DAF STTR DAF26TZ06-DV008: Counter Adversarial GPS Jamming
Quick Answer
DAF26TZ06-DV008 is a Department of the Air Force STTR Direct to Phase II topic under the DAF 2026 STTR Broad Agency Announcement, Release 6. The Air Force wants a general, effective, and robust antijamming framework for GPS signals, and it names a specific and unusual technical route to get there: exceptional-point stochastic resonance combined with modern machine learning. The counterintuitive premise is that adding noise in the right way can improve the signal-to-noise ratio for a weak signal, which opens a path to pulling a GPS signal out of jamming that is orders of magnitude stronger. Awards are up to $2,000,000 for up to 24 months, with a 35 page technical volume limit. The topic opens September 23, 2026 and closes October 21, 2026 through the Defense SBIR/STTR Innovation Portal.
Two things to settle before you invest proposal effort. First, this document states that small businesses majority-owned in part by multiple venture capital operating companies, hedge funds, or private equity funds are not eligible. Second, this is an STTR topic requiring a research institution partner, and the physics involved, higher-order exceptional points in pseudo-Hermitian systems, is genuinely academic territory. The ideal team here is a small business with signal processing and GPS receiver capability paired with a university group that works on non-Hermitian physics or stochastic resonance.
Topic At a Glance
Topic number: DAF26TZ06-DV008
Title: Counter Adversarial GPS Jamming
Solicitation: Department of the Air Force 2026 Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Broad Agency Announcement (BAA), Release 6, Direct to Phase II Proposal Submission Instructions
Program: STTR, which requires a research institution partner as a condition of the program
Program type: Direct to Phase II (D2P2). Phase I proposals will not be evaluated and Phase I awards will not be made under this topic
Award maximum value: $2,000,000
Award maximum duration: 24 months
Technical volume page limit: 35 pages or slides
OUSD (R&E) Critical Technology Area: Contested Logistics Technology (LOG)
Component Technology Priority Area: Integrated Sensing and Cyber
Projected CMMC level requirement: Level 2 (Self)
Export control status: Restricted under ITAR 22 CFR Parts 120-130 and EAR 15 CFR Parts 730-774
Venture capital, hedge fund, private equity majority ownership: not eligible under this document
Named technical approach: exceptional-point stochastic resonance plus modern machine learning
Phase II deliverable: a user-friendly computer program prototype insertable into a GPS anti-jamming system
Evaluation criteria: not restated in this document. See the FY26 STTR BAA
Topic open date: September 23, 2026
Proposal deadline: October 21, 2026, at the time stated in the DoW FY26 STTR 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: counter adversarial GPS jamming, exceptional-point stochastic resonance
Note on the deadline time. The DAF instructions direct firms to the DoW FY26 STTR BAA for the proposal submission deadline date and time. DoW deadlines are ordinarily 12:00 p.m. Eastern on the close date. Confirm the exact time on the live DSIP posting and do not plan around an end-of-day deadline.
Read This First: Two Eligibility Gates
Venture capital ownership is disqualifying under this document
The instructions state that small business concerns owned in majority part by multiple venture capital operating companies, hedge funds, or private equity funds are not eligible to submit applications or receive awards for DAF topics.
This provision varies across the DAF Release 6 component instructions, and the pattern is now clear enough to describe. Both Direct to Phase II documents issued under the Broad Agency Announcement, the SBIR version covering topic DV037 and this STTR version, state that such firms are not eligible. The BAA Phase I instructions and the CSO instructions, both SBIR and STTR, state that they are eligible. So the exclusion tracks the BAA Direct to Phase II documents specifically.
Because the same provision appears in two independent BAA D2P2 documents, a deliberate restriction is more plausible than a typographical error, though the DAF has not explained it. Treat it as the operative rule for this topic. If your ownership sits near the line, verify your status against 13 CFR 121.702 and the definition in the instructions, and raise it with the DAF SBIR/STTR One Help Desk during the open period rather than assuming it resolves in your favor.
STTR requires a research institution partner
This is an STTR topic. The defining feature of the STTR program is a formal partnership between a small business concern and a research institution, and it is a condition of eligibility rather than an option.
The Air Force component instructions for this release do not restate the STTR partnership mechanics. They cover proposal format, cost volume detail, foreign risk assessment, and administration, in language that reads nearly identically to the parallel SBIR BAA instructions, but the work split, the written agreement, and the allocation of intellectual property rights all live in the DoW FY26 STTR Program BAA and the SBA SBIR/STTR Policy Directive. Read those alongside this topic.
Under the STTR statute and the SBA Policy Directive, the small business generally performs at least 40 percent and the research institution at least 30 percent of the total effort, and the principal investigator may be primarily employed by either organization. That last point is a genuine advantage on a topic like this one, where the relevant expertise may well sit with an academic physicist.
There is a tension to work through. These instructions state that a minimum of 50 percent of the R/R&D must be performed by the proposing firm, and separately cap all consultant fees, facility lease or usage fees, and other subcontract or purchase agreements at one-half of the total contract price. A third statement, under Performance of Work Requirements, sets a two-thirds floor while labeling it Phase I inside a Direct to Phase II document, which appears to be a drafting carryover. A 50 percent in-house floor is compatible with the STTR 40/30 split depending on how effort and cost are measured, but a two-thirds floor is harder to reconcile. This is worth a question to the One Help Desk early in the open period, and the instructions provide a Performance of Work deviation process that must be exercised twice, once before submission during the open period and again with the initial proposal submission.
What the Air Force Is Actually Looking For
The problem
Military and commercial missions rely heavily on the Global Positioning System, but GPS signals, due to their low signal intensity and their need to travel considerable distances, are vulnerable to external interference such as jamming and spoofing.
The topic then quantifies the difficulty. Adversarial jamming can be strong in that its amplitude can be orders of magnitude larger than that of the GPS signal, and jamming shares the same spectral band as the signal. That combination, far stronger interference in the same band, is what defeats conventional approaches.
Various methods based mostly on traditional signal-processing techniques, such as filtering or wavelet transform, were proposed to mitigate GPS jamming to a certain extent. But the effectiveness of a specific method often depends on the type of jamming signals in terms of their waveform, amplitude, and frequency range. That dependency is the gap. The Air Force wants a general framework rather than a collection of countermeasures each tuned to a particular jammer.
The objective
Developing a general, effective, and robust antijamming framework for GPS signals is described as a problem of critical importance. This topic seeks proposals that utilize exceptional-point stochastic resonance and modern machine learning to overcome the vulnerabilities of GPS signals to strong adversarial jamming and spoofing. This will ultimately enhance the signal-to-noise ratio for weak signals and maintain the operational readiness of the Air Force.
Note the three words describing the desired framework: general, effective, and robust. General means jammer-agnostic. Effective means it actually recovers the signal. Robust means performance does not collapse as conditions change. Your proposal should address all three explicitly, because the topic's complaint about existing methods is precisely that they are not general.
The technical thesis, in the topic's own terms
The topic lays out a two-part argument, and understanding it is essential to writing a responsive proposal.
First, GPS antijamming is framed as a problem type. GPS antijamming is essentially a nonlinear signal prediction and classification problem. For nonlinear signal prediction, a possible solution is exploiting modern machine learning, where a suitable neural-network architecture trained with features of the desired signals views the jamming as undesired and removes them.
Then the obstacle. However, the inevitable noise represents a difficulty when employing machine learning to predict the GPS waveform and navigation signal, which can significantly degrade the antijamming capability.
Then the counterintuitive resolution. In nonlinear dynamical systems, the counterintuitive phenomenon of stochastic resonance has been well established, where the signal-to-noise ratio for a weak signal can be enhanced by tuning the noise amplitude. This opens the possibility of enhancing the GPS signal through the stochastic-resonance mechanism.
So the intended architecture pairs a machine learning predictor and classifier with a stochastic resonance front end that uses noise constructively rather than fighting it. Noise is the problem for the machine learning approach and, through stochastic resonance, also part of the solution. A proposal that treats these as two unrelated techniques bolted together has missed the logic.
Why exceptional points
The Phase II description extends the physics. Previous research explored the potential of higher-order exceptional points, uncovering a broad type of stochastic resonance where the system's response to a signal is enhanced by the presence of noise. As the noise amplitude increases, the signal-to-noise ratio reaches a global maximum, suggesting that higher order exceptional points can sustain high performance over a wide range of noise amplitudes.
That last clause is the engineering payoff, and it maps directly onto the robustness requirement. A conventional stochastic resonance system has an optimal noise amplitude and degrades away from it. Higher-order exceptional points reportedly hold performance across a wide range of noise amplitudes, which is what you need in a system facing a jammer whose amplitude you do not control.
The ability to achieve a high signal-to-noise ratio with minimal performance decay paves the way for the development of robust and reliable signal processing and sensor technology.
Proposals in antijamming and counter measuring GPS technology would exploit the exceptional-point features design for the development of next generation sensors and communication systems both sensitive and resilient to GPS disruptions and jamming. In signal processing paradigms, robust systems that maintain high quality signal transmission, in the presence of adversarial interference, drives innovative solutions for the challenges and needs of the Department of Air Force's operational readiness.
The technical merit of GPS antijamming research is described as lying in the adaptability and efficiency of integrated sensing and cyber capabilities that remain robust under varying noise and interference levels.
The Phase II deliverable
One sentence, and it is unusually concrete for a physics-driven topic. The offeror must develop and demonstrate a user-friendly computer program prototype that can be inserted into a GPS anti-jamming system.
Note the word "GSP" appears in the source text at this point, which is plainly a transposition of GPS. Read it as GPS.
Three things follow. The deliverable is software, not hardware. It must be user-friendly, which implies attention to interfaces and operability rather than a research script. And it must be insertable into a GPS anti-jamming system, which means you need a view of what receiver or anti-jam architecture it drops into, and what the interface looks like. Naming a plausible host system, or a class of host systems, strengthens the proposal considerably.
Phase III dual use
The integration of higher-order exceptional features into commercial technologies offers the promise of reliable, efficient, dynamical systems across a broad spectrum of industrial and military processes. In industrial sectors like manufacturing and logistics, efforts would improve the resilience of sensors, ensuring that they remain responsive and resilient to external interferences.
Potential research would also address critical Department of Defense areas in weak signal processing, a facet central to GPS. Extracting weak signals in strong jamming and noise is described as a poised challenge to GPS, magnetometer, and numerous communication systems significant to commercial and DoD domains.
Successful research in this domain promises the protection of aircraft and long-range vehicle capabilities, particularly in enhancing the accuracy of flight data, reduction of signal disruption risks, and advancement of autonomous flight systems in the aerospace ecosystem. As these advancements are realized, aircraft would adapt swiftly to changes in signal processing flight conditions, enhancing the overall readiness of flight operations, including protection of commercial airline usage of GPS.
That gives you a broad and credible commercialization argument: weak signal extraction is a general capability, and magnetometers, communications receivers, industrial sensing, and civil aviation GPS protection are all named markets. Commercial aviation GPS interference is a live and well-documented operational problem, which makes this a market claim you can support rather than assert.
The reference list
Four references, and they define the intellectual territory precisely.
C.-Z. Wang, L.-W. Kong, J.-J. Jiang, and Y.-C. Lai, "Machine learning-based approach to GPS antijamming," GPS Solutions 25, 115, 1-12 (2021).
L. Gammaitoni, P. Hanggi, P. Jung, and F. Marchesoni, "Stochastic resonance," Reviews of Modern Physics 70, 223-287 (1998).
S. Panahi, L.-L. Ye, and Y.-C. Lai, "Higher-order exceptional points and stochastic resonance in pseudo-Hermitian systems," Physical Review Applied 22, 054063, 1-14 (2024).
J. B.-Y. Tsui, Fundamentals of Global Positioning System Receivers: A Software Approach, John Wiley and Sons, 2005.
Three observations. The Gammaitoni review is the canonical stochastic resonance reference, so the topic is grounding itself in established physics rather than speculation. The Panahi paper from 2024 is the recent result the topic is built on, and reading it is not optional. And Y.-C. Lai appears as an author on two of the four references, including both the GPS antijamming machine learning paper and the higher-order exceptional points paper, which strongly suggests the intellectual lineage of this topic. A proposal that engages seriously with that body of work, including where it disagrees, will read very differently from one that does not.
The Tsui textbook reference is a signal that the Air Force expects real GPS receiver competence alongside the physics. A software-defined receiver perspective is the practical frame in which any of this has to be implemented.
The Feasibility Requirement
Direct to Phase II means you must document that you already performed the Phase I equivalent work outside the SBIR and STTR programs. The DAF will not review a proposal that fails this test, and proposals will be disqualified and not evaluated if the Phase I equivalency documentation does not establish the proposed technical approach's feasibility and technical merit.
What this topic requires
This is a Direct to Phase 2 topic. Phase I proposals will not be evaluated and Phase I awards will not be made under this topic. The offeror is required to provide detail and documentation in the Direct-to-Phase-II proposal which demonstrates accomplishment of a Phase I type effort, including a feasibility study.
For this D2P2 topic, the offeror should have accomplished the following in a Phase I type effort via some other means. The offeror must have developed a concept for a workable prototype or design to address at a minimum the basic capabilities of the stated objective above. The proposal must show, as appropriate to the proposed effort, a demonstrated technical feasibility to meet the capabilities of the stated objective. The proposal may provide example cases of this new capability on a specific application.
The documentation provided must demonstrate that the offeror has developed a preliminary understanding of the technology to be applied in their Phase II proposal to meet the objectives of this topic. Documentation should include all relevant information including, but not limited to, technical reports, test data, prototype designs and models, and performance goals and results.
Note the phrase "preliminary understanding." That is a lower bar than some Direct to Phase II topics set, and it fits the character of this work. You are not being asked to have a fielded product. You are being asked to show you already have a concept, evidence of technical feasibility, and enough grasp of the physics and the signal processing to execute a 24 month program. Prior publications, simulation results, and bench demonstrations all count as relevant documentation.
The general D2P2 rules
Feasibility documentation cannot be based solely upon or logically extend from any prior or ongoing federally funded SBIR or STTR work. Note the word "solely" in this topic's phrasing, which is slightly softer than the flat prohibition in some parallel documents, but do not rely on that distinction. The safe position is feasibility evidence with an independent basis.
Applicants must demonstrate completion of research and development through means other than the SBIR and STTR programs to establish the feasibility of the proposed Phase II effort based on the criteria outlined in the topic description.
Feasibility efforts detailed must have been substantially performed by the applicant or the principal investigator. On an STTR award where the principal investigator may be employed by the research institution, this is worth reading carefully: work performed by your academic partner's principal investigator can qualify where that person is the designated PI.
If technology in the feasibility documentation is subject to intellectual property rights, the applicant must provide IP rights assertions, and applicants shall provide a short summary for each item asserted with less than unlimited rights describing the restriction's nature and the intellectual property intended for use in the proposed research. This matters here because university-held IP on exceptional point or stochastic resonance methods is a realistic possibility, and your partner's technology transfer office will have views.
Feasibility documentation is required for all proposal submissions, is contained within Volume 5, and is not subject to page limitations. That last clause is valuable. Your prior publications, simulation results, and technical reports can be documented at whatever length the evidence requires without consuming your 35 page technical volume.
If appropriate, include a reference or works cited list as the last page. Do not include marketing material, which will not be evaluated.
Funding Allowance and Cost Structure
Award ceiling
Up to $2,000,000 across up to 24 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.
Two million dollars over 24 months is a substantial award for a software deliverable, which suggests the Air Force expects real research depth alongside the prototype. Budget for the physics and algorithm development, the receiver-side implementation, and a credible test campaign against representative jamming.
Contract type and fee
Generally firm-fixed-price contracts are appropriate for Phase II awards. In accordance with the SBA SBIR/STTR Policy Directive, Phase II contracts must include profit or fee.
If no exceptions are taken to an applicant's proposal, the Government may award a contract without exchanges. Therefore the applicant's initial proposal should contain the applicant'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 exchanges later if the Contracting Officer determines doing so to be necessary.
Technical and Business Assistance
The DAF will provide up to $50,000 per Phase II award, in addition to the per-topic total identified in the DSIP Volume 3 Cost Proposal. Applicants may elect to use 50 percent of this TABA allocation, meaning $25,000, on a first Phase II award and 50 percent on a sequential Phase II award.
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.
On an STTR award with a research institution partner, intellectual property protections is the standout eligible activity. Sorting out who owns what between your firm and your partner is exactly the kind of work TABA is meant to fund.
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.
Cost volume expectations
A detailed cost proposal must be submitted, and cost proposal information will be treated as proprietary. Proposed costs must be provided by both individual cost element and contractor fiscal year in sufficient detail to determine the basis for estimates, as well as the purpose, necessity, and reasonableness of each. Cost proposal attachments do not count toward proposal page limitations.
Direct labor. Identify key personnel by name, if possible, and 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 research-heavy software program this is the dominant element, and the credibility of your named physicists and signal processing engineers is part of what gets evaluated.
Direct cost materials. Costs for materials, parts, and supplies must be justified and supported. Provide an itemized list of types, quantities, prices, and where appropriate purpose. If computer or software purchases are planned, detailed information such as manufacturer, price quotes, proposed use, and support for the need will be required. Software-defined radio hardware, GPS simulators, and compute resources belong here with quotes.
Other direct costs. This includes specialized services such as machining or milling, special test and analysis, and costs for temporary use or lease of specialized facilities and equipment. Provide usage hours expected, rates, and sources, as well as a brief discussion concerning the purpose and justification. Proposals including leased hardware must include an adequate lease versus purchase rationale. GPS signal simulator time and anechoic or shielded test facility access plausibly sit here, and simulator rental is common enough that the lease versus purchase rationale is likely to apply.
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, and should not be of a type that an applicant would otherwise possess in the normal course of business.
Subcontracts. Subcontract costs must be supported with copies of subcontract agreements. Agreement documents must adequately describe the work to be performed and cost bases, and should include a statement of work, assigned personnel, hours and rates, materials if any, and proposed travel if any. A letter from a subcontractor agreeing to perform a task or tasks at a fixed price is not considered sufficient. The proposed total of all consultant fees, facility leases or usage fees, and other subcontract or purchase agreements may not exceed one-half of the total contract price, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Contracting Officer. The prime contractor must accomplish price analysis, including reasonableness, of the proposed subcontractor costs. If based on comparison with prior efforts, identify the basis upon which the prior prices were determined reasonable. If price analysis techniques are inadequate or the FAR requires subcontractor cost or pricing data submission, provide a cost analysis.
On an STTR award your research institution partner's costs count against this cap, so get their formal budget with federally negotiated rates early and check the arithmetic. One-half of $2,000,000 leaves reasonable room for a university partner, which is more workable than the one-third cap that applies on the DAF Phase I documents.
Consultants. For each consultant, provide a separate agreement letter briefly stating the service to be provided, hours required, and hourly rate, as well as a short, concise resume.
Travel. Each effort should include, at a minimum, a kickoff or interim meeting. Travel costs must be justified as required for the effort. Include destinations, number of trips, number of travelers per trip, airfare, per diem, lodging, and ground transportation. Per diem and lodging rates may be found in the Joint Travel Regulation, Volume 2.
Indirect costs. Indicate proposed rates' bases, for example budgeted or actual rates per fiscal year. The proposal should identify the specific rates used and allocation bases to which they are applied. Do not propose composite rates; proposed rates and applications per fiscal year throughout the anticipated performance period are required.
Non-SBIR governmental or private investment is allowed. However, it is not required, nor will it be a proposal evaluation factor.
The work performance statements, and how to handle them
Three statements bear on how much work must be yours.
Under Consultants and Subcontractors, the instructions state that in accordance with the SBA SBIR Policy Directive, a minimum of 50 percent of the R/R&D must be performed by the proposing firm, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Contracting Officer, and that these requests can only be made upon proposal submission.
Under Performance of Work Requirements and Location of Work, the instructions state that for Phase I, a minimum of two-thirds of the research or analytical effort must be performed by the Awardee, measured by both direct and indirect costs, not including profit. That paragraph says Phase I inside a Direct to Phase II document where no Phase I awards are made, and the same wording appears in the parallel SBIR BAA D2P2 instructions, which suggests a drafting carryover rather than an intended two-thirds floor for this topic.
Under the Cost Volume, the total of all consultant fees, facility leases or usage fees, and other subcontract or purchase agreements may not exceed one-half of the total contract price.
The workable reading for an STTR proposal is to plan on performing at least 50 percent of the R/R&D in house and keeping all outside costs below one-half of the contract price. That satisfies the two statements that are clearly intended for a Phase II award, and it is compatible with an STTR research institution partner performing its statutory 30 percent share. If you want certainty, ask the One Help Desk during the open period which floor governs, and file the pre-submission Performance of Work deviation request as insurance.
Where work must be performed
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.
Non-Hermitian physics and stochastic resonance are internationally distributed research fields, so if your partner's collaborators sit abroad, address this.
Export Control and Foreign Nationals
The technology within this topic is restricted under ITAR 22 CFR Parts 120-130, which controls the export and import of defense-related material and services including export of sensitive technical data, and the EAR 15 CFR Parts 730-774, which controls dual use items.
Offerors must disclose any proposed use of foreign nationals, their countries of origin, the type of visa or work permit possessed, and the statement of work tasks intended for accomplishment by the foreign nationals in accordance with section 3.5 of the Announcement. Offerors are advised that foreign nationals proposed to perform on this topic may be restricted due to the technical data under U.S. export control laws.
Foreign nationals, also known as foreign persons, means any person who is not a citizen or national of the United States, not a lawful permanent resident, and not a protected individual as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b. All applicants proposing to use foreign nationals must follow the FY26 STTR BAA and disclose this information regardless of whether the topic is subject to ITAR restrictions.
When the topic area is subject to export control, these individuals, if permitted to participate, are limited to work in the public domain. Further, tasks assigned must not be capable of assimilation into an understanding of the project's overall objectives. This prevents foreign citizens from acting in key positions, such as Principal Investigator or Senior Engineer. Additional information may be requested during negotiations in order to verify foreign citizens' eligibility to perform on a contract awarded under this BAA.
This is the sharpest practical tension on this topic. GPS antijamming is export-controlled technical data. Theoretical physics groups working on pseudo-Hermitian systems are among the most internationally staffed environments in academia. And the instructions state that foreign persons cannot act as Principal Investigator or Senior Engineer where the topic is export controlled, which constrains the STTR flexibility to place the PI at the research institution. Resolve this with your partner before you designate a principal investigator.
For all projects with military or dual-use applications developing beyond fundamental research, the contractor shall comply with all U.S. export control laws and regulations, is responsible for obtaining the appropriate licenses or other approvals including for deemed exports of hardware, technical data, and software, is responsible for obtaining export licenses before utilizing foreign persons including where work is performed on-site at any Government installation whether in or outside the United States, is responsible for all regulatory record keeping requirements associated with the use of licenses and license exemptions or exceptions, and is responsible for ensuring that these provisions apply to its subcontractors.
If you are asserting export-controlled status, a copy of the certified DD Form 2345, Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement, or evidence of application submission must be included in Volume 5. DD Form 2345 approval will be required if the proposal is selected for award.
Proposal Structure: The Seven Volumes
Formatting
Proposals should be direct, concise, and informative. Type shall be no smaller than 11-point on standard 8.5 by 11 paper, with one-inch margins and pages consecutively numbered. Applicants are discouraged from including promotional and non-programmatic items. If included, such material will count toward the page limit.
Note that this differs from the DAF Phase I instructions in this same release, which permit 10-point.
The technical volume limit for this topic is 35 pages or slides. Pages or slides in excess of this number will not be considered by the Government in evaluations. The preferred submission format is Portable Document Format. Graphics must be distinguishable in black and white, which matters here because you will want to show signal-to-noise curves, eigenvalue plots, and receiver operating characteristics. Virus-check all submissions.
The complete proposal must be submitted electronically through DSIP. Ensure the complete technical volume and additional cost volume information is included in this sole submission.
Fraud, Waste, and Abuse training must be completed prior to proposal submission. When training is complete and certified, DSIP will indicate completion of the Volume 6 requirement, and the proposal cannot be submitted until the training is complete. The DAF recommends completing submission early, as site traffic is heavy prior to solicitation close, causing system lag, and states plainly not to wait until the last minute. The DAF will not be responsible for proposals not completely submitted prior to the deadline due to system inaccessibility unless advised by DoW, and will not accept alternative means of submission outside of DSIP.
The instructions also carry a criminal warning: 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.
If a proposal submitted in response to this BAA is substantially the same as another proposal submitted previously, currently, or in the process of being funded by another federal agency, DoW component, or the DAF, the applicant must so indicate on the Cover Sheet. This section deserves attention on an STTR proposal, since university partners frequently have related federally funded research.
Volume 2, Technical Volume
The technical proposal includes all items listed below in the order provided.
Table of contents, located immediately after the Cover Sheet. Glossary of acronyms and abbreviations used in the proposal. Milestone identification, including a program schedule with all key milestones identified. Identification and significance of the problem or opportunity, briefly referencing the specific technical problem or opportunity to be pursued. Phase II technical objectives, detailing the specific objectives of the Phase II work and describing the technical approach and methods to be used in meeting these objectives, including an assessment of the potential commercial application for each objective.
Work plan. The work plan shall be a separate and distinct part of the proposal package, using a page break to divide it from the technical proposal, and begins on a new page. It must contain a summary description of the technical methodology and task description in broad enough detail to provide contractual flexibility. Do not include proprietary information, because in the event of proposal selection the work plan will be incorporated into the resulting contract by reference. The recommended format is 1.0 Objective, providing a brief overview of the specialty area explaining the purpose and expected outcome; 2.0 Scope, providing a concise description of the work to be accomplished including the technology area to be investigated, goals, and major milestones, with task development and deliverables as the key elements and consistent with section 4.0; 3.0 Background, in which the applicant shall identify appropriate specifications, standards, and other documents applicable to the effort, including information or explanation for and constraints to understanding requirements, relationships to previous, current, or future operations, and techniques previously determined ineffective; and 4.0 Task and Technical Requirements, in which detailed individual task descriptions must be developed in an orderly progression with sufficient detail to establish overall program requirements and goals, with the work effort segregated into major tasks identified in separately numbered paragraphs. Each numbered major task should delineate the work to be performed by subtask. The work plan must contain every task to be accomplished in definite, realistic, and clearly stated terms. Use "shall" whenever the work plan expresses a binding provision, "should" or "may" to express a declaration or purpose, and "will" when no contractor requirement is involved.
Section 3.0 Background is worth attention here. The topic itself says that traditional signal-processing techniques such as filtering and wavelet transform mitigate GPS jamming only to a certain extent, which is precisely the kind of "techniques previously determined ineffective" that this section asks you to identify.
Deliverables. Include a section clearly describing the specific sample or prototype hardware and software to be delivered, as well as data deliverables, schedules, and quantities. Be aware of the possible requirement for unique item identification in accordance with DFARS 252.211-7003 for hardware. If hardware or software will be developed but not delivered, provide an explanation. Since the Phase II deliverable here is a computer program prototype, be specific about what form it takes, what it runs on, and what interface it presents.
At a minimum, the following reports will be required under all Phase II contracts. Scientific and Technical Reports, noting that rights in technical data including software developed under the terms of any contract resulting from a SBIR Announcement generally remain with the contractor, and the Government obtains SBIR/STTR data rights in all data developed or generated under the contract for a period of 20 years commencing at contract award, after which the Government has Government purpose rights to the SBIR data. The Final Report's first page will be a single-page project summary identifying the work's purpose, providing a brief description of the effort accomplished, and listing potential result applications; the summary may be published by DoW and therefore must not contain any proprietary or classified information. Status reports are due quarterly at a minimum. The Air Force may require additional reporting documentation including software documentation and users' manuals, engineering drawings, operation and maintenance documentation, safety hazard analysis when hardware is developed and delivered, and updates to the commercialization results.
Software documentation and users' manuals deserve note, because the deliverable is required to be user-friendly. Plan for the documentation as a real work product.
Related work. Describe significant activities directly related to the proposed effort, including any previous programs conducted by the principal investigator, proposing firm, consultants, or others, and their application to the proposed project. Describe how these activities interface with the proposed project and discuss any planned coordination with outside sources. Also list any applicant-identified subject matter experts, regardless of affiliation, providing comments regarding the applicant's knowledge of the state of the art in the specific approach proposed. Describe previous work not directly related to the proposed effort but similar, providing a short description, the client for which the work was performed including an individual to be contacted and phone number, and the date of completion.
Commercialization potential. The DoW requires a commercialization plan be submitted with the Phase II proposal, specifically addressing what the first planned product to incorporate the proposed technology is, who the probable customers are and what the estimated market size is, how much money is needed to bring the technology to market and how it will be raised, whether the firm has the necessary marketing expertise and if not how the firm will compensate, and who the probable competitors are and what price or quality advantage is anticipated. Commercial potential is evidenced by the existence of private sector or non-SBIR/STTR governmental funding sources demonstrating commitment to Phase II efforts and results, the existence of Phase III follow-on commitments for the research subject, and the presence of other indicators of commercial technology potential including the firm's commercialization strategy. If awarded, the awardee will be required to update periodically the commercialization results via SBA. The Commercialization Plan and the Company Commercialization Report are distinct documents.
Relationship with future R/R&D efforts. State the anticipated results of the proposed approach, specifically addressing plans for Phase III, if any, and discuss the significance of the D2P2 effort in providing a basis for the Phase III R/R&D effort, if planned.
Key personnel. Identify all key personnel involved in the project, including information directly related to education, experience, and citizenship. A technical resume for the Principal Investigator, including publications if any, must be included. Concise technical resumes for subcontractors and consultants are also useful. The Principal Investigator's primary employment must be with the small business concern at the time of award and during the entire period of performance, where primary employment means more than one-half of the PI's time is spent in the small business's employ, which precludes full-time employment with another entity. Only one principal investigator or project manager can be designated to a proposal at any given time.
That primary employment statement is worth flagging on an STTR proposal, because the STTR program generally permits the principal investigator to be employed by the research institution instead. These component instructions state the small business employment requirement without the STTR carve-out that appears in some other components' instructions. Since the STTR PI employment rule comes from the DoW STTR BAA and the SBA Policy Directive rather than from this document, confirm with the DAF SBIR/STTR One Help Desk before designating an academic PI.
Facilities and equipment. Describe instrumentation and physical facilities necessary and available to carry out the D2P2 effort. Justify equipment to be purchased, with detail in the cost proposal. State whether proposed performance locations meet environmental laws and regulations of federal, state, and local governments for airborne emissions, waterborne effluents, external radiation levels, outdoor noise, solid and bulk waste disposal practices, and handling and storage of toxic and hazardous materials.
Consultants and subcontractors. Private companies, consultants, or universities may be involved in the project. All should be described in detail and included in the cost proposal. In accordance with the SBA SBIR Policy Directive, a minimum of 50 percent of the R/R&D must be performed by the proposing firm, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Contracting Officer, and these requests can only be made upon proposal submission. Signed copies of all consultant or subcontractor letters of intent must be attached to the proposal, briefly stating the contribution or expertise being provided. Include statements of work and detailed cost proposals, and information regarding consultant or subcontractor unique qualifications. Subcontract copies and supporting documents do not count against the Phase II page limit. Identify any subcontractor or consultant foreign citizens.
Prior, current, or pending support of similar proposals or awards. While it is permissible, with proper notification, to submit identical proposals or proposals containing a significant amount of essentially equivalent work for consideration under numerous federal program solicitations, it is unlawful to enter into contracts or grants requiring essentially equivalent effort. Any potential for this situation must be disclosed to the solicitation agencies before award. Provide the name and address of the federal agencies or DoW components to which proposals were or will be submitted or from which an award is expected or has been received, the proposal submission or award dates, the proposal title, the PI's name and title for each, the solicitation titles, numbers, and dates, the contract number if an award was received, and the applicable topics. If the section does not apply, state in the proposal, "No prior, current, or pending support for proposed work."
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 DoW FY26 STTR BAA for full details. Information contained in the CCR will not be considered by the DAF during proposal evaluations.
Volume 5, Supporting Documents
The following documents may be required if applicable to your proposal. DD Form 2345, which applies to this export-controlled topic. Verification of Eligibility of Small Business Joint Ventures, Attachment 3 to the DoW STTR FY26 BAA. Technical Data Rights Assertions, if asserting data rights restrictions.
Feasibility documentation is required for all proposal submissions, is contained within Volume 5, and is not subject to page limitations.
The detailed TABA request, if you are requesting TABA, also belongs in Volume 5.
Volume 6, Fraud, Waste and Abuse Training
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.
How Your Proposal Will Be Evaluated
The criteria are in the BAA, not in this document
D2P2 proposals are evaluated on a competitive basis by subject matter expert scientists, engineers, or other technical personnel. Throughout evaluation, selection, and award, confidential proposal and evaluation information will be protected to the greatest extent possible. D2P2 proposals will be disqualified and not evaluated if the Phase I equivalency documentation does not establish the proposed technical approach's feasibility and technical merit.
The instructions then state that proposals will be evaluated for overall merit in accordance with the criteria outlined in the FY26 STTR BAA.
That is the whole of it. Unlike the DAF Release 6 CSO instructions, which restate Criteria A, B, and C with their relative importance, this BAA document does not reproduce the evaluation criteria. Read the criteria in the DoW FY26 STTR BAA before you begin writing, since they determine your proposal's structure and emphasis, and do not assume the CSO criteria carry over.
The DAF adds that it 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, that multiple procurements are planned and anticipated, that each proposal is a separate procurement evaluated on its own merit, and that the Government may award all, some, or none of the proposals.
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, foreign affiliations, and patent analysis all deserve attention on this topic. Non-Hermitian physics and stochastic resonance are internationally collaborative fields, academic appointments abroad are common, and the exceptional-point literature has substantial international authorship. Work through your partner's personnel and collaborations 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).
The foreign research institution affiliation provision is a mandatory denial and names research institutions specifically, which makes it a first-order diligence item on an STTR proposal.
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 APEX, Peerless Technologies, Engineering Services Network, HPC-COM, Mile Two, REI Systems, MacB (an Alion company), Montech, Oasis, Astrion/Oasis, and Infinite Management Solutions. 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 Force may evaluate proposals. All support contractors are bound by appropriate non-disclosure agreements. Contact the DAF SBIR/STTR Contracting Officer with concerns about any of these 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 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.
The DAF anticipates that all proposals will be evaluated and selections finalized within approximately 90 calendar days of solicitation close. Refrain from contacting the DAF for proposal status before that time.
Refer to the FY26 STTR BAA for procedures to protest the Announcement. As further prescribed in FAR 33.106(b) and FAR 52.233-3, protests after award should be submitted to Air Force SBIR/STTR Contracting Officer Daniel J. Brewer and to the individual procuring contracting officer listed on your firm's selection notification.
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.
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 STTR 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 24 months from award
A working backward plan
Before September 23. Settle eligibility first: if venture capital, hedge fund, or private equity funds hold majority ownership in part, resolve your status and raise it with the DAF SBIR/STTR One Help Desk. Read the evaluation criteria in the DoW FY26 STTR BAA, since they are not in this document. Read the four cited references, especially the 2024 Panahi paper on higher-order exceptional points and stochastic resonance in pseudo-Hermitian systems. Contact your research institution partner's sponsored programs office and get their internal review timeline, since that sets your real deadline. Resolve the principal investigator employment question with the One Help Desk, because these instructions state the PI's primary employment must be with the small business while the STTR program generally permits an academic PI. Work through export control staffing with your partner, since foreign persons cannot serve as PI or Senior Engineer on an export-controlled topic. Assemble feasibility documentation, which does not count against your page limit. Map your partner's patents, licensing arrangements, and international collaborations. Start DD Form 2345 if you do not hold one. Complete Volume 6 training and verify SAM and DSIP alignment.
September 23 through October 3. Draft Volume 2 in the required order against the 35 page limit. Build the technical approach around the topic's own logic: nonlinear signal prediction and classification via machine learning, the noise obstacle, and stochastic resonance at higher-order exceptional points as the resolution. Address general, effective, and robust as three separate claims. Write the work plan as a separate page-broken document in contract language with no proprietary content, and use section 3.0 Background to address the filtering and wavelet approaches the topic identifies as insufficient.
October 4 through October 12. Build the cost volume by individual cost element and contractor fiscal year. Get your research institution's formal budget with federally negotiated rates in writing and check it against the one-half cap. Get signed letters of intent, statements of work, and detailed cost proposals from every consultant and subcontractor, remembering that a fixed-price agreement letter is not sufficient. Itemize GPS simulator, software-defined radio, and compute costs with quotes. Write the detailed TABA request into Volume 5 if requesting TABA, and consider intellectual property protections as the activity.
October 13 through October 16. Finalize Volume 5: feasibility documentation with no page limit, DD Form 2345, Technical Data Rights Assertions, and the TABA request. Complete the Volume 7 webform and the Volume 4 CCR. Run compliance: 35 page limit, 11-point minimum type, one-inch margins, consecutive page numbers, graphics distinguishable in black and white, virus-checked PDF, no marketing material, no proprietary content in the technical abstract or the work plan.
October 17 through October 19. Submit and certify in DSIP.
October 20 through October 21. Buffer only.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is DAF STTR topic DAF26TZ06-DV008?
DAF26TZ06-DV008 is a Department of the Air Force STTR Direct to Phase II topic titled "Counter Adversarial GPS Jamming," released under the DAF 2026 STTR Broad Agency Announcement, Release 6. It seeks proposals that utilize exceptional-point stochastic resonance and modern machine learning to overcome the vulnerabilities of GPS signals to strong adversarial jamming and spoofing.
How much funding is available under DAF26TZ06-DV008?
Up to $2,000,000 for a period of performance up to 24 months. Proposals in excess of that amount or duration will not be considered for evaluation or award. Up to $50,000 in Technical and Business Assistance may be requested in addition to that ceiling.
When is the proposal deadline?
The topic closes October 21, 2026. The DAF instructions direct firms to the DoW FY26 STTR 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.
Are venture capital backed companies eligible?
No, under this document. The instructions state that firms owned in majority part by multiple venture capital operating companies, hedge funds, or private equity funds are not eligible for DAF topics. This provision varies across the DAF Release 6 component instructions: both BAA Direct to Phase II documents, the SBIR version and this STTR version, exclude such firms, while the BAA Phase I instructions and both CSO documents permit them. Verify your status and raise it with the One Help Desk during the open period.
Do I need a research institution partner?
Yes. This is an STTR topic, and the STTR program requires a formal partnership with a qualifying research institution. Note that these Air Force component instructions do not restate the partnership mechanics, so read the DoW FY26 STTR Program BAA and the SBA SBIR/STTR Policy Directive for the work split, the written agreement, and the allocation of rights.
Can my principal investigator be at the university?
Confirm before you commit. The STTR program generally permits the principal investigator to be primarily employed by either the small business or the research institution. However, these component instructions state that the Principal Investigator's primary employment must be with the small business concern at the time of award and during the entire period of performance, without the STTR carve-out. Separately, because this topic is export controlled, the instructions state that foreign persons cannot act as Principal Investigator or Senior Engineer. Ask the DAF SBIR/STTR One Help Desk before designating an academic PI.
What is the technical approach the Air Force wants?
Exceptional-point stochastic resonance paired with modern machine learning. The topic's logic is that GPS antijamming is essentially a nonlinear signal prediction and classification problem suited to machine learning, that noise degrades the machine learning approach, and that stochastic resonance, in which the signal-to-noise ratio for a weak signal is enhanced by tuning the noise amplitude, resolves that obstacle. Higher-order exceptional points reportedly sustain high performance over a wide range of noise amplitudes, which is what delivers robustness.
Why does the topic emphasize higher-order exceptional points?
Because of robustness. The topic states that as noise amplitude increases the signal-to-noise ratio reaches a global maximum, suggesting that higher order exceptional points can sustain high performance over a wide range of noise amplitudes, and that the ability to achieve a high signal-to-noise ratio with minimal performance decay paves the way for robust and reliable signal processing and sensor technology. A conventional stochastic resonance system has one optimal noise level; that is not useful against a jammer whose amplitude you do not control.
What is wrong with existing antijamming methods?
The topic says various methods based mostly on traditional signal-processing techniques, such as filtering or wavelet transform, mitigate GPS jamming to a certain extent, but the effectiveness of a specific method often depends on the type of jamming signal in terms of waveform, amplitude, and frequency range. The gap is generality. The Air Force wants a general, effective, and robust framework rather than a countermeasure tuned to a particular jammer.
What is the Phase II deliverable?
The offeror must develop and demonstrate a user-friendly computer program prototype that can be inserted into a GPS anti-jamming system. Note the deliverable is software, that user-friendliness is stated as a requirement, and that insertability implies you need a view of the host receiver or anti-jam architecture and its interface.
Can I submit a Phase I proposal?
No. This is a Direct to Phase 2 topic. Phase I proposals will not be evaluated and Phase I awards will not be made under this topic.
What feasibility documentation does this topic require?
You must have developed a concept for a workable prototype or design addressing at a minimum the basic capabilities of the stated objective, and must show demonstrated technical feasibility to meet those capabilities. You may provide example cases of the new capability on a specific application. The documentation must demonstrate that you have developed a preliminary understanding of the technology to be applied in Phase II, and should include all relevant information including technical reports, test data, prototype designs and models, and performance goals and results.
Can I use prior SBIR or STTR work as my feasibility basis?
No. The topic states feasibility documentation cannot be based solely upon or logically extend from any prior or ongoing federally funded SBIR or STTR work. Note the word "solely" in this topic's phrasing, but do not rely on it. Feasibility efforts must also have been substantially performed by the applicant or the principal investigator.
Does feasibility documentation count against my page limit?
No. The instructions state that feasibility documentation is required for all proposal submissions, is contained within Volume 5, and is not subject to page limitations. Use that room for prior publications, simulation results, and test data rather than compressing them into the technical volume.
How long can my technical volume be?
35 pages or slides. Type must be no smaller than 11-point on standard 8.5 by 11 paper with one-inch margins and consecutively numbered pages. Note this differs from the DAF Phase I instructions in this same release, which permit 10-point. Cost proposal attachments, subcontract copies and supporting documents, and feasibility documentation do not count toward the limit.
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 outlined in the FY26 STTR BAA. Read those criteria before writing, and do not assume the Criteria A, B, and C structure from the DAF CSO instructions carries over.
How much of the work must my company perform?
The instructions contain three statements. Under Consultants and Subcontractors, a minimum of 50 percent of the R/R&D must be performed by the proposing firm unless the Contracting Officer approves otherwise in writing, and such requests can only be made upon proposal submission. Under Performance of Work Requirements, a minimum of two-thirds of the research or analytical effort must be performed by the Awardee, though that paragraph says Phase I inside a Direct to Phase II document and appears to be a drafting carryover. And the Cost Volume caps all consultant fees, facility leases or usage fees, and other subcontract or purchase agreements at one-half of the total contract price. Planning to perform at least 50 percent in house and keeping outside costs under one-half of contract price satisfies the statements clearly intended for a Phase II award and is compatible with an STTR partner's 30 percent share.
How does the work split interact with the STTR requirement?
A 50 percent in-house floor and a one-half outside cost cap leave workable room for a research institution partner performing its statutory 30 percent share on a $2,000,000 award. A two-thirds floor would be harder to reconcile. Ask the One Help Desk which governs, and note that Performance of Work deviation requests must be made twice, before submission during the open period and again with the initial proposal.
Is this topic export controlled?
Yes. The technology is restricted under ITAR 22 CFR Parts 120-130 and EAR 15 CFR Parts 730-774. You must disclose any proposed foreign nationals with countries of origin, visa or work permit type, and the statement of work tasks intended for them, and the topic advises those individuals may be restricted from performing. Where a topic is export controlled, permitted foreign national participants are limited to work in the public domain and cannot act in key positions such as Principal Investigator or Senior Engineer.
What references should I read?
Four are cited. Wang, Kong, Jiang and Lai on a machine learning based approach to GPS antijamming, GPS Solutions 2021. Gammaitoni, Hanggi, Jung and Marchesoni, "Stochastic resonance," Reviews of Modern Physics 1998, the canonical review. Panahi, Ye and Lai on higher-order exceptional points and stochastic resonance in pseudo-Hermitian systems, Physical Review Applied 2024, which is the recent result the topic is built on. And Tsui's Fundamentals of Global Positioning System Receivers: A Software Approach, 2005, which signals that real receiver competence is expected alongside the physics.
Who owns the software I develop?
Rights in technical data including software developed under the terms of any resulting contract generally remain with the contractor. The Government obtains SBIR/STTR data rights in all data developed or generated under the contract for 20 years commencing at contract award, after which the Government has Government purpose rights. On an STTR award, work out the intellectual property boundaries with your research institution partner before award, and use Technical Data Rights Assertions in Volume 5 for background IP.
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 DAF during proposal evaluations.
What is TABA and how do I request it?
Up to $50,000 per Phase II award, in addition to the per-topic ceiling, identified in the Volume 3 Cost Proposal, and splittable as $25,000 on a first Phase II award and $25,000 on a sequential one. The detailed request must be in Volume 5 with 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. Requests specifying only a value in Volume 3 will not be considered. On an STTR award, intellectual property protections is a particularly relevant eligible activity.
What is the commercial market?
Broad, and the topic names it. Higher-order exceptional features integrated into commercial technologies for industrial and military processes, including improving sensor resilience in manufacturing and logistics. Weak signal extraction in strong jamming and noise, which the topic notes is significant for GPS, magnetometers, and numerous communication systems in both commercial and DoD domains. And protection of aircraft and long-range vehicle capabilities, enhanced flight data accuracy, reduced signal disruption risk, advancement of autonomous flight systems, and protection of commercial airline usage of GPS.
When will I hear about selection?
The DAF 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 DAF 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 FY26 STTR 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
Check eligibility twice before you write. Venture capital, hedge fund, or private equity majority ownership in part is disqualifying under this document, and the STTR research institution partnership is mandatory. Both gates come before any technical consideration.
Build the right team. This topic asks for physics that lives in universities and signal processing that lives in industry. A small business with GPS receiver and software-defined radio competence paired with an academic group working on non-Hermitian systems or stochastic resonance is the profile the topic describes. A team with only one half of that will struggle to be credible.
Read the Panahi 2024 paper and engage with it. Higher-order exceptional points and stochastic resonance in pseudo-Hermitian systems is the specific result the topic is built on, and the same senior author appears on the GPS antijamming machine learning reference. Demonstrating command of that body of work, including any limitations you see in it, is the fastest way to establish technical credibility.
Answer general, effective, and robust as three separate claims. The topic's complaint about existing methods is that their effectiveness depends on the jammer's waveform, amplitude, and frequency range. Show what makes your framework jammer-agnostic, quantify recovery performance, and show performance across a range of noise and interference levels rather than at one operating point.
Connect the physics to a receiver. The Tsui software receiver textbook in the reference list is a hint. Exceptional-point stochastic resonance is interesting physics, but the deliverable is a program that inserts into a GPS anti-jamming system. Name the receiver architecture, the point of insertion, and the interface, and show you understand acquisition, tracking, and navigation solution stages.
Take user-friendly literally. The Phase II deliverable is specified as a user-friendly computer program prototype. Most physics-driven proposals will treat that as an afterthought. Treating it as a requirement, with attention to operability and to the software documentation and users' manuals the instructions may require, is a cheap differentiator.
Plan a real test campaign. Twenty-four months and $2,000,000 is enough to test against representative jamming, and a proposal that describes simulated and hardware-in-the-loop testing against varied jammer types will be more persuasive than one resting on analysis alone. Budget the GPS simulator time.
Resolve the PI employment question early. These instructions state the PI's primary employment must be with the small business, while the STTR program generally permits an academic PI, and the export control provision separately bars foreign persons from the PI role. Those three constraints interact, and getting it wrong invalidates your key personnel section.
Use the page-limit exclusions. Feasibility documentation, cost proposal attachments, and subcontract documents all sit outside the 35 pages. Prior publications and simulation results belong in Volume 5.
Do the IP work with your partner now. University-held intellectual property on exceptional point methods is a realistic possibility, twenty year Government SBIR data rights attach to what you develop, and TABA can fund intellectual property support. Better to settle this in September than during contract negotiation.
Lean on the aviation market. Commercial GPS interference affecting civil aviation is a documented and growing operational problem, and the topic names protection of commercial airline usage of GPS explicitly. That makes your commercialization argument evidence-based rather than speculative.
