclassified.

• Cost-sharing may be required only for traditional defense contractors without nontraditional partners.

• Export-controlled technologies must comply with U.S. export laws (ITAR/EAR).

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

For a first-time applicant, preparing a competitive abstract will likely take 40–60 hours in total.

How can BW&CO help?

Our team specializes in complex federal R&D proposals and can:

• Triple your likelihood of success through proven strategy and insider-aligned proposal development

• Reduce your time spent on the proposal by 50–80%, letting your team focus on technology and operations

• Ensure you are targeting the best opportunity for your project and positioning your company for long-term growth.

How much would BW&CO Charge?

Our full service support is available for the Abstract for $4000. Assistance with Oral Presentation quoted upon invitation.

Fractional support is $300 per hour.

For startups, we offer a discounted rate of $250 per hour to make top-tier grant consulting more accessible while maintaining the same level of strategic guidance and proposal quality.

Additional Resources

View the Solicitation here.

Adaptive Manufacturing and Integration at Scale (10^n)

Executive Summary:

The Department of War (using the DIU Commercial Solutions Opening process) is seeking commercial prototypes that demonstrate responsive, adaptive, and scalable production methods (e.g., digital design, AI-enabled software, 3D printing, CNC, automated molding, software-defined manufacturing) to create a resilient domestic space supply chain capable of on-demand production at unprecedented scale.
Responses are due by November 21, 2025, meaning companies should begin preparing today and seek additional help in order to meet this deadline.

How much funding would I receive?

Funding levels are not pre-set. Awards are made under Other Transaction (OT) authority, which allows the government to negotiate prototype agreements of varying scale based on project scope and relevance. Vendors selected for Phase 2 will provide a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) cost estimate. Follow-on production contracts—potentially of significantly larger magnitude—may be awarded without further competition if the prototype is successful.

What could I use the funding for?

Background and Problem Statement: The current domestic space supply chain, is oriented towards low-volume, exquisite production of bespoke components for highly specialized spacecraft. This model involves long lead times, high costs, and minimal bench stock. Suppliers are typically small and specialized entities that produce components in units of tens, not hundreds or thousands.

This legacy approach cannot meet current demand, which is driven by a dramatic increase in heavy lift launch capacity, cadence (trending towards a launch every day),  and the need for proliferated satellite architectures. The existing exquisite supply chain will not scale without significant government investment and is unlikely to achieve the production levels needed to support the warfighter in times of conflict.

In response, the Department of War (DoW) is seeking commercial solutions to address production rate and capacity challenges in the U.S. space supply chain. This initiative aims to leverage digital design, AI-enabled software, adaptive manufacturing, and agile testing to rapidly produce dual- use space systems on demand and at commercial scale. Developing responsive, scalable and affordable  space systems is critical for maintaining U.S. technological leadership in the space domain.

The Desired Solution and Key Objectives

The DoW seeks commercial solutions to prototype and demonstrate responsive and adaptive production methods (e.g., design for manufacturing (DFM), artificial intelligence (AI), 3D printing, computer numerical control (CNC), automated molding, software-defined manufacturing) with the goal of creating a resilient, adaptive, and agile domestic space supply chain capable of on-demand production at an unprecedented scale.

Key objectives include:

• Achieve economies of scale in the U.S. space supply chain 

• Disrupt DoW’s dependence on exquisite sources of parts requiring long lead times

• Demonstrate on-demand production rates of hundreds of units per month (10²/mo) to thousands per year (≥10³/yr).

• Team commercial suppliers, advanced manufacturers, and defense integrators to address critical supply chain shortfalls as appropriate.

• Accelerate the advancement of space manufacturing readiness level (MRL).

• Employ an agile Design-Build-Test and Validate/Qualify iterative process to retain technological relevance.

Participant Roles

We will form teaming arrangements from the down-selected companies to collectively meet the needs of this AOI through an iterative process of digital design, adaptive building, operational test, and independent qualification.

Companies applying should identify with one of the following roles:

• Defense Integrators: Defense contractors with a successful history of executing DoW contracts for system-level production units (e.g., spacecraft, aerospace systems).

• Adaptive Manufacturers: Established companies experienced in scaling design-to-production throughput, including smart factories and agile supply chains.

• Disruptive Innovators: Companies of any size that have developed disruptive technologies or manufacturing capabilities that enable economies of scale (e.g., unique software, robotics, AI algorithms).

Success will be measured by the DoW’s ability to demonstrate substantial economies of scale in the mass production and integration of critical space components and systems.

Mandatory Attributes: 

• Must have an established production capability (e.g. technology, process, or facility) to meet the specified production rates (10²/mo or 10³/yr).

• Must be able to collaborate digitally throughout all prototype phases.

• Must be agile and able to source components at the speed of relevance.

• Defense Integrators must be willing to team with selected commercial companies.

Desired Attributes for Compelling Solutions:

• Ready to produce key elements of flight-ready hardware within 3 months of the award.

• Designed for autonomous operation.

• Produced domestically or via friendly foreign supply chains.

• Responsive and cost-effective at production scale.

• Solutions should be commercially viable independent of this specific government use case.

Product/Capabilities Exemplars

There are known critical space manufacturing supply chain bottlenecks and these challenges range from Tier 1 Systems, Tier 2 Sub Systems, Tier 3 Assemblies, Tier 4 Components and Parts, or Tier 5 Hardware and Materials. Examples include, but are not limited to, propulsion tanks, power supplies, star trackers, thrusters, rad-hard electronics, batteries, modems, crypto, harnesses, and/or domestic commodities production for space applications. It is anticipated that defense integrators include discussion of Tier 1 and Tier 2 supply chain bottleneck solutions while adaptive manufacturers and disruptive innovators can highlight specific Tier 3, 4, and 5 products/capabilities they consider candidates for this CSO.  Capabilities that enable scaled production rates (10²/mo or 10³/yr) are an example.  

Are there any additional benefits I would receive?

Beyond the direct funding, participation offers major strategic advantages:

Government Validation and Credibility:
Selection through the DIU CSO process signals that your company’s industrialized construction approach meets urgent defense infrastructure modernization goals. That endorsement strengthens credibility with defense primes, base infrastructure offices, and private investors.

Enhanced Market Visibility and Notoriety:
Awardees gain visibility through DIU announcements, government communications, and defense industry press—establishing your firm as a recognized innovator in resilient military housing and off-site manufacturing.

Follow-On Production Opportunities:
Successful prototypes can transition directly to follow-on production agreements without further competition, potentially unlocking multi-installation, multi-year build programs.

Nondilutive Growth and Exit Value:
Winning an OT award provides nondilutive capital and validation, often leading to higher valuations and stronger acquisition potential for defense and construction-tech firms.

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding?

• Phase 1 Submission Deadline: November 21, 2025 (11:59 PM ET)

• Phase 2 Pitches

• Phase 3 Full Proposals

• Awards: Prototype OT agreements are often executed within 60–90 days of selection under the above process.

Where does this funding come from?

Funding is provided through the Department of War (DoW) under the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) using Other Transaction (OT) authority (10 U.S.C. § 4022). This allows flexible, competitive awards to commercial vendors outside of traditional Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR).

Who is eligible to apply?

Eligible applicants include:

• Defense Integrators – Established DoD contractors capable of system-level production and integration.

• Adaptive Manufacturers – Companies experienced in high-throughput, smart, or autonomous production systems.

• Disruptive Innovators – Any company (including startups and SMEs) offering breakthrough technologies that enable large-scale or cost-efficient production, such as AI-driven design or robotic manufacturing.

What companies and projects are likely to win?

Defense Integrators:

• Have a track record of successful DoD system-level production (e.g., spacecraft or aerospace systems).

• Present clear plans to integrate adaptive manufacturers and innovators into their production pipelines.

• Address Tier 1 and Tier 2 bottlenecks such as propulsion systems, payload integration, or power architectures.

• Demonstrate the ability to rapidly qualify and field flight-ready units at scale.

Adaptive Manufacturers:

• Operate established or emerging smart factories capable of scaling throughput from tens to hundreds or thousands of units per year.

• Showcase agile, AI-enabled, or software-defined production methods (e.g., CNC automation, additive manufacturing, digital twins).

• Emphasize cost-efficient, domestic, and responsive production capacity.

• Target Tier 3 and Tier 4 assemblies or components where scale and speed are critical.

Disruptive Innovators:

• Bring novel technologies or processes that could redefine production economics (e.g., new materials, robotics, or design automation tools).

• Demonstrate a path to integration with larger production ecosystems via teaming with integrators or manufacturers.

• Highlight proof-of-concept or prototype performance showing transformative potential for space manufacturing readiness.

• Focus on Tier 4 and Tier 5 hardware and materials, such as rad-hard electronics, sensors, or propulsion subcomponents.

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

• All production must be domestic or via allied supply chains.

• Companies must comply with ITAR and DoD security requirements.

• Participants must be able to share and collaborate digitally throughout prototype phases.

• Defense integrators are required to team with selected commercial companies.

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

For a first-time applicant, preparing a competitive solutions brief will take 50-75 hours in total.

How can BW&CO help?

Our team specializes in complex federal R&D proposals and can:

• Triple your likelihood of success through proven strategy and insider-aligned proposal development

• Reduce your time spent on the proposal by 50–80%, letting your team focus on technology and operations

• Ensure you are targeting the best opportunity for your project and positioning your company for long-term growth.

How much would BW&CO Charge?

Our full service support is available for the Solution Brief for $5000. Pitch & Full proposal quoted upon invitation.

Fractional support is $300 per hour.

For startups, we offer a discounted rate of $250 per hour to make top-tier grant consulting more accessible while maintaining the same level of strategic guidance and proposal quality.

Additional Resources

View the Solicitation Here.

Barracks Resilience Through Industrialized Construction (BR-IC)

Executive Summary:

The Department of War, through the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU), is soliciting proposals under its Commercial Solutions Opening (CSO) process for the Barracks Resilience Through Industrialized Construction (BR-IC) initiative. This effort seeks to prototype and scale advanced manufacturing and modular construction solutions to modernize and rebuild military barracks that are energy-efficient, durable, and rapidly deployable.
Responses are due by November 25, 2025, meaning companies should begin preparing today and seek additional help in order to meet this deadline.

How much funding would I receive?

Funding levels are not pre-set. Awards are made under Other Transaction (OT) authority, which allows the government to negotiate prototype agreements of varying scale based on project scope and relevance. Vendors selected for Phase 2 will provide a Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) cost estimate. Follow-on production contracts—potentially of significantly larger magnitude—may be awarded without further competition if the prototype is successful.

What could I use the funding for?

Problem Statement

The Department of War (DoW) faces a critical challenge in modernizing its aging infrastructure, particularly barracks, which continue to degrade due to poor environmental conditions, structural inefficiencies, and outdated building systems. Issues such as mold, pests, and inadequate HVAC performance directly affect the health, safety, and morale of service members, ultimately diminishing force readiness and retention.

Current military construction (MILCON) processes are characterized by lengthy design cycles, fragmented delivery models, and escalating costs. These legacy approaches cannot meet the speed or scalability required to align infrastructure modernization with operational tempo and strategic readiness goals.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, in announcing the formation of the Barracks Taskforce on October 7, emphasized this urgency: “How can we expect them to be ready for anything on the battlefield when their own living space is a constant source of stress and frustration?”

To address these challenges, the DoW seeks to prototype and scale advanced manufacturing and industrialized construction (IC) solutions capable of delivering high-quality, energy-efficient, and resilient facilities at accelerated timelines and reduced lifecycle costs. The objective is to establish repeatable, modular design and construction methodologies that can be rapidly deployed across installations—improving quality of life and ensuring the warfighter’s environment matches the standard of excellence expected on the battlefield.

Desired BR-IC Solution Objectives 

DIU is seeking vendor solutions from the commercial sector that directly address the challenges listed above. 

The Department is seeking a transformative approach to military construction, one that leverages controlled factory environments to shift significant portions of work off-site. This model enables automation, mechanization, and digital precision, allowing for simultaneous site preparation and module fabrication while ensuring superior consistency and quality. The result is accelerated delivery, improved cost predictability, and durable, high-performance structures that enhance warfighter readiness both domestically and abroad.

Through this effort, DIU aims to prototype IC solutions for repeatable military facility types, showcasing how commercial innovation can revolutionize defense construction. These prototypes will demonstrate how industrialized building methods can deliver faster timelines, reduced costs, and resilient, scalable infrastructure that meets the evolving demands of the DoW.

Proposed vendor solutions should address the following:

• Innovative IC building methodologies, such as volumetric modular, hybrid, and Kit of Parts

• Structure(s) that are adaptable for a variety of geographical locations, both domestic and international

• Organization of specialized roles that often are siloed in traditional construction which need to come together to effectively implement Industrialized Construction, organized into project delivery lifecycle: Design, Manufacturing, Assembly, and onsite construction

• Advanced manufacturing methodologies that can deliver high-quality barracks that ensure both performance and durability

• Faster delivery by reducing design and build timelines 30% or more compared to traditional construction. Proposed structure(s) must be capable of being designed, reviewed, and approved within a 9 to 12 month time frame

• Greater cost predictability by reducing design and construction costs by 20% or more as compared to traditional construction

• A comprehensive prototype that encompasses BR-IC design, manufacturing, and building methodologies while employing advanced manufacturing techniques

• Adaptable designs for barracks.

• Process Efficiency: Describe in as much detail as possible, the vendor’s unique BR-IC process, through design and prototyping, as well as estimates for increased efficiencies in terms of scale, cost, and deliverability

• High Performance Sustainable Buildings: Buildings must be energy resilient high performance sustainable buildings and validated by a third-party certification

Complementary Capabilities

In addition, the DoW is interested in the following optional complementary capabilities:

• Utilities: Vendors may propose solutions that consider Enhanced Use Leases, Intergovernmental Support Agreement (IGSA), Energy Resilience Contracts and/or Power Purchase Agreements 

• Finance: Vendors may propose private capital investment, with little or no government upfront capital investment. For example, proposals may leverage third party/private financing, either independently or through a public private partnership

• Owned, Operations and Maintenance Services: Vendors may propose post-construction building operations and maintenance services

Vendors are requested to provide BR-IC design, manufacturing, and construction solution briefs that include the following; 

• Effective cost and schedule control in all phases (design, manufacturing, construction, integration, performance and servicing) 

• Provide design construction process improvements

• Demonstrate the use of technology/AI to provide a scalable, faster, and reliable aid to design efforts

• Ensure design for manufacturing and assembly 

DoD building standards are typically established by the Whole Building Design Guide (WBDG) and DoD Unified Facility Criteria (UFC). Vendors are free to propose alternative means of ensuring building longevity, life/safety requirements, and force protection standards are met.

Vendor Solution Brief Submission Options

Vendors have flexibility in how they submit their solution briefs, which can be proposed either independently or through a teaming arrangement:

1. Teaming: Vendors (e.g., Design/Build Firms, Design/Build Joint Ventures) are permitted to submit proposals as part of a team.

2. Scope of Objectives: Vendor or vendor teams may submit a solution brief that addresses one, multiple, or all of the BR-IC objectives.

3. Complementary Capabilities: Vendor or vendor teams may also submit a solution brief that focuses exclusively on one or more of the complementary capabilities.

Expectations 

The successful vendor(s),or team will work collaboratively with DoW personnel to meet the following expectations: 

• Design, manufacture, construct, and commission BR-IC 

• Develop detailed project requirements to meet objectives 

• Submit detailed proposal(s) for completing the design, manufacturing and construction for barracks

• Develop and negotiate design, manufacturing and construction agreements 

• Perform quality control and collaborate with DoW quality management personnel

  • Functions of quality control will be the responsibility of the vendor

  • Functions of quality assurance will reside with the DoW

• Vendor(s) must have the ability to conduct the projects at DoW installations in CONUS and/or OCONUS

Desired solutions should demonstrate relevant and verified experience, as well as descriptions of past examples of designing and constructing BR-IC commercial buildings that are energy efficient with reduced life cycle costs.

Vendors or vendor teams are to provide examples and descriptions of designing and building three completed IC projects within the past 10 years with each project value exceeding $20,000,000. Past building projects must include achievement of sustainable third-party certification. 

The selected vendors/teams will initially demonstrate these approaches by designing, constructing, and commissioning new building(s); some examples include: 

(a) AND/OR ~100,000 SF for ~160 rooms (~300 personnel) multi-story Barracks

(b) AND/OR ~440,000 SF for a 600 room (1200 personnel) multi-story Student Housing

(c) AND/OR ~100,000 SF for 200 rooms (200 personnel) multi-story Unaccompanied Personnel dormitory 

Are there any additional benefits I would receive?

Beyond the direct funding, BR-IC participation offers major strategic advantages:

Government Validation and Credibility:
Selection through the DIU CSO process signals that your company’s industrialized construction approach meets urgent defense infrastructure modernization goals. That endorsement strengthens credibility with defense primes, base infrastructure offices, and private investors.

Enhanced Market Visibility and Notoriety:
Awardees gain visibility through DIU announcements, government communications, and defense industry press—establishing your firm as a recognized innovator in resilient military housing and off-site manufacturing.

Follow-On Production Opportunities:
Successful prototypes can transition directly to follow-on production agreements without further competition, potentially unlocking multi-installation, multi-year build programs.

Nondilutive Growth and Exit Value:
Winning an OT award provides nondilutive capital and validation, often leading to higher valuations and stronger acquisition potential for defense and construction-tech firms.

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding?

• Phase 1 Submission Deadline: November 21, 2025 (11:59 PM ET)

• Phase 2 Pitches

• Phase 3 Full Proposals

• Awards: Prototype OT agreements are often executed within 60–90 days of selection under the above proce

Where does this funding come from?

Funding is provided through the Department of War (DoW) under the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) using Other Transaction (OT) authority (10 U.S.C. § 4022). This allows flexible, competitive awards to commercial vendors outside of traditional Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR).

Who is eligible to apply?

This opportunity is open to both U.S. and international vendors across allied nations. To receive an OT award, companies must satisfy 10 U.S.C. § 4022(d) by demonstrating at least one of the following:

• Significant participation from a nontraditional defense contractor.

• All participants are small businesses.

• At least one-third of project cost is funded with non-Federal sources.

What companies and projects are likely to win?

1. Teams with verified IC delivery experience: three completed IC projects in the last 10 years, each >$20M, with sustainability certification.

2. Solutions demonstrating repeatable, modular IC methodologies that:

   • Cut design/build timelines by ≥30% (capable of 9–12 month design/review/approval),

   • Improve cost predictability by ≥20%, and

   • Deliver durable, energy-resilient, high-performance facilities across CONUS/OCONUS.

3. Organizations showing integrated capability across Design → Manufacturing → Assembly → On-site construction, strong quality control, and scalable delivery.

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

• Companies must be registered in SAM.gov prior to award.

• Proposals must comply with CSO HQ0845-20-S-C001 evaluation criteria.

• Vendors must meet DoD building standards (Whole Building Design Guide and Unified Facility Criteria) or propose equivalent alternatives ensuring durability and force protection.

• Projects will be conducted at DoW installations in CONUS and/or OCONUS locations.

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

For a first-time applicant, preparing a competitive solutions brief will take 50-75 hours in total.

How can BW&CO help?

Our team specializes in complex federal R&D proposals and can:

• Triple your likelihood of success through proven strategy and insider-aligned proposal development

• Reduce your time spent on the proposal by 50–80%, letting your team focus on technology and operations

• Ensure you are targeting the best opportunity for your project and positioning your company for long-term growth.

How much would BW&CO Charge?

Our full service support is available for the Solution Brief for $5000. Pitch & Full proposal quoted upon invitation.

Fractional support is $300 per hour.

For startups, we offer a discounted rate of $250 per hour to make top-tier grant consulting more accessible while maintaining the same level of strategic guidance and proposal quality.

Additional Resources

View the Solicitation Here.

NIH STTR RFA-DA-25-047: Seeking Products to Address Social Needs Impacting Substance Use Disorders (SUD)

Executive Summary:

The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) is awarding up to $2.0 million per project for U.S. small businesses to develop technologies addressing social needs that impact substance use disorders (SUD), excluding alcohol use disorder. Applications are due March 13, 2026. Companies should start preparing at least 16 weeks prior to ensure registration and submission compliance. Partnership with a research organization is required.

How much funding would I receive?

$314,363 for Phase I projects (up to 6 months).

What could I use the funding for?

A variety of products addressing the individual-level factors of health-related social needs (HRSN) should be considered to confront SUD. Additionally, technology, such as telemedicine and mobile health applications, provide an opportunity to address HRSN with the ability to provide tested, accessible, and ongoing solutions for individuals who are the most at-risk for these risk factors that impact SUD. According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administratio (SAMHSA), technology has several advantages in addressing SUD including decreased waiting periods, decreased stigma impact and increased privacy. The advantages of technology are also exhibited in its capability to make treatment services more accessible and convenient, which can aid to improve SUD outcomes and reduce disparities.

Regarding this NOFO, a product is any source of value for the end-users and customers. A product can be a physical/tangible device as well as digital services, software as a service, or non-physical/non-tangible products (including but not limited to digital applications, digital platforms, or service models). These and other comparable examples could be considered eligible products. Products can be the result of original scientific research, recycled existing technology for SUD, extension of an observation into SUD area, development of a new business model or distribution/delivery channel that reveals currently unseen value, or the delivery of a product or service to disregarded consumers.

The National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA) supports the development of evidence-based SUD care and treatment technology from multiple funding opportunities published elsewhere. The eligible small businesses can submit applications focusing on products that reduce costs, time, and/or increase access in addressing HRSN including, but not limited to, housing instability, non-medical transportation, food insecurity, utility needs, and personal safety. The products should provide the best feasible and accessible opportunities for the intended end-users to measurably improve their HRSN and SUD. Products of interest that address, but are not limited to, the following HRSN include:

• Access to housing services.

• Soft skills development and/or job training (e.g., in entrepreneurship, literacy, financial literacy, IT skills) for employment.

• Stigma and nurture compassion.

• Family healthy behaviors, social skills, community opportunities, and productive social involvement.

• Social stability (community, tradition, faith, family), self-regulation, and resilience.

• Well-being (mental, physical, spiritual), communal belonging, and positive productivity.

• Social support networks for recovery, engagement with care, and/or access to needed services.

• Successful community reintegration for formerly incarcerated people.

• Social needs service engagement and coordination among justice-involved organizations.

• Employer education to hire, retain, and facilitate treatment for employees seeking help for SUD.

Are there any additional benefits I would receive?

Beyond the formal funding award, awardees gain several strategic advantages:

• Government Validation and Credibility:
  Being selected for an NIH-backed STTR grant signals technical excellence and alignment with national health and biomedical priorities. This validation builds investor and partner confidence.

• Enhanced Visibility and Market Recognition:
  Awardees are featured in NIH and HHS announcements, helping attract partnerships, media attention, and future contracting opportunities.

• Access to the Federal Innovation Ecosystem:
  Recipients join a national network of researchers and agencies advancing life science innovation, often opening doors to collaborations with NIH laboratories and federal health programs.

• Stronger Commercial and Exit Potential:
  By maturing technology through nondilutive funding, companies strengthen valuation, de-risk commercialization, and increase attractiveness for acquisition or follow-on private investment.

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding?

• Next Application Deadlines: March 13, 2026

• Scientific Review: July following submission

• Council Review: October

• Earliest Start Date: December of the same year

Where does this funding come from?

Funding comes from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, with statutory set-asides requiring NIH, CDC, and FDA to devote portions of their extramural R&D budgets (3.2% for SBIR, 0.45% for STTR) to support small business innovation.

Who is eligible to apply?

Applicants must be U.S. small business concerns (SBCs) that:

• Are organized for profit with a U.S. place of business.

• Have ≤ 500 employees including affiliates.

• Are > 50% owned by U.S. citizens or permanent residents, qualifying U.S. entities, or combinations thereof.

• Must partner with a nonprofit research institution.

What companies and projects are likely to win?

Projects that demonstrate:

• Measurable improvement in one or more social determinants of health affecting SUD outcomes.

• Use technology (digital, AI-enabled, or connected health tools) to reduce costs, stigma, or access barriers.

• Strong scientific rationale and feasibility,

• High commercialization potential, supported by a realistic market and regulatory strategy, and

• Align with NIDA’s goals to integrate behavioral health and social needs solutions into recovery ecosystems

Competitive applicants often have an early prototype, preliminary data, and a defined path to market adoption.

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

• Companies must partner with a research institution who performs a minimum of 30% and maximum of 60% of the work.

• Companies must complete multiple federal registrations (SAM.gov, Grants.gov, eRA Commons, SBA Company Registry) before applying.

• Foreign entities are not eligible.

• Disclosure of foreign affiliations and compliance with national security screening are mandatory. Currently we do not recommend any sort of foreign affiliation.

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

For a first-time applicant, preparing a competitive submission will likely take 120–200 hours in total.

How can BW&CO help?

Our team specializes in complex federal R&D proposals and can:

• Triple your likelihood of success through proven strategy and insider-aligned proposal development

• Reduce your time spent on the proposal by 50–80%, letting your team focus on technology and operations

• Ensure you are targeting the best opportunity for your project and positioning your company for long-term growth.

How much would BW&CO Charge?

Our full service support is available for

• Phase I: $9,000 Flat Fee + a 5% Success Fee.

• Phase II: $13,000 Flat Fee + a 5% Success Fee.

• Fast-Track: $13,000 Flat Fee + a 5% Success Fee.

Fractional support is $300 per hour.

For startups, we offer a discounted rate of $250 per hour to make top-tier grant consulting more accessible while maintaining the same level of strategic guidance and proposal quality.

Additional Resources

View the RFA Here