DAF SBIR DAF26BZ06-NV035: Quantum Memory for Secure Communication
Quick Answer
DAF26BZ06-NV035 is a Department of the Air Force SBIR Phase I topic under the DAF 2026 SBIR Broad Agency Announcement, Release 6. The Air Force wants advanced quantum memory systems that enable secure communication within quantum networks, with the specific aim of building quantum repeaters that extend the range of Quantum Key Distribution. The problem being solved is stated plainly: current QKD systems are limited by signal loss over long distances, which prevents widespread implementation. Quantum memory is the component that makes a repeater possible, and a repeater is what breaks the distance limit. Awards are up to $250,000 for a period of performance up to 6 months, with a 20 page or slide technical volume limit. The topic opens September 23, 2026 and closes October 21, 2026 through the Defense SBIR/STTR Innovation Portal.
The maturity framing is the most important thing to understand before you write. The topic states that at project start the technology is at Technology Readiness Level 2, focusing on application concept formulation, and that Phase I success means demonstrating TRL 3 by drafting a feasibility report and a detailed architecture plan for a Phase II prototype of a lab-based test bench capable of end-to-end quantum information transport. That is a design and analysis deliverable, not a working repeater. Six months and $250,000 buys a scientific approach, a conceptual design, a feasibility report, and an architecture plan, with laboratory validation activity where you can achieve it.
Topic At a Glance
Topic number: DAF26BZ06-NV035
Title: Quantum Memory for Secure Communication
Solicitation: Department of the Air Force 2026 SBIR Broad Agency Announcement (BAA), Release 6, Phase I Proposal Submission Instructions
Program type: Phase I
Award maximum value: $250,000
Award maximum duration: 6 months
Technical volume page limit: 20 pages or slides
OUSD (R&E) Critical Technology Area: Quantum and Battlefield Information Dominance (Q-BID)
Component Technology Priority Areas: Integrated Sensing and Cyber; Integrated Network System-of-Systems; Quantum Science; Emerging Threat Reduction; Sustainment and Logistics
Projected CMMC level requirement: Level 2 (Self)
Export control status: no topic-level ITAR or EAR restriction paragraph appears on this topic, unlike NV034 in the same release. General disclosure obligations still apply
Technology readiness at project start: TRL 2, application concept formulation
Phase I success criterion: demonstrate TRL 3
Target at end of Phase II: the topic states TRL 5 in one place and TRL 4 to 6 in another
Phase III target: TRL 7
Minimum work performed in house: two-thirds of the research or analytical effort
Subcontract and consultant cap: one-third of total contract price, profit excluded
Technical and Business Assistance: up to $6,500 per Phase I award
Type size: no smaller than 10-point
Topic open date: September 23, 2026
Proposal deadline: October 21, 2026, at the time stated in the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA
Selection timeline: within approximately 90 calendar days of solicitation close, meaning on or about January 19, 2027
Submission portal: DSIP at dodsbirsttr.mil
Keywords: quantum memory, quantum key distribution, secure communication, quantum networks, photonic qubits, quantum repeaters, long-range communication, cybersecurity, TRL 2-5, quantum science, AFWERX, strategic communications, emerging threats
Note on the deadline time. The DAF instructions direct offerors to the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA for the proposal submission deadline date and time. DoW SBIR deadlines are ordinarily 12:00 p.m. Eastern on the close date. Confirm the exact time on the live DSIP posting rather than assuming end of day.
What the Air Force Is Actually Looking For
The threat and the gap
The topic opens with the strategic motivation. The rapid advancement of quantum computing poses a significant challenge to traditional encryption methods, potentially compromising the security of digital communications. Quantum Key Distribution provides a solution by using quantum properties to generate secure encryption keys.
Then the limitation. Current QKD systems are limited by signal loss over long distances, preventing widespread implementation. This project seeks to address that limitation by developing advanced quantum memory systems, or quantum repeaters, designed to extend the range and fidelity of quantum signals. These repeaters will enable efficient Quantum Key Distribution over long distances, thereby enhancing secure communications for the Air Force's digital infrastructure.
That framing sets your problem statement. You are not being asked to improve QKD key rates at existing distances. You are being asked to attack the distance limit itself, and quantum memory is the enabling component.
The objective
The objective is to develop and demonstrate advanced quantum memory systems essential for enabling secure communication within quantum networks. The primary goal is to enhance the storage and transmission capabilities of photonic qubits, ensuring high coherence and minimal loss over extended distances. This will facilitate the creation of scalable quantum repeater systems that significantly improve the efficiency and robustness of Quantum Key Distribution.
By focusing on the foundational aspects of quantum memory hardware, the effort aims to address critical challenges in quantum communication, providing a reliable solution that can be adapted and expanded upon in subsequent phases. The results from this phase will establish a solid technical foundation, allowing for iterative improvement and seamless integration with existing and future quantum entanglement sources and networks.
Two phrases deserve attention. "Foundational aspects of quantum memory hardware" tells you the Air Force expects hardware-oriented work rather than protocol or software analysis. And "seamless integration with existing and future quantum entanglement sources and networks" tells you that interoperability with entanglement sources is part of the design problem, not an afterthought, which the Phase II description reinforces.
The primary goal is restated as developing and demonstrating advanced quantum memory systems capable of high coherence and minimal loss, essential for reliable communication within quantum networks.
The Phase I tasks
The topic describes Phase I twice, at different levels of specificity, and the two descriptions should be read together rather than treated as alternatives.
The first description says the required efforts will commence with foundational research and development of quantum memory hardware. In Phase I, the tasks will involve designing quantum memory materials, developing quantum repeater prototypes, and validating their performance through controlled laboratory experiments. Key activities will include designing and fabricating quantum memory materials aimed at reducing signal decoherence and data loss; developing prototypes capable of storing and transmitting photonic qubits; and conducting laboratory tests to validate the prototypes' performance against defined metrics such as coherence, loss, and noise.
The second, later description is more specific about what Phase I is assessed on. Phase I will assess the feasibility of using quantum memory hardware to enhance Quantum Key Distribution by requiring proposals to detail the scientific approach, develop a conceptual design for a functional quantum memory prototype showcasing its capabilities and potential advantages in both lab and simulated environments. Demonstrate Technology Readiness Level 3 by drafting a feasibility report and a detailed architecture plan for a Phase II prototype of a lab-based test bench capable of end-to-end quantum information transport.
The tension between those two passages is real and worth handling deliberately in your proposal. The first mentions fabricating materials and developing prototypes with laboratory validation. The second sets the assessed deliverable at a feasibility report plus an architecture plan, at TRL 3. Six months and $250,000 will not support meaningful materials fabrication and prototype development from scratch, so the sensible reading is that the assessed Phase I output is the feasibility report, the scientific approach, the conceptual design, and the architecture plan, with whatever laboratory validation you can credibly perform on material or apparatus you already have.
The strongest proposals will be explicit about this. State what design and analysis you will deliver, state what laboratory work you will actually perform in six months and on what existing capability, and do not promise fabrication and validation cycles the schedule cannot hold. Cost realism sits inside the evaluation, and an overpromised quantum hardware schedule is not credible.
The three named Phase I key activities
Use these as structure. Designing and fabricating quantum memory materials aimed at reducing signal decoherence and data loss. Developing prototypes capable of storing and transmitting photonic qubits. Conducting laboratory tests to validate the prototypes' performance against defined metrics, with coherence, loss, and noise given as the examples.
Coherence, loss, and noise is your metric triple. Whatever your memory approach, atomic ensemble, rare-earth doped crystal, solid-state defect center, or another, give predicted values against those three and say how you will measure them.
Minimum deliverables
Minimum deliverables for this project include detailed technical reports, functional quantum memory prototypes, performance evaluation data, and an integration roadmap detailing steps for transition into operational use.
Note that this list is framed as deliverables for the project rather than for Phase I specifically, which is consistent with the functional prototype appearing in the Phase II description. For Phase I, the assessed items are the feasibility report and the architecture plan at TRL 3, with the integration roadmap being a natural Phase I product as well since it is analysis rather than hardware.
The advanced quantum repeater systems developed through this SBIR initiative will significantly enhance the Department of Defense's capabilities in secure communications, positioning the Air Force at the forefront of quantum-secured information transfer.
Phase II
Phase II will focus on developing a prototype quantum repeater and memory system, validating functionality in relevant environments, and achieving TRL 4 to 6. This involves building scalable prototypes, integrating with entangled pair transmission equipment, and rigorous lab testing to meet metrics such as coherence, loss, and security. Successful outcomes will demonstrate transition readiness for development and deployment.
The main Phase II activities are named as enhancing quantum memory systems for increased coherence fidelity and extended transmission distances; integrating prototypes with existing entanglement sources and quantum communication networks; testing the quantum memory systems in simulated and real-world environments to ensure robustness and reliability; and evaluating performance through rigorous data collection and analysis to meet predefined security and operational metrics.
Note the TRL inconsistency in the source. Earlier the topic states that by the end of Phase II the target is to reach TRL 5, demonstrating the integrated system in a relevant environment. The Phase II paragraph states achieving TRL 4 to 6. Those are not the same claim. The safe course is to plan toward TRL 5 in a relevant environment, which satisfies both statements, and to describe your maturity claims in terms of what you will actually demonstrate rather than leaning on a TRL number alone.
Note also that integration with entangled pair transmission equipment and with existing entanglement sources appears in both the objective and the Phase II activities. Your Phase I architecture plan should address the interfaces to an entanglement source, since that is where the Air Force has signaled the system boundary sits.
Phase III
In Phase III, the quantum memory technology will achieve TRL 7, transitioning into secure Department of Defense communication networks and commercial QKD applications. Expected efforts include finalizing integration, extensive testing, obtaining necessary certifications, and establishing production capability. Potential Air Force customers include network and cybersecurity divisions. This addresses critical needs for secure, long-range communication solutions.
Two useful details for your commercialization section. The named Air Force customers are network and cybersecurity divisions, which gives you a concrete internal buyer to reference. And commercial QKD applications are named alongside the defense path, which supports a dual-use case built on financial, utility, and government network security markets rather than an invented one.
The reference list
The topic carries an unusually long reference list, fifteen items, spanning the foundational and the applied. Kimble's "The quantum internet" in Nature 2008. Gisin and Thew, "Quantum communication," Nature Photonics 2007. Afzelius, Simon, de Riedmatten and Gisin on multimode quantum memory based on atomic frequency combs, Physical Review A 2009. Ladd et al, "Quantum computers," Nature 2010. Bussieres et al on prospective applications of optical quantum memories, Journal of Modern Optics 2013. Van Meter, Devitt and Itoh on architecture-dependent execution time of Shor's algorithm, Physical Review A 2007. Bennett and Brassard's 1984 public key distribution and coin tossing paper, listed twice, once in the Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems and Signal Processing and once as the BB84 Protocol citation in Theoretical Computer Science with the note that this is the original QKD protocol. Knill, Laflamme and Milburn on efficient quantum computation with linear optics, Nature 2001. A 2020 Journal of Research of the National Institute of Standards and Technology paper on optical quantum memory and its applications in quantum communication systems. The Quantum Economic Development Consortium. The National Quantum Initiative at quantum.gov. Scarani et al on the security of practical quantum key distribution, Reviews of Modern Physics 2009. Pirandola et al on quantum cryptography, Nature Reviews Physics 2020. And Lucamarini, Yuan, Dynes and Shields on overcoming the rate-distance limit of quantum key distribution without quantum repeaters, Nature 2018.
That last reference is the interesting one, and worth engaging with directly. It describes twin-field QKD, an approach that extends range without quantum repeaters. Its presence in a quantum memory topic's reference list means the Air Force is aware of the repeaterless alternative. A proposal that explains why a memory-based repeater is worth pursuing given that alternative, in terms of ultimate scaling, network topology, or entanglement distribution capability beyond key exchange, is answering a question the reference list implicitly asks. Ignoring it is a missed opportunity.
The inclusion of Afzelius on atomic frequency comb multimode memory and the NIST optical quantum memory review also suggests the government's frame of reference for candidate approaches. The Shor's algorithm and linear optics computation references, by contrast, are context for the threat and for the broader quantum landscape rather than steers on approach.
Funding Allowance and Cost Structure
Award ceiling and realistic scoping
Up to $250,000 across up to 6 months. The topic index states that proposals in excess of this amount will not be considered for evaluation or award, and proposals in excess of this duration will not be considered for evaluation or award.
The instructions add that any per-award or per-topic funding caps are budgetary estimates only and more or less funding may become available. Multiple procurements are planned and anticipated to be awarded as a result of the topic, each proposal is considered a separate procurement and will be evaluated on its own merit, and the Government may award all, some, or none of the proposals. Funding decisions are made with complete disregard to the other awards under the same topic.
For a TRL 2 to TRL 3 quantum hardware effort, six months and $250,000 is a study with supporting laboratory work, not a build. The proposals that read as credible will scope accordingly and will be specific about what existing capability they bring, since nothing meaningful in quantum memory hardware gets built from zero in two quarters.
Contract type
The DAF primarily makes SBIR Phase I and Phase II awards as firm-fixed-price contracts. Awardees are strongly urged to work toward a Defense Contract Audit Agency approved accounting system, since if the company intends to continue work with the Department of War an approved accounting system allows competition in a broader array of acquisition opportunities, including award of cost-reimbursement type contracts.
If no exceptions are taken to an offeror's proposal, the Government may award a contract without negotiations. Therefore the offeror's initial proposal should contain the offeror's best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. If there are questions regarding the award document, contact the Phase I Contracting Officer identified on the cover page. The Government reserves the right to reopen negotiations later if the Contracting Officer determines doing so to be necessary.
Technical and Business Assistance
The DAF will provide up to $6,500 per Phase I award, in addition to the per-topic total identified in the DSIP Volume 3 Cost Proposal.
This BAA Phase I document carries the full detailed TABA request requirements. Awardees can only use TABA funding for the activities outlined in 15 U.S.C. 638(q)(1) and the purposes outlined in 15 U.S.C. 638(q)(1)(A) through (E). Eligible activities include access to a network of scientists and engineers engaged in a wide range of technologies, assistance with product sales, intellectual property protections, cybersecurity assistance, market research, market validation, development of regulations and manufacturing plans, and access to technical and business literature available through online databases. Those activities can be undertaken in furtherance of making better technical decisions concerning such projects, solving technical problems which arise during the conduct of such projects, minimizing technical risks associated with such projects, developing and commercializing new commercial products and processes resulting from such projects including intellectual property protections, and screening for potential foreign involvement in technology development or commercialization activities.
Requests for TABA funding creditable to a TABA provider must include the following or will be subject to denial: the TABA providers; the providers' point of contact, email address, and phone number; an explanation of the provider's unique qualifications to provide the TABA service; the tasks that will be performed by the provider including the purpose and objective of the assistance, with the task milestone list tracking to the milestone payment schedule otherwise provided by the applicant; and total provider cost, number of hours, and labor rates, with average or blended rates acceptable.
If proposing TABA funding to hire new staff, augment staff, or direct staff to conduct or participate in training activities consistent with the purpose of TABA, the following must be included or may be subject to denial: names and positions, business need to be filled or training to be provided; number of employees to be hired, augmented, or directed to participate in training activities; qualifications of employees hired or augmented, or detailed need for training; tasks that will be performed including both a description of the activity and the purpose that it will serve; and total staff or training cost, number of hours, and labor rates.
A detailed request for TABA funding must be included in the Volume 5 Supporting Documents in DSIP. TABA requests that only specify a TABA request value in the Volume 3 Cost Proposal will not be considered.
For a quantum company, access to a network of scientists and engineers and intellectual property protections are the natural fits. Market validation is also worth considering given that the topic names both Air Force network and cybersecurity divisions and commercial QKD as destinations.
Cost volume requirements
Cost information should be provided by completing the Cost Volume in DSIP and including the Cost Volume Itemized Listing. The cost volume detail must be adequate to enable Air Force personnel to determine the purpose, necessity, and reasonableness of each cost element. The DSIP Cost Volume and Itemized Cost Volume Information will not count against the specified page limit, and the itemized listing may also be submitted in Volume 5 under the "Other" dropdown option.
Direct cost materials. Justify costs for materials, parts, and supplies with an itemized list containing types, quantities, prices, and where appropriate purpose. Material costs may include raw materials, parts, subassemblies, components, and manufacturing supplies. On this topic, crystals or other memory media, single photon detectors, lasers, cryogenic consumables, and optics belong here with quantities and prices.
Other direct costs. This includes but is not limited to specialized services such as machining, milling, special testing or analysis, and costs incurred in temporarily using specialized equipment. Proposals including leased hardware must include an adequate lease versus purchase justification. Cryostat time, characterization services, and specialized measurement may sit here.
Direct labor. Identify key personnel by name, if possible, or by labor category, if not. Direct labor hours, labor overhead or fringe benefits, and actual hourly rates for each individual are necessary for the Contracting Officer to determine whether these hours, fringe rates, and hourly rates are fair and reasonable. On a study-weighted Phase I this will be most of the budget, and the credibility of your named quantum scientists matters.
Travel. Travel costs must relate to project needs. Break out travel costs by trip, number of travelers, airfare, per diem, lodging, and similar. The number of trips required, as well as the destination and purpose of each, should be reflected. The instructions recommend budgeting at least one trip to the Air Force location managing the contract.
Subcontracts. Involvement of university or other consultants in the project's planning or research stages may be appropriate. If so, describe in detail and include information in the Cost Volume. The proposed total of consultant fees, facility lease or usage fees, and other subcontract or purchase agreements may not exceed one-third of the total contract price or cost, with profit excluded from the calculation, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Contracting Officer. The SBIR funded work percentage calculation considers both direct and indirect costs after removal of the small business concern's proposed profit. Support subcontract costs with copies of executed agreements that adequately describe the work to be performed, and at a minimum include a Statement of Work with a corresponding detailed Cost Volume for each planned subcontract.
This cap is the practical constraint for quantum memory work, because the field is heavily university-based. One-third of $250,000 is roughly $83,000 for all consultant fees, facility lease and usage fees, and subcontracts combined. If your approach depends on a university group's cryogenic facility and their graduate students, model the arithmetic before you commit, and note that facility usage fees count against the same cap as the subcontract itself.
Special tooling, special test equipment, and material. The inclusion of equipment and materials will be carefully reviewed relative to need and appropriateness to the work proposed. Special tooling and special test equipment purchases must, in the Contracting Officer's opinion, be advantageous to the Government and relate directly to the effort. These toolings or equipment should not be of a type that an offeror would otherwise possess in the normal course of business, and may include items such as innovative instrumentation or automatic test equipment.
Consultants. Provide a separate agreement letter for each consultant, briefly stating what service or assistance will be provided, the number of hours required, and the hourly rate.
Performance of work requirements
For Phase I, a minimum of two-thirds of the research or analytical effort must be performed by the awardee. The DAF measures percentage of work by both direct and indirect costs, not including profit.
Occasionally the DAF will consider deviations from this performance of work requirement. Requests for Performance of Work deviations must be made twice: prior to submission during the topic open period, and as part of the initial proposal submission. For requests prior to the initial proposal submission, the DAF will consider the request and approve or disapprove requesting applicants to proceed with DSIP submission. Upon proposal receipt, the DAF will again consider such requests for approval for the resultant award.
Because quantum memory expertise concentrates in academic groups, this requirement will bind on a number of otherwise strong teams. If your plan is university-centric, either restructure so that two-thirds of the research or analytical effort sits inside the company, or file the pre-submission deviation request in the first week of the open period, since it must occur inside the four week window.
All R/R&D work must be performed in the United States. Based on a rare and unique circumstance, the DAF may approve a particular portion of the R/R&D work to be performed or obtained in a country outside the United States. The awarding Funding Agreement officer must approve each specific condition in writing. Applicants seeking this approval must make the request with their initial proposal submission, and the DAF will not consider these requests prior to proposal submission. Quantum research collaborations are frequently international, so if any collaborator sits abroad, address it.
Export Control, Foreign Nationals, and Personnel Disclosure
This topic does not carry a topic-level ITAR and EAR restriction paragraph, unlike NV034 in the same Phase I release. That absence does not eliminate your obligations.
The Volume 2 Key Personnel requirements apply to every topic in this release. Identify in the Technical Volume all key personnel who will be involved in this project, including information on directly related education, experience, and citizenship. A technical resume of the principal investigator, including a list of publications if any, must be included, and only one principal investigator or project manager can be designated to a proposal at any given time. Concise technical resumes for subcontractors and consultants are also useful.
Identify all U.S. permanent residents to be involved in the project as direct employees, subcontractors, or consultants. Identify all non-U.S. citizens expected to be involved in the project as direct employees, subcontractors, or consultants. For all non-U.S. citizens, in addition to technical resumes, provide countries of origin, the type of visa or work permit under which they are performing, and an explanation of their anticipated level of involvement on this project, as appropriate. Additional information may be requested during negotiations in order to verify the foreign citizen's eligibility to participate on a contract issued as a result of this announcement.
One instruction is easy to get wrong: do not upload information such as Permanent Resident Cards, birth certificates, Social Security Numbers, or other personally identifiable information to the DSIP system. Provide the categories of information requested, not the underlying identity documents.
Quantum research groups are among the most internationally staffed in physical science, so build your key personnel section with this in mind. Note also that the foreign risk evaluation described below explicitly assesses foreign affiliations of covered individuals with entities in foreign countries of concern, including research institutions, which is directly relevant where your team members hold or held academic appointments abroad.
If you are asserting export-controlled status for your own technology, a copy of the certified DD Form 2345, Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement, or evidence of application submission is a Volume 5 document, and approval will be required if the proposal is selected for award.
Proposal Structure: The Seven Volumes
Formatting, and what does not count against the page limit
The Technical Volume should include all graphics and attachments but should not include the Cover Sheet, which is completed separately as Volume 1. Ensure that all graphics are distinguishable in black and white.
The Technical Volume must be no smaller than 10-point on standard 8.5 by 11 inch paper with one-inch margins. This differs from the DAF Direct to Phase II instructions, which require 11-point, so do not carry formatting assumptions across documents.
The Phase I Technical Volume page and slide limits identified for the topics do not include the Cover Sheet, the Cost Volume, or the Cost Volume Itemized Listing. Only the Technical Volume and any enclosures or attachments count toward the page limit. The documents required for upload into Volume 5 under "Other" do not count toward the specified limits. In the interest of equity, pages or slides in excess of the stated limits will not be reviewed.
The limit for this topic is 20 pages or slides. Because the limit is expressed as pages or slides, a slide-format technical volume is acceptable.
Twenty pages is workable here if you resist the urge to write a quantum communication tutorial. The evaluators do not need the background, and the fifteen-item reference list tells you they have it. Spend the pages on your specific memory approach, your predicted coherence, loss, and noise, your architecture plan, and your integration path.
Fraud, Waste and Abuse training must be completed prior to proposal submission, and DSIP will indicate completion of the Volume 6 requirement once the training is complete and certified. Note the criminal warning the instructions carry: knowingly and willfully making false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations may be a felony under 18 U.S.C. Section 1001, punishable by a fine up to $250,000, up to five years in prison, or both.
Volume 1, Cover Sheet
Complete the proposal Cover Sheet in accordance with the instructions provided via DSIP. The technical abstract should include a brief description of the program objectives, a description of the effort, anticipated benefits and commercial applications of the proposed research, and a list of keywords and terms.
The technical abstract of each successful proposal will be submitted to the Office of the Secretary of War for publication and therefore must not contain proprietary or classified information. If selected for funding, the proposal's technical abstract and discussion of anticipated benefits will be publicly released.
Volume 2, Technical Volume
The Phase I technical volume shall contain the required elements below. These instructions supplement the FY26 SBIR BAA, and in addition to the requirements found in the BAA, applicants are required to provide the following information in Volume 2.
Key personnel, as described above.
Phase I Statement of Work outline. The DAF uses the work plan outline as the initial draft of the Phase I Statement of Work. Therefore, do not include proprietary information in the work plan outline. To do so will necessitate a request for revision, if selected, and may delay award.
That instruction matters. Your work plan outline becomes the contract's statement of work, so proprietary content there either ends up in a contract document or triggers a revision cycle that delays award. Keep the detailed physics in the technical volume body and keep the outline at the task and deliverable level.
Include a work plan outline in the following format. Scope, listing the effort's major requirements and specifications. Task Outline, providing a brief outline of the work to be accomplished during the Phase I effort. Milestone Schedule. Deliverables. Progress reports. Final report with SF 298.
The SF 298 is the Report Documentation Page that accompanies a technical report. It is named in the required outline, so plan for it rather than discovering it at closeout.
Volume 3, Cost Volume
Covered above.
Volume 4, Company Commercialization Report
Completion of the CCR as Volume 4 of the proposal submission in DSIP is required. Refer to the FY26 SBIR BAA for full details. Information contained in the CCR will not be considered by the Air Force during proposal evaluations.
Volume 5, Supporting Documents
The following documents may be required if applicable to your proposal. DD Form 2345, for proposals submitted under export-controlled topics. Verification of Eligibility of Small Business Joint Ventures, Attachment 3 to the FY26 SBIR BAA. Technical Data Rights Assertions, if asserting data rights restrictions.
Technical Data Rights Assertions deserve attention on a quantum topic where your memory material, your protocol implementation, or your control approach may be background intellectual property developed with private or prior non-federal funding.
The detailed TABA request, if you are requesting TABA, also goes in Volume 5. Documents uploaded into Volume 5 under "Other" do not count toward the page limit, and the Cost Volume Itemized Listing may also be submitted there.
Volume 6, Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Training
Material can be found in the Volume 6 section of the proposal submission module in DSIP and must be thoroughly reviewed once per year to proceed with proposal submission.
Volume 7, Disclosures of Foreign Affiliations or Relationships to Foreign Countries
Small business concerns must complete the webform in Volume 7 of the DSIP proposal submission. The disclosures will not be accepted as a PDF Supporting Document in Volume 5, and previous versions of this form must not be uploaded to Volume 5. For additional details, refer to the DoW SBIR Program BAA.
How Your Proposal Will Be Evaluated
The criteria live in the BAA
Proposals will be evaluated for overall merit in accordance with the criteria discussed in the FY26 SBIR BAA. The DAF is seeking varying technical and scientific approaches and varying and new technologies that would be responsive to the problem statements and areas of interest in the topic. Multiple procurements are planned and anticipated to be awarded as a result of the topic, each proposal is considered a separate procurement and will be evaluated on its own merit, and the Government may award all, some, or none of the proposals.
This BAA document does not reproduce the evaluation criteria, unlike the DAF Release 6 CSO Phase I instructions which restate Criteria A, B, and C with their relative importance. Read the criteria in the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA before you begin writing, and do not assume the CSO criteria carry over.
Foreign risk evaluation
15 U.S.C. 638 and the Small Business Innovation and Economic Security Act of 2026 require the Department of War, in coordination with the Small Business Administration, to implement a due diligence program to assess security risks presented by small business concerns seeking a federally funded award.
The DAF will evaluate all small business concerns that submit proposals under this release on whether the concern presents a security risk for any reason. The measures include the due diligence process required under 15 U.S.C. 638(vv), disclosures required under 15 U.S.C. 638(g) and (o), and coordination with the intelligence community as defined in section 3 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003), federal law enforcement, and other counterintelligence capabilities of the United States Government.
The DAF will assess using a risk-based approach as appropriate: the cybersecurity practices; patent analysis; employee analysis; foreign ownership of a small business concern seeking an award, including the financial ties and obligations, which shall include surety, equity, and debt obligations, of the concern and employees of the concern to a foreign country, foreign person, or foreign entity; foreign affiliations of a covered individual, owner, or other key personnel of a concern with an entity in a foreign country of concern; investment relationships of a concern with an individual or entity in a foreign country of concern; technology licensing agreements or joint ventures, including joint venture like agreements, with an individual or entity in a foreign country of concern; and business relationships between a covered individual, owner, or other key personnel and an individual or entity in a foreign country of concern.
Employee analysis and foreign affiliations warrant particular attention on this topic. Quantum information science is a globally connected field, and academic affiliations abroad are common among exactly the people you would want as key personnel. Know your team's affiliation history before you propose.
The DAF will also assess proposals utilizing open-source analysis and analytical tools for the nondisclosures of the information set forth in 15 U.S.C. 638(g)(13) or 638(o)(17), and examine any relationship of a concern seeking an award to any entity or individual included on the lists described in 15 U.S.C. 638(g)(16)(D) and 638(o)(20)(D).
If the DAF assesses that a concern has security risks, the DAF will review the proposal, the evaluation, and the security risks and may choose either to create a plan to mitigate the risks or to not select the proposal for award based upon a totality of the review.
Applicants will be required to disclose, under penalty of perjury, the representations, attestations, and certifications required under 15 U.S.C. 638(g)(13) and 638(o)(17), fulfilled by completing Volume 7. In addition, a written statement with any substantial changes to a foreign disclosure form must be provided to the awarding agency within 30 days of any changes while on a project for the DAF.
The DAF will not make an award if it determines the concern has an owner or covered individual that is party to a malign foreign talent recruitment program; has a business entity, parent company, or subsidiary located in the People's Republic of China or another foreign country of concern; has an owner or covered individual that has a foreign affiliation with a research institution located in the PRC or another foreign country of concern; or has a security risk connecting the concern to an entity, including any affiliates of the entity, or individual on any of the following: the UFLPA Entity List maintained by the Department of Homeland Security; the Non-SDN Chinese Military-Industrial Complex Companies List of the Office of Foreign Assets Control maintained by the Department of the Treasury; the Section 889 Prohibition List established under section 889 of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 and maintained by the Department of War; the list of Chinese Military Companies required under section 1260H of the William M. Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 and maintained by the Department of War; the Military End User List maintained by the Bureau of Industry and Security of the Department of Commerce; the Entity List maintained by the Bureau of Industry and Security; the List of Equipment and Services maintained by the Federal Communications Commission; or the Withhold Release Orders and Findings List maintained by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
The DAF will also not make an award if it determines the concern has a security risk with a primary source that is classified or has a security risk the DAF determines warrants a denial.
If an award is denied on these grounds, the DAF will, as appropriate pursuant to its discretion and in a manner that does not compromise security, provide a notification advising the small business of the determination, the basis for the determination, and a statement that denial of award does not prohibit the concern from being eligible for an award in a subsequent award cycle. The same applies to denials under 15 U.S.C. 638(vv). Note that the malign foreign talent recruitment program provision and the foreign research institution affiliation provision are both mandatory denials, not discretionary judgments.
Venture capital, hedge fund, and private equity ownership
Small business concerns that are owned in majority part by multiple venture capital operating companies, hedge funds, or private equity funds are eligible to submit applications or receive awards for DAF topics.
This is worth stating plainly because the DAF Release 6 BAA Direct to Phase II instructions say the opposite for that document's topic. Within the same BAA cycle, the Phase I instructions permit venture-backed firms and the Direct to Phase II instructions do not. The Phase I instructions govern this topic, so venture-backed quantum companies are eligible here. Check eligibility per document rather than assuming a cycle-wide rule, and consider raising the discrepancy with the DAF SBIR/STTR One Help Desk if you are pursuing both.
Support contractors, status, feedback, and protests
Restrictive notices notwithstanding, proposals may be handled for administrative purposes only by support contractors, which may include but are not limited to TEC Solutions, Inc., APEX, Oasis Systems, Riverside Research, Peerless Technologies, HPC-COM, Mile Two, Montech, Wright Brothers Institute, and MacB (an Alion Company). In addition, only Government employees and technical personnel from the FFRDCs MITRE and Aerospace Corporations working under contract to provide technical support to AF Life Cycle Management Center and Space and Missiles Centers may evaluate proposals. All support contractors are bound by appropriate non-disclosure agreements. Contact the AF SBIR/STTR Contracting Officer with concerns regarding the use of support contractors.
The Principal Investigator and Corporate Official indicated on the Proposal Cover Sheet will be notified by email regarding proposal selection or non-selection. Small businesses will receive a notification for each proposal submitted, so read each notification carefully and note the Proposal Number and Topic Number referenced.
Automated feedback will be provided for Phase I proposals designated Not Selected. Additional feedback may be provided at the sole discretion of the DAF.
Proposals submitted to the DAF are received and evaluated by different organizations, handled by topic. Each organization operates within its own schedule for proposal evaluation and selection, so updates and notification timeframes will vary. If contacted regarding a proposal submission, it is not necessary to request information regarding additional submissions.
The Air Force anticipates that all proposals will be evaluated and selections finalized within approximately 90 calendar days of solicitation close. Refrain from contacting the BAA Contracting Officer for proposal status before that time.
Refer to the DoW SBIR Program BAA for procedures to protest the Announcement. As further prescribed in FAR 33.106(a) and FAR 52.233-2, protests should be submitted to Air Force SBIR/STTR Contracting Officer Daniel J. Brewer. The DAF uses its best efforts to resolve concerns raised by interested parties at the contracting officer level through open and frank discussions, and for agency protests the DAF provides for inexpensive, informal, procedurally simple, and expeditious resolution of protests.
All final reports will be submitted to the awarding DAF organization in accordance with contract instructions. Companies will not submit final reports directly to the Defense Technical Information Center.
How Phase II works
DAF organizations may request Phase II proposals while Phase I technical performance is ongoing or at any time after the conclusion of the period of performance. This decision will be based on the awardee's technical progress, as determined by a DAF Technical Point of Contact review using the Phase II review criteria.
Phase II is the demonstration of the technology found feasible in Phase I. Only Phase I awardees are eligible to submit a Phase II proposal. All Phase I awardees will be sent a notification with the Phase II proposal submittal date and detailed preparation instructions. If the physical or email addresses or firm points of contact have changed since submission of the Phase I proposal, correct information shall be sent to the DAF SBIR/STTR One Help Desk. Phase II dollar values, performance periods, and proposal content will be specified in the Phase II request for proposal. Only one Phase II proposal may be submitted for each Phase I award.
The DAF reserves the right to modify the Phase II submission requirements, and should the requirements change, all Phase I awardees will be notified. The DAF also reserves the right to change any administrative procedures that will improve management of the DAF SBIR/STTR Program at any time.
Because the Phase II request can arrive while Phase I is still running and is based on demonstrated technical progress, producing real results early rather than holding everything for the final report is worth planning for on a six month award.
Timeline and What to Do When
The dates
Topic opens: September 23, 2026
Proposal deadline: October 21, 2026, at the time specified in the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA, ordinarily 12:00 p.m. Eastern. Confirm on DSIP.
Selections finalized: within approximately 90 calendar days of close, on or about January 19, 2027
Period of performance: up to 6 months from award
A working backward plan
Before September 23. Read the evaluation criteria in the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA, since they are not in the component instructions. Work through the reference list, particularly the Lucamarini paper on overcoming the rate-distance limit without repeaters, and form your argument for why a memory-based repeater is the right investment anyway. Settle your memory approach and the predicted coherence, loss, and noise figures. Decide honestly what laboratory work six months supports on capability you already have. Model the two-thirds in-house requirement and the one-third outside cost cap against any university involvement, and if it does not close, file the pre-submission Performance of Work deviation request in the first week of the open period. Map your team's foreign affiliations and any international collaborations. Inventory background intellectual property for Technical Data Rights Assertions. Complete Volume 6 training and verify SAM and DSIP alignment. Send clarifying questions to the DAF SBIR/STTR One Help Desk, which encourages early inquiries, and consider asking about the TRL 5 versus TRL 4 to 6 inconsistency in the Phase II language.
September 23 through October 3. Draft the technical volume against the 20 page limit. Lead with your scientific approach and the conceptual design, then the coherence, loss, and noise projections, then the architecture plan for the Phase II lab-based test bench capable of end-to-end quantum information transport, then the integration path to entanglement sources. Skip the tutorial. Write the work plan outline separately, keeping proprietary detail out of it since it becomes the Statement of Work. Build the milestone schedule early since the TABA task list must track to it.
October 4 through October 12. Build the cost volume and itemized listing, neither of which counts against the page limit. Itemize memory media, detectors, lasers, cryogenic consumables, and optics. Check the one-third cap, remembering that facility usage fees count against it alongside subcontracts. Get separate agreement letters from each consultant and executed agreements with statements of work and detailed cost volumes for each planned subcontract. Budget at least one trip to the Air Force location managing the contract. Write the detailed TABA request into Volume 5 if requesting TABA.
October 13 through October 16. Assemble Volume 5 with Technical Data Rights Assertions and any applicable DD Form 2345, complete the Volume 7 webform, finish the Volume 4 CCR, and run compliance: 20 page limit, 10-point minimum type, one-inch margins, graphics distinguishable in black and white, no PII uploaded to DSIP, no proprietary content in the technical abstract or the work plan outline.
October 17 through October 19. Submit and certify in DSIP.
October 20 through October 21. Buffer only.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is DAF SBIR topic DAF26BZ06-NV035?
DAF26BZ06-NV035 is a Department of the Air Force SBIR Phase I topic titled "Quantum Memory for Secure Communication," released under the DAF 2026 SBIR Broad Agency Announcement, Release 6. It seeks advanced quantum memory systems that enable secure communication within quantum networks, specifically to build quantum repeaters that extend the range and fidelity of Quantum Key Distribution.
How much funding is available under DAF26BZ06-NV035?
Up to $250,000 for a period of performance up to 6 months. Proposals in excess of that amount or duration will not be considered for evaluation or award. Up to $6,500 in Technical and Business Assistance is available per Phase I award, in addition to the per-topic total.
When is the proposal deadline?
The topic closes October 21, 2026. The DAF instructions direct offerors to the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA for the exact submission time, ordinarily 12:00 p.m. Eastern on the close date. Confirm on the live DSIP posting.
When does this topic open?
September 23, 2026, giving a 29 day submission window.
What problem is this topic solving?
Signal loss over long distances in Quantum Key Distribution systems, which the topic says prevents widespread implementation. Quantum memory enables quantum repeaters, and repeaters extend the range and fidelity of quantum signals so that QKD works over long distances.
What technology readiness level does Phase I target?
The technology is at TRL 2 at project start, focusing on application concept formulation. Phase I success is demonstrating TRL 3 by drafting a feasibility report and a detailed architecture plan for a Phase II prototype of a lab-based test bench capable of end-to-end quantum information transport.
What is the actual Phase I deliverable?
The assessed output is a feasibility report plus a detailed architecture plan at TRL 3, supported by a detailed scientific approach and a conceptual design for a functional quantum memory prototype showing its capabilities and potential advantages in both lab and simulated environments. The topic also describes designing quantum memory materials, developing prototypes, and conducting laboratory validation, but six months and $250,000 will not support meaningful fabrication from scratch, so the credible plan pairs the design and analysis deliverables with whatever laboratory work you can perform on existing capability.
Why do the two Phase I descriptions differ?
The topic describes Phase I twice. One passage lists designing and fabricating quantum memory materials, developing prototypes, and laboratory validation. The other sets the assessed criterion at a feasibility report and architecture plan demonstrating TRL 3. Read them together, be explicit in your proposal about which activities you will actually perform in six months, and do not promise fabrication and validation cycles your schedule cannot hold.
What metrics should I address?
Coherence, loss, and noise are named as the defined metrics for laboratory validation in Phase I. Phase II adds security to that list. Give predicted values for coherence, loss, and noise for your approach and say how you will measure each.
What are the minimum deliverables?
The topic lists detailed technical reports, functional quantum memory prototypes, performance evaluation data, and an integration roadmap detailing steps for transition into operational use. Note this is framed as deliverables for the project rather than for Phase I alone, consistent with the functional prototype appearing in the Phase II description.
What happens in Phase II?
Developing a prototype quantum repeater and memory system, validating functionality in relevant environments, and achieving TRL 4 to 6. That involves building scalable prototypes, integrating with entangled pair transmission equipment, and rigorous lab testing against coherence, loss, and security metrics. Named activities include enhancing coherence fidelity and extended transmission distances, integrating with existing entanglement sources and quantum communication networks, testing in simulated and real-world environments, and rigorous data collection against predefined security and operational metrics.
Is the Phase II TRL target 5 or 4 to 6?
The topic says both in different places. Earlier it states that by the end of Phase II the target is to reach TRL 5, demonstrating the integrated system in a relevant environment. The Phase II paragraph states achieving TRL 4 to 6. Planning toward TRL 5 in a relevant environment satisfies both statements. Describe maturity in terms of what you will demonstrate rather than relying on a TRL number alone, and consider asking the One Help Desk during the open period.
What happens in Phase III?
The quantum memory technology will achieve TRL 7, transitioning into secure Department of Defense communication networks and commercial QKD applications. Expected efforts include finalizing integration, extensive testing, obtaining necessary certifications, and establishing production capability. Potential Air Force customers include network and cybersecurity divisions.
Does this topic care about integration with entanglement sources?
Yes, and it says so twice. The objective mentions seamless integration with existing and future quantum entanglement sources and networks, and the Phase II activities name integrating prototypes with existing entanglement sources and quantum communication networks and with entangled pair transmission equipment. Your Phase I architecture plan should address those interfaces.
The reference list includes a paper on QKD without quantum repeaters. Should I address that?
Yes. The Lucamarini, Yuan, Dynes and Shields 2018 Nature paper on overcoming the rate-distance limit of quantum key distribution without quantum repeaters describes an approach that extends range without memory-based repeaters. Its presence in a quantum memory topic's reference list means the government is aware of the alternative. A proposal that explains why a memory-based repeater is worth pursuing anyway, on grounds of ultimate scaling, network topology, or entanglement distribution beyond key exchange, is answering a question the reference list implicitly poses.
Is this topic export controlled?
This topic does not carry a topic-level ITAR and EAR restriction paragraph, unlike NV034 in the same release. Your general disclosure obligations still apply, including identifying all U.S. permanent residents and all non-U.S. citizens involved with countries of origin, visa or work permit type, and anticipated level of involvement. If you are asserting export-controlled status for your own technology, DD Form 2345 is a Volume 5 document.
What identity information should I not upload?
Do not upload Permanent Resident Cards, birth certificates, Social Security Numbers, or other personally identifiable information to the DSIP system. Provide the categories of information requested, meaning countries of origin, visa or work permit type, and level of involvement, not the underlying documents.
How long can my technical volume be?
20 pages or slides. The Technical Volume must be no smaller than 10-point on standard 8.5 by 11 inch paper with one-inch margins. The Cover Sheet, Cost Volume, and Cost Volume Itemized Listing do not count toward the limit; only the Technical Volume and any enclosures or attachments do. Documents uploaded into Volume 5 under "Other" do not count either. Pages or slides in excess of the stated limit will not be reviewed.
How much of the work must my company perform?
For Phase I, a minimum of two-thirds of the research or analytical effort must be performed by the awardee, measured by direct and indirect costs excluding profit. Separately, all consultant fees, facility lease or usage fees, and other subcontract or purchase agreements together may not exceed one-third of the total contract price or cost with profit excluded, unless the Contracting Officer approves otherwise in writing. On a $250,000 award that is roughly $83,000 for all outside costs combined.
My approach depends on a university lab. Is that a problem?
Potentially, and it is the constraint most likely to bind on this topic since quantum memory expertise concentrates in academic groups. Note that facility usage fees count against the same one-third cap as the subcontract itself. Either restructure so two-thirds of the research or analytical effort sits inside the company, or file a Performance of Work deviation request, which must be made prior to submission during the topic open period and again as part of the initial proposal submission.
How will my proposal be evaluated?
The BAA component instructions do not restate the evaluation criteria. They say only that proposals will be evaluated for overall merit in accordance with the criteria discussed in the FY26 SBIR BAA. Read those criteria in the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA before writing, and do not assume the Criteria A, B, and C structure from the DAF CSO instructions applies.
Are venture capital backed companies eligible?
Yes, for this topic. The BAA Phase I instructions state that firms owned in majority part by multiple venture capital operating companies, hedge funds, or private equity funds are eligible for DAF topics. Note that the DAF Release 6 BAA Direct to Phase II instructions state the opposite for that document's topic, so verify eligibility per document rather than per cycle.
Does the Company Commercialization Report affect my score?
No. Completing the CCR as Volume 4 in DSIP is required, but the instructions state information contained in the CCR will not be considered by the Air Force during proposal evaluations.
Why does the work plan outline matter so much?
Because the DAF uses it as the initial draft of the Phase I Statement of Work. The instructions direct you not to include proprietary information in it, warning that doing so will necessitate a request for revision if selected and may delay award. Keep the detailed physics in the technical volume body.
What is TABA and how do I request it?
Up to $6,500 per Phase I award, in addition to the per-topic total, identified in the Volume 3 Cost Proposal. This BAA document carries the full detailed request requirements: provider name, point of contact with email and phone, an explanation of unique qualifications, the tasks with purpose and objective, and total cost with hours and labor rates, with the task milestone list tracking to your milestone payment schedule. The detailed request must be in Volume 5, and requests specifying only a value in Volume 3 will not be considered.
How do I get to Phase II?
DAF organizations may request Phase II proposals while Phase I technical performance is ongoing or at any time after the period of performance concludes, based on the awardee's technical progress as determined by a DAF Technical Point of Contact review. Only Phase I awardees are eligible, all Phase I awardees receive a notification with the submittal date and detailed instructions, and only one Phase II proposal may be submitted for each Phase I award.
When will I hear about selection?
The Air Force anticipates all proposals will be evaluated and selections finalized within approximately 90 calendar days of solicitation close, meaning on or about January 19, 2027. The Principal Investigator and Corporate Official on the cover sheet are notified by email.
Who do I contact with questions?
The AF SBIR/STTR One Help Desk at usaf.team@afsbirsttr.us for general program and proposal preparation questions, and the DAF encourages requesting clarifying information as early as possible because delays constrain its ability to respond. For DSIP submission system issues, dodsbirsupport@reisystems.com. For technical questions about the topics during the pre-announcement and open period, reference the DoW FY26 SBIR BAA. The Air Force SBIR/STTR Contracting Officer is Mr. Daniel J. Brewer at Daniel.Brewer.13@us.af.mil. Address or point of contact changes after submission go to the One Help Desk with the subject line "FY26 SBIR BAA Address Change."
Positioning Advice for Companies Considering This Topic
Scope to what six months and TRL 3 actually mean. The single most common way to lose this topic will be promising a working quantum memory prototype. The assessed deliverable is a feasibility report and an architecture plan. Write a proposal that delivers those excellently, plus laboratory results on capability you already possess, and be explicit that this is the plan rather than leaving the evaluator to wonder whether you understand the constraint.
Name your memory modality and defend it. Atomic ensemble, rare-earth doped crystal, solid-state defect center, or another approach, the choice drives everything about coherence time, bandwidth, wavelength compatibility, and operating temperature. Say which and why, with numbers.
Give the coherence, loss, and noise triple explicitly. Those three are named as the defined metrics. A table with predicted values, measurement methods, and which you consider highest risk earns its space.
Address the telecom wavelength question. QKD infrastructure lives in the telecom bands. If your memory operates elsewhere, the frequency conversion problem and its loss penalty is part of your architecture, and a proposal that omits it looks incomplete to anyone who works in this field.
Engage the repeaterless alternative. The reference list includes the twin-field QKD paper. Explain why memory-based repeaters remain the right long-term investment, whether on scaling, on network topology, or on the entanglement distribution capability that key exchange alone does not provide.
Build the architecture plan as a real deliverable. The Phase I criterion names a detailed architecture plan for a Phase II prototype of a lab-based test bench capable of end-to-end quantum information transport. That phrase is a specification. Show the test bench: sources, memory, channel, detection, synchronization, and the measurements that establish end-to-end transport.
Design for the entanglement source interface. Integration with existing and future entanglement sources appears in both the objective and Phase II. Treat the source as an external interface with defined requirements rather than as something to be figured out later.
Solve the university dependency problem before you write. Two-thirds of the research or analytical effort in house, and all outside costs including facility usage fees under one-third of contract price, is the requirement most likely to disqualify an otherwise strong academic-adjacent team. Either restructure or file the deviation request in the first week of the open period.
Know your team's foreign affiliations. Foreign affiliation with a research institution in a country of concern is a mandatory denial, not a discretionary judgment, and quantum information science is an unusually international field. This is a diligence item, not a paperwork item.
Use the named Phase III customers. Air Force network and cybersecurity divisions are named as potential customers, and commercial QKD applications are named alongside them. That gives you both a defense buyer to reference and a credible commercial market in financial, utility, and government network security, without having to invent one.
Do not write the tutorial. Fifteen references tell you the evaluators know the field. Spend all twenty pages on your approach, your numbers, and your plan.
