DAF SBIR Direct-to-Phase-II Topic DAF26BX05-DV509: High-Voltage Radiation Hardened Power Switches for Space Power and Propulsion

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

Quick Answer

The Department of the Air Force is offering a Direct-to-Phase-II SBIR award of up to $2,000,000 for companies that can design, fabricate, and demonstrate high-voltage radiation hardened power switches for space power and propulsion systems. This is topic DAF26BX05-DV509 under the DoW FY26 SBIR CSO Release 5. There is no Phase I award for this topic. Applicants must already have feasibility data in hand and submit directly to Phase II. Proposals are due September 23, 2026 through DSIP.

What This Solicitation Is

This is a Direct-to-Phase-II (D2P2) topic, which means the government is skipping straight to Phase II funding under the authority of 15 U.S.C. 638(cc). There is no separate Phase I contract. Instead, applicants must prove they already completed Phase I-type feasibility work on their own dime, using resources other than federal SBIR or STTR funding, and submit that evidence as part of the Phase II proposal package.

The topic sits under the Microelectronics Component Technology Priority Area and carries a projected CMMC Level 2 (Self) cybersecurity requirement. It is also restricted under ITAR and EAR export control regulations, so companies planning to use foreign nationals need to plan for that disclosure early.

What DAF Is Looking For

The Space Force is moving from a static, benign space posture to an active "Maneuver Without Regret" concept, which requires high-voltage architectures in the 200V to 800V range to support next-generation electric propulsion. That shift demands power switching electronics that can handle much higher voltages than current silicon rad-hard switches, which typically derate to around 350V max.

Specifically, DAF wants radiation hardened semiconductor power switches that can operate above 350V up to 1kV, with efficiency greater than 80 percent. The switches need to survive single event burnout at a linear transfer energy of 85 MeV cm2/mg with a fluence of at least 1E6 ions per square centimeter, and withstand 300 krad total ionizing dose without failure. Testing needs to happen at credible domestic facilities, with NASA's Space Radiation Laboratory at Brookhaven National Laboratory called out as an example. By the end of Phase II, wafer yield needs to be above 50 percent.

Because there is no Phase I, the feasibility bar for the Phase II proposal itself is high. Applicants need to show their device can be built on a commercially viable semiconductor foundry process, provide a preliminary assessment of space rated packaging that can handle both high voltage and thermal extraction in a vacuum, and back it up with TCAD simulation data, bench testing, or other practical demonstration. This feasibility work cannot be based on or extend from any prior or ongoing federally funded SBIR or STTR work. It has to be work the applicant paid for and performed itself.

Phase II deliverables center on a working prototype plus a full test data package covering technical performance, radiation survivability, and manufacturability, structured to support qualification and reliability testing in Phase III. Phase III is framed around dual use commercialization: product design kit development, high voltage packaging, and MIL-PRF-19500 screening, with target markets including commercial satellite systems, in space transportation, and advanced power electronics broadly.

Funding and Timeline

Award maximum is $2,000,000 with a maximum duration of 24 months. Any proposal exceeding either number will not be considered. The technical volume page limit is 25 pages.

On top of the award amount, DAF provides Technical and Business Assistance funding of up to $50,000 per Phase II award, which can be split 50/50 across a first and sequential Phase II award if applicable. TABA funding can cover things like market research, IP protection, cybersecurity assistance, and manufacturing plan development, but any request has to include a detailed breakdown of the provider, their qualifications, tasks, and costs. A bare dollar figure in the cost volume without that detail will not be considered.

Proposals are due September 23, 2026 through the DoW SBIR/STTR Innovation Portal, known as DSIP. DAF anticipates evaluation and selection will wrap up within roughly 90 calendar days after the solicitation closes.

Who Should Apply

This topic fits small businesses that already have a working handle on wide bandgap or advanced semiconductor power device design, ideally with some silicon carbide, gallium nitride, or similar high voltage switching experience, and that have already put real money and engineering time into a feasibility effort before ever touching this solicitation. Companies without existing device-level data, TCAD modeling, or bench test results proving voltage and efficiency performance will have a hard time meeting the feasibility bar, since there is no Phase I runway to develop that evidence.

It also fits companies comfortable with ITAR and EAR compliance obligations, since this topic is explicitly export controlled and requires disclosure of any foreign national involvement.

Eligibility and Compliance Notes

At least one third of the research effort must be performed by the awardee, measured by direct and indirect costs. All research and development work must happen in the United States, with rare exceptions requiring written approval from the funding agreement officer, requested at initial proposal submission.

The principal investigator's primary employment must be with the applicant company at time of award and throughout the period of performance, meaning more than half their working time. Only one PI can be designated per proposal.

Applicants also need to be aware DAF now runs a foreign risk evaluation and due diligence review on every proposal under 15 U.S.C. 638(vv), covering things like foreign ownership, financial ties to countries of concern, and any listing on a range of federal restricted entity lists. This is a newer layer of scrutiny companies should budget time and legal review for before submitting.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is there a Phase I award for this topic?
No. This is a Direct-to-Phase-II topic. Phase I awards will not be made. Applicants must independently complete and document a Phase I-type feasibility effort before submitting the Phase II proposal.

How much funding is available?
Up to $2,000,000 for a Phase II award with a maximum period of performance of 24 months, plus up to $50,000 in additional Technical and Business Assistance funding.

What is the proposal deadline?
September 23, 2026, submitted electronically through DSIP.

What technical performance does DAF require?
Power switches must operate above 350V up to 1kV, achieve at least 80 percent efficiency, survive 300 krad total ionizing dose, demonstrate single event burnout immunity at 85 MeV cm2/mg LET with fluence of at least 1E6 ions per square centimeter, and reach a wafer yield above 50 percent by the end of Phase II.

Can feasibility work from a prior SBIR or STTR contract count?
No. Feasibility documentation cannot be based on or logically extend from any prior or ongoing federally funded SBIR or STTR work. It must be work the applicant substantially performed independently.

Is this topic export controlled?
Yes. It is restricted under both ITAR and the Export Administration Regulations. Any use of foreign nationals must be disclosed along with their country of origin, visa or work permit status, and the specific tasks they would perform.

What is the page limit for the technical volume?
25 pages.

What cybersecurity certification level is expected?
CMMC Level 2, Self-assessed.

Where should test data for radiation survivability come from?
Credible domestic test facilities. The topic specifically references the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory at Brookhaven National Laboratory as an example.

What happens in Phase III?
Phase III focuses on commercialization and transition into both DoW and commercial applications, including product design kit development, high voltage packaging, and MIL-PRF-19500 reliability screening, targeting markets like commercial satellites, in-space transportation, and advanced power electronics.

FY26 Breast Cancer Research Program: Breakthrough Award and Clinical Research Extension Award

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

Quick Answer

The FY26 Breast Cancer Research Program (BCRP) is a Department of War grant program, managed by CDMRP, that funds high-impact breast cancer research with clinical relevance. FY26 includes two award mechanisms: the Breakthrough Award, offered at two funding levels ranging from $750,000 to $3.35M depending on level and whether a Partnering PI is included, and the Clinical Research Extension Award, which funds deeper analysis of existing clinical trial data at up to $8.4M. A pre-application through eBRAP and a letter of intent are required before the full application. The estimated application due date is September 30, 2026.

What This Opportunity Is

This funding opportunity comes from the Breast Cancer Research Program, part of the Department of War's Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs (CDMRP), operating under the Defense Health Agency's research and development structure. The FY26 Defense Appropriations Act provided funding to support innovative, high-impact breast cancer research with clinical relevance, aimed at accelerating progress toward ending breast cancer for Service Members and their families, Veterans, and the general public.

FY26 BCRP includes two distinct award mechanisms, each suited to a different stage of research maturity. The Breakthrough Award is built for research ranging from early, high-risk ideas through late-stage, clinically validated work. The Clinical Research Extension Award is built specifically for teams that already have an open, ongoing, or completed clinical trial or study and want to extend the value of that existing data.

What the Program Is Looking For

Applications submitted to the FY26 BCRP must address one or more of the following overarching challenges.

Prevent breast cancer through primary prevention

Identify determinants of breast cancer initiation, risk, or susceptibility

Distinguish deadly from non-deadly breast cancers

Conquer the problems of overdiagnosis and overtreatment

Identify what drives breast cancer growth and determine how to stop it

Identify why some breast cancers become metastatic

Determine why and how breast cancer cells lie dormant for years and then re-emerge, and determine how to prevent lethal recurrence

Revolutionize treatment regimens by replacing them with ones that improve survival, are more effective, and are less toxic

Eliminate the mortality associated with metastatic breast cancer

In practical terms, this program is a strong fit for companies and research teams working in oncology diagnostics, breast cancer risk stratification, metastasis biology, dormancy and recurrence research, novel treatment regimens, and clinical biomarker validation tied to existing trial data.

Award Mechanism 1: Breakthrough Award

The Breakthrough Award supports promising research with high potential to lead to breakthroughs in breast cancer. Research must have the potential for major impact and must accelerate progress toward ending the disease. The award includes a Partnering PI option that supports meaningful, productive partnerships between two principal investigators.

The award is structured across three funding levels.

Funding Level 1 supports innovative, high-risk and high-reward research in the earliest stages of idea development. Preliminary data is not required at this level. Maximum allowable total costs are $750,000 for a Single PI application and $1.25M under the Partnering PI Option. Maximum period of performance is 3 years.

Funding Level 2 supports research already backed by substantial preliminary or published data in breast cancer that strongly validates clinical translation. Maximum allowable total costs are $1.65M for a Single PI application and $2.50M under the Partnering PI Option. Maximum period of performance is 3 years.

Funding Level 2, Population Science Studies is a variation of Funding Level 2 for studies analyzing human data and biospecimens that meet the same qualification standards. Maximum allowable total costs are $2.50M for a Single PI application and $3.35M under the Partnering PI Option. Maximum period of performance is 4 years.

The Grants.gov funding opportunity number for this mechanism is HT942526BCRPBTA122. A letter of intent is required prior to full application submission. Each investigator may be named as Principal Investigator or Initiating PI on one application and as Partnering PI on one additional application under this opportunity. Investigators named on an application submitted under the related opportunity HT942526BCRPBTA12 are not eligible to submit the same research project under HT942526BCRPBTA122.

Award Mechanism 2: Clinical Research Extension Award

The Clinical Research Extension Award supports projects that go deeper into clinical samples and data that already exist, rather than starting new trials. Eligible work includes deeper molecular analysis of clinical samples, initiation of new correlative studies, biomarker validation, or continuing clinical follow-up of patients enrolled in an open, ongoing, or completed clinical trial or study.

Proposed research may be hypothesis-testing, hypothesis-generating, or designed to generate experimental platforms. Projects that propose initiating new clinical trials or studies, or that propose increasing enrollment in existing studies, do not meet the intent of this award and should not apply under this mechanism.

This award requires applications to include two or more breast cancer consumer advocates on the research team, which is a distinctive requirement compared to the Breakthrough Award. It also includes a Partnering PI option.

Maximum allowable total costs are $7.0M for a Single PI application and $8.4M under the Partnering PI Option. Maximum period of performance is 4 years.

The Grants.gov funding opportunity number for this mechanism is HT942526BCRPCREA2. A letter of intent is required prior to full application submission. Each investigator may be named as PI, Initiating PI, or Partnering PI on a single application under this opportunity. Investigators named on an application submitted under the related opportunity HT942526BCRPCREA are not eligible to submit the same research project under HT942526BCRPCREA2.

Eligibility Snapshot

Breakthrough Award: open to investigators, with post-doctoral fellows specifically encouraged to be named on applications.

Clinical Research Extension Award: open to independent investigators.

Both mechanisms require a letter of intent before full application submission, and both offer a Partnering PI option for two-investigator collaborations.

Funding Details Summary

Breakthrough Award Funding Level 1: $750,000 Single PI, $1.25M Partnering PI, 3 year maximum period of performance

Breakthrough Award Funding Level 2: $1.65M Single PI, $2.50M Partnering PI, 3 year maximum period of performance

Breakthrough Award Funding Level 2, Population Science Studies: $2.50M Single PI, $3.35M Partnering PI, 4 year maximum period of performance

Clinical Research Extension Award: $7.0M Single PI, $8.4M Partnering PI, 4 year maximum period of performance

Timeline

Estimated application due date is September 30, 2026

This is currently a forecasted date. The official funding opportunity announcements, including finalized pre-application and full application deadlines, will be posted to Grants.gov under the funding opportunity numbers listed above.

How to Apply

Before submitting a full application, CDMRP requires investigators to submit a pre-application through the electronic Biomedical Research Application Portal, known as eBRAP, ahead of the pre-application deadline. All applications must conform to the final funding opportunity announcements once posted on Grants.gov.

To find this and related CDMRP funding opportunities directly on Grants.gov, search using Assistance Listing number 12.420. Investigators can also subscribe to program specific email updates through the Email Subscriptions option on the eBRAP homepage to be notified as soon as the official announcements are released.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Breast Cancer Research Program? The Breast Cancer Research Program, or BCRP, is a Department of War research program managed by CDMRP that funds innovative, high-impact breast cancer research with clinical relevance, intended to accelerate progress toward ending breast cancer.

What award mechanisms are available under FY26 BCRP? FY26 BCRP includes two mechanisms: the Breakthrough Award, offered at multiple funding levels, and the Clinical Research Extension Award, which supports deeper analysis of data from existing clinical trials or studies.

How much funding is available under the Breakthrough Award? Funding Level 1 allows up to $750,000 for a Single PI or $1.25M with a Partnering PI. Funding Level 2 allows up to $1.65M for a Single PI or $2.50M with a Partnering PI. Funding Level 2 Population Science Studies allows up to $2.50M for a Single PI or $3.35M with a Partnering PI.

How much funding is available under the Clinical Research Extension Award? Up to $7.0M for a Single PI application or $8.4M under the Partnering PI Option.

Does the Breakthrough Award require preliminary data? Funding Level 1 does not require preliminary data, since it is designed for early-stage, high-risk and high-reward ideas. Funding Level 2 and Funding Level 2 Population Science Studies do require substantial preliminary or published data that strongly validates clinical translation.

Can the Clinical Research Extension Award be used to start a new clinical trial? No. This award is intended for deeper molecular analysis, new correlative studies, biomarker validation, or continued follow-up of patients already enrolled in an open, ongoing, or completed clinical trial or study. Proposals that initiate new trials or increase enrollment in existing studies do not meet the intent of this mechanism.

Does the Clinical Research Extension Award have any team composition requirements? Yes. Applications must include two or more breast cancer consumer advocates on the research team.

What is a Partnering PI? The Partnering PI option allows two principal investigators to collaborate on a single application, and is available under both the Breakthrough Award and the Clinical Research Extension Award.

Is a letter of intent required? Yes, for both award mechanisms, a letter of intent is required before the full application can be submitted.

What is eBRAP? eBRAP is the electronic Biomedical Research Application Portal. CDMRP requires investigators to submit a pre-application through eBRAP before the pre-application deadline, prior to submitting a full application.

When is the application due? The estimated application due date is September 30, 2026, though this is currently a forecasted date pending the official funding opportunity announcements on Grants.gov.

What are the Grants.gov funding opportunity numbers? The Breakthrough Award funding opportunity number is HT942526BCRPBTA122. The Clinical Research Extension Award funding opportunity number is HT942526BCRPCREA2.

Where can I find the official announcements? The official funding opportunity announcements will be posted on Grants.gov. Investigators can search using Assistance Listing number 12.420 to find CDMRP opportunities, and can subscribe to updates through the eBRAP homepage.

FY26 Reconstructive Transplant Research Program: Investigator-Initiated Research Award

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

Quick Answer

The FY26 Reconstructive Transplant Research Program (RTRP) Investigator-Initiated Research Award is a Department of War grant, managed by CDMRP, that funds research into vascularized composite allotransplantation (VCA), the field covering hand, face, and other tissue transplants. The program has $8,000,000 available across an expected 8 awards, with a maximum of $1.0M in total costs per award over up to 3 years. There is no cost sharing requirement. A pre-application through eBRAP is required before the full application. The estimated application due date is November 4, 2026.

What This Opportunity Is

This funding opportunity comes from the Reconstructive Transplant Research Program, a program within the Department of War's Congressionally Directed Medical Research Programs (CDMRP), operating under the Defense Health Agency's research and development structure. The FY26 Defense Appropriations Act provided funding specifically to advance the science and clinical practice of vascularized composite allotransplantation, or VCA.

VCA covers transplants involving multiple tissue types together, such as skin, muscle, bone, nerve, and blood vessels, most commonly seen in hand and face transplantation for patients recovering from severe trauma. This is an area with direct relevance to wounded Service Members, though the program also serves the broader civilian patient population.

The Investigator-Initiated Research Award is designed for independent investigators at all career levels. Unlike some CDMRP mechanisms, this award does not support clinical trials, but it does support preclinical research, translational research, and clinical research involving human subjects or human anatomical substances, so long as the work stays within the scope of a defined research study rather than a trial testing an intervention's efficacy.

What the Program Is Looking For

Applications must address at least one of the following FY26 RTRP focus areas.

Improving or optimizing VCA immunosuppression, including:

Defining the unique targets and mechanisms of VCA immunogenicity and its regulation

Developing novel tolerogenic agents or approaches for VCA immunosuppression

Developing less toxic or personalized regimens for maintenance immunosuppression

Identifying or validating reliable prognostic or diagnostic biomarkers, methods, or tools for monitoring VCA graft rejection and immunosuppression

Identifying or validating reliable biomarkers for predicting and monitoring acute and chronic VCA rejection in the clinic, using human clinical samples

Developing assays, devices, or technology for clinical graft monitoring that utilize biomarkers, with proposed devices expected to account for human use factors unique to VCA recipients

Identifying or validating reliable approaches to measuring and monitoring in vivo or clinical immunosuppression levels

Advancing VCA preservation strategies, including:

Developing promising static preservation strategies, active perfusion modalities, or other technologies for translation to the clinic

Developing mitigation strategies for preservation mediated injury, including immune activation or ischemia reperfusion injury

Developing tools for measuring VCA outcomes, including performance based, patient reported, and neurocognitive measures

In practical terms, this opportunity is a strong fit for companies and research teams working in transplant immunology, organ and tissue preservation technology, perfusion systems, biomarker development, diagnostic assays, and clinical monitoring devices for transplant patients.

Eligibility and Requirements

Eligibility is open to independent investigators at all career levels. There is no restriction limiting this to a specific organization type, which CDMRP designates as unrestricted eligibility.

Applications must demonstrate solid scientific rationale paired with military relevant utility. All projects must respond to the health care needs of military Service Members or Veterans recovering from traumatic injury, and may also address the needs of their family members, caregivers, or clinicians, as well as the general public. Collaboration with military researchers and clinicians is encouraged but not required.

Applicants must include preliminary or published data relevant to reconstructive transplantation that supports the rationale for the proposed research. A letter of intent is required as part of the process.

Study design should be rigorous, with a strong statistical plan and appropriate power analysis to support reproducibility and translational feasibility.

Funding Details

Total program funding is $8,000,000

Expected number of awards is 8

Maximum allowable funding per award is $1.0M in total costs

Maximum period of performance is 3 years

Cost sharing or matching is not required

Funding instrument type is a grant

Funding opportunity number is HT942526RTRPIIRA

Assistance Listing number is 12.420, Military Medical Research and Development

Timeline

Estimated posting date is August 24, 2026

Estimated application due date is November 4, 2026

Estimated award date is September 30, 2027

Estimated project start date is September 30, 2027

These are currently forecasted dates. The official funding opportunity announcement, including the finalized pre-application and full application deadlines, will be posted to Grants.gov.

How to Apply

Before submitting a full application, CDMRP requires investigators to submit a pre-application through the electronic Biomedical Research Application Portal, known as eBRAP, ahead of the pre-application deadline. All applications must conform to the final funding opportunity announcement once it is posted on Grants.gov.

To find this and related CDMRP funding opportunities directly on Grants.gov, search using Assistance Listing number 12.420. Investigators can also subscribe to program specific email updates through the Email Subscriptions option on the eBRAP homepage to be notified as soon as the official announcement is released.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the Reconstructive Transplant Research Program? The Reconstructive Transplant Research Program, or RTRP, is a Department of War research program managed by CDMRP that funds research to advance the science and clinical practice of vascularized composite allotransplantation, the field covering hand, face, and similar multi-tissue transplants.

What does VCA stand for? VCA stands for vascularized composite allotransplantation, which refers to transplants that involve multiple connected tissue types, such as skin, muscle, bone, nerve, and blood vessels, transplanted together as a functional unit.

How much funding is available for the FY26 RTRP Investigator-Initiated Research Award? The program has $8,000,000 in total funding available and expects to make 8 awards, with a maximum of $1.0M in total costs allowed per award.

What is the maximum period of performance? The maximum period of performance for an award is 3 years.

Is cost sharing or matching required? No, this award does not require cost sharing or matching funds.

Does this award support clinical trials? No, the Investigator-Initiated Research Award does not support clinical trials. It does support research from basic through translational phases, including preclinical studies in animal models and clinical research involving human subjects or human anatomical substances.

Who is eligible to apply? Eligibility is unrestricted and open to independent investigators at all career levels.

Is preliminary data required? Yes, applicants must include preliminary or published data relevant to reconstructive transplantation that supports the scientific rationale of the proposed research.

Is a letter of intent required? Yes, a letter of intent is required before submitting the full application.

What is eBRAP? eBRAP is the electronic Biomedical Research Application Portal. CDMRP requires investigators to submit a pre-application through eBRAP before the pre-application deadline, prior to submitting a full application.

When is the application due? The estimated application due date is November 4, 2026, though this is currently a forecasted date pending the official funding opportunity announcement on Grants.gov.

What focus areas must an application address? Applications must address at least one FY26 RTRP focus area, which fall under two broad goals: improving or optimizing VCA immunosuppression, and advancing VCA preservation strategies. Specific focus areas include biomarker development, tolerogenic agents, personalized immunosuppression regimens, graft monitoring devices, perfusion and preservation technologies, and tools for measuring functional, patient reported, and neurocognitive outcomes.

Does the research need to have military relevance? Yes, all projects must be responsive to the health care needs of military Service Members or Veterans recovering from traumatic injury, and may also address their family members, caregivers, or clinicians, along with the general public. Collaboration with military researchers is encouraged but not a requirement.

What is the funding opportunity number? The funding opportunity number is HT942526RTRPIIRA.

Where can I find the official announcement? The official funding opportunity announcement will be posted on Grants.gov. Investigators can search using Assistance Listing number 12.420 to find CDMRP opportunities, and can subscribe to updates through the eBRAP homepage.

CIRM PDEV: Preclinical Development Awards for Stem Cell and Genetic Therapies

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

Quick Answer

CIRM's Preclinical Development (PDEV) program funds California organizations developing stem cell based or genetic therapies that are ready to move through IND enabling studies toward FDA clearance and a first in human clinical trial. Awards go up to $13,000,000 total cost over as long as 5 years, split into an Early PDEV (Pre IND) stage worth up to $5,500,000 and a Late PDEV (IND Enabling) stage worth up to $7,500,000. Applications must show reproducible disease modifying activity in a relevant preclinical model before CIRM will consider funding. The program recurs once per year, and CIRM anticipates funding between 12 and 21 awards in FY26-27.

Program Overview

CIRM's mission is to accelerate world class regenerative medicine science for the benefit of California patients. Under its Strategic Allocation Framework, CIRM has set a goal of advancing 15 to 20 therapies to late stage clinical trials. PDEV is one of CIRM's core product development programs built to help hit that goal. Unlike many funding mechanisms, PDEV is not a passive check writer. CIRM commits internal staff and an external network of subject matter experts to actively work alongside the awardee team on regulatory strategy, CMC, and clinical planning.

The objective of PDEV is straightforward. Take a therapeutic candidate that already has reproducible disease modifying data, and fund the work needed to clear an IND with the FDA and start a first in human trial. CIRM structures this into two possible stages:

Early PDEV covers Pre IND activities. This includes finishing candidate optimization, conducting a Pre IND meeting with the FDA, and preparing everything needed to enter pivotal IND enabling studies.

Late PDEV covers IND Enabling activities. This includes GLP toxicology and safety studies, CMC and GMP manufacturing scale up, submission and clearance of the IND itself, and clinical trial startup activities to prepare for rapid patient recruitment.

An applicant can request funding for one stage or both in a single application.

Who Should Apply

This opportunity is built for companies and nonprofit research organizations developing a stem cell based therapy or a genetic therapy that already has strong preclinical proof of concept. If your candidate has not yet shown reproducible disease modifying activity in a model relevant to your target indication, you are not ready to apply. CIRM is explicit that it will refuse applications submitted before all eligibility prerequisites are met.

You are a strong fit if:

You are a California organization, nonprofit or for profit, under CIRM's definition of a California Organization.

You have a single, finalized human therapeutic candidate, not multiple candidates under parallel evaluation.

You can name your Principal Investigator, and that person can commit at least 15 percent effort.

You have or can bring on an experienced Project Manager at 50 percent effort and a Data Project Manager to handle data sharing obligations.

Your organization, not an outside partner, will be the IND sponsor of record.

You have at least one clinical trial site in California, or a solid justification for using outside sites.

You can be ready to start funded work within 90 days of award approval.

Funding Allowance

Maximum total award: $13,000,000 in total cost, over a maximum of 5 years (60 months).

Early PDEV (Pre IND) stage: up to $5,500,000, over up to 30 months. That 30 month window includes an optional 6 months specifically for candidate optimization work.

Late PDEV (IND Enabling) stage: up to $7,500,000, over up to 30 months. That window includes an optional 6 months for clinical trial startup activity that follows IND clearance.

Allowable costs include direct project costs, facilities costs, and indirect costs, all governed by the CIRM Grants Administration Policy for Clinical Stage Projects. For profit organizations cannot claim indirect costs. Nonprofit indirect costs are capped at 20 percent of allowable direct research funding, exclusive of equipment, tuition, patient care costs, and large subcontracts over $25,000.

Applicants requesting both stages in one application must budget them separately with no overlap, though CIRM allows up to $1,500,000 of well justified Late PDEV activity that is not dependent on FDA feedback to happen ahead of the Pre IND meeting, such as GMP manufacturing runs at a CDMO.

Co-Funding Requirements

Unpartnered nonprofit applicants: no co-funding required.

Nonprofit applicant with a for profit partner: the for profit partner must commit 20 percent of total allowable project costs.

For profit applicants: must commit 20 percent of total allowable project costs.

Co-funding can be cash based or warrant based. Warrant based co-funding lets a for profit applicant issue equity warrants to CIRM instead of cash, but requires signing a Warrant Term Sheet at the time of application and issuing the warrants at award start.

Eligibility Requirements Snapshot

The application must target a single IND for one stem cell based or genetic therapy candidate.

The candidate must have documented, reproducible disease modifying activity in a relevant preclinical model. If the candidate is manufactured from a single cell source, the exact test article used in that data must be identical to the candidate moving forward. If it comes from multiple cell sources or donors, disease modifying activity must be shown across at least two donor sources or cell lines using comparable manufacturing.

Allogeneic donor cell projects need documented donor consent covering clinical development and commercial sale, plus compliance with Good Tissue Practices under 21 CFR 1271.

The applicant organization must be the named IND sponsor.

The applicant must maintain at least one California clinical trial site.

The applicant organization must meet CIRM's definition of a California Organization, must demonstrate solvency if for profit, and must be in good standing.

What CIRM Will Not Fund

Conducting a clinical trial beyond startup activities.

Patient recruitment, screening, or enrollment.

Costs already covered by a prior, current, or future CIRM award.

Work performed by an out of state organization that would retain independent IP or publication rights over what comes out of the CIRM funded project.

Costs incurred before the date of ICOC board approval.

Timeline

The PDEV program runs once per year. After the application deadline, here is roughly what to expect:

Grants Working Group (GWG) selection happens approximately 60 days after the submission deadline.

GWG discussion of selected applications happens approximately 30 days after selection.

Award approval occurs at the next available Application Review Subcommittee (ARS) meeting of CIRM's governing board.

Awardees must be ready to start work within 90 days of award approval.

How Applications Get Reviewed and Scored

If the volume of submitted applications is too high for the GWG panel to discuss all of them, CIRM runs an initial screening round. Applications get a composite score built from a selection weight (60 percent) and a rank weight (40 percent), based on clinical impact potential, unmet need, and feasibility of patient uptake. Only the top scoring group advances to full GWG discussion.

Applications that make it to full review are scored by 15 outside scientific experts on a 1 to 100 scale. A median score of 85 or higher qualifies the application as having exceptional merit and eligible for funding if funds are available. A median score below 85 is not recommended for funding.

Separately, patient advocate and nurse members of the GWG apply a 1 to 5 Patient Perspective Score. This does not directly change the scientific score, but it can influence discussion and the ARS funding decision.

The five scored review criteria are:

Value Proposition, meaning the clinical improvement the therapy offers over existing options and its potential to address unmet need and improve access.

Rationale, meaning how strong the underlying science and preclinical data are.

Project Plan and Design, meaning whether the proposed activities, budget, and timeline realistically get the project to an active IND.

Project Team and Resources, meaning whether the team has the regulatory, CMC, clinical, and manufacturing expertise and facilities to execute.

Population Impact, meaning how well the applicant understands the demographics and genetic or environmental factors relevant to the target population.

Award Administration After Funding

CIRM disburses funds against Operational Milestones rather than as a lump sum or simple reimbursement schedule. Each milestone releases additional funds once it is achieved. If an awardee misses a milestone by more than four months without resolving it to CIRM's satisfaction, CIRM can cut off disbursements and terminate the award.

Awardees also get access to CIRM's Product Development Expert Network, a group of contracted specialists in CMC, clinical, preclinical, and regulatory strategy who advise on individual projects. Any awardee planning a Pre IND meeting must review their strategy and package with CIRM and this expert network before submitting to the FDA.

Awardees are required to participate in the PDEV Knowledge Network, a pre-competitive knowledge sharing structure across CIRM's portfolio of awardees, and must budget for data management and sharing consistent with FAIR principles.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the CIRM PDEV program? PDEV is a California Institute for Regenerative Medicine funding opportunity that supports preclinical development of stem cell based and genetic therapies through IND clearance and clinical trial startup, with awards up to $13,000,000.

Who is eligible to apply for a PDEV award? Only California organizations, nonprofit or for profit, that meet CIRM's definition of a California Organization can apply. The applicant must be the IND sponsor, must have a candidate with proven disease modifying activity, and must maintain at least one clinical trial site in California.

How much funding can a PDEV award provide? Up to $13,000,000 total cost over up to 5 years. Early PDEV, the Pre IND stage, caps at $5,500,000 over 30 months. Late PDEV, the IND enabling stage, caps at $7,500,000 over 30 months.

Does PDEV require co-funding or matching funds? Unpartnered nonprofits do not need co-funding. For profit applicants, and nonprofits with a for profit partner, must commit at least 20 percent of total allowable project costs, either in cash or through equity warrants issued to CIRM.

What stage of development does my project need to be at? Your candidate needs reproducible, documented disease modifying activity in a preclinical model relevant to your target indication before you apply. This is a hard eligibility gate, not a scoring preference.

Can I apply for both the Pre IND and IND Enabling stages at once? Yes. Applicants can request funding across both Early PDEV and Late PDEV stages in a single application, though the two stages must be budgeted separately with defined, non-overlapping activities.

How long does the CIRM review process take? Roughly 60 days after the deadline for GWG selection, another 30 days for GWG discussion, then award approval at the next scheduled Application Review Subcommittee meeting. Once approved, awardees must start work within 90 days.

What review score does an application need to get funded? Applications need a median scientific score of 85 or higher out of 100 from the Grants Working Group to be considered to have exceptional merit and be eligible for funding.

Does CIRM fund the actual clinical trial? No. PDEV funds trial startup activities only, meaning protocol development, site preparation, and operational readiness. It does not fund patient recruitment, screening, enrollment, or the conduct of the trial itself.

How many PDEV awards does CIRM expect to fund this cycle? CIRM anticipates funding between 12 and 21 PDEV awards in FY26-27, depending on the mix of Early PDEV and Late PDEV applications recommended for funding.

Who is the IND sponsor under a PDEV award? The CIRM applicant organization itself, or the CIRM Principal Investigator in the case of an investigator sponsored IND. An outside partner cannot serve as the sponsor.

What kind of team does CIRM require on a PDEV application? At minimum a Principal Investigator at 15 percent effort, a Project Manager with relevant preclinical development experience at 50 percent effort, and a Data Project Manager responsible for data handling and sharing obligations.

DARPA Quantum Benchmarking Initiative (QBI) 2026: What Startups Need to Know

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

Quick Answer

DARPA's Quantum Benchmarking Initiative (QBI) 2026 Program Announcement, DARPA-PA-26-02, is not a standard solicitation you propose directly against. It is an umbrella announcement that opens the door for individual QBI Topic (QBIT) calls, which is where the actual proposal opportunities, funding details, and deadlines will live. The program's mission is to independently verify and validate whether any approach to quantum computing can reach utility scale by 2033. DARPA is looking for revolutionary, high risk, high reward paths to a utility scale quantum computer (USQC), not incremental improvements to existing systems. The overarching PA closes December 30, 2026, following a July 29, 2026 amendment that also moved oversight from the Microsystems Technology Office (MTO) to the newly formed Multi X Office (MXO) and named a new Program Manager, Dr. Micah Stoutimore.

What Is QBI, in Plain Terms

QBI exists because nobody actually knows if or when a fault tolerant, utility scale quantum computer can be built. DARPA defines "utility scale" as a machine whose computational value exceeds its cost. Rather than betting on one architecture, DARPA created QBI as a rigorous, third party verification and validation program. If a company claims it has a credible path to utility scale quantum computing, QBI is how DARPA tests that claim, helps the company identify and burn down real risks, and then communicates validated results to other government stakeholders who might want to acquire or use the technology.

QBI 2026 is the newest on-ramp into that program. It builds on the original Underexplored Systems for Utility-Scale Quantum Computing program (US2QC, DARPA-PS-22-04) and the first QBI solicitation from August 2024 (DARPA-PS-24-26). The 2026 PA exists specifically to bring in new entrants that DARPA has not yet evaluated. If your company was already selected under a prior QBI or US2QC award, DARPA does not expect you to apply again under this PA, though you are not barred from doing so if your approach is genuinely new or distinct.

What DARPA Is Actually Looking For

DARPA is explicit that this program excludes evolutionary improvements to the current state of the art in quantum computing. They want proposals that describe a credible, near term path to a USQC, not incremental qubit count increases or modest error rate improvements on familiar architectures.

Every QBIT will fall somewhere within three verification and validation stages:

Stage A asks a company to describe a USQC concept with a plausible path to realization in the near term.

Stage B asks a company to lay out the research and development plan for realizing that USQC, including the technical risks involved, how those risks will be mitigated, and what prototypes are needed to prove the concept works.

Stage C is where DARPA and the performer work together to actually verify and validate that the USQC can be built as designed and will operate as intended.

Beyond describing a hardware concept, DARPA is also interested in companies that can build the verification tools themselves, meaning testing and evaluation methods or concepts that strengthen DARPA's own Independent Verification and Validation team.

How the Program Is Structured

This is the part that trips people up. DARPA-PA-26-02 is not something you submit a proposal against directly. It is a standing program announcement under which DARPA will issue individual QBIT calls over time. Each QBIT will define its own:

Technical focus area within the broader QBI mission

Proposal process, which may include an abstract phase, a written proposal, an oral presentation, or some combination

Submission instructions and deadlines

Evaluation criteria

Eligibility requirements

Funding amount and award instrument details

Proposals submitted directly to the PA itself, rather than to a specific QBIT, will be disregarded. If you are interested in QBI, the move is to monitor for QBIT announcements at darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities rather than trying to respond to the PA itself.

Funding and Award Structure

The PA specifies the funding category as 6.2, which is applied research funding under the DoD's research classification system. Multiple awards are anticipated across the program.

Awards will be made using Other Transaction (OT) authority, either an OT for Research agreement or an OT for Prototype agreement, with the exact instrument specified in each QBIT. OTs matter here because they let DARPA and the performer negotiate terms outside the standard Federal Acquisition Regulation process. In practice, that means fewer compliance burdens, milestone based payments instead of rigid cost reporting, and more flexibility to structure the deal around commercial transition goals.

The PA itself does not publish a dollar ceiling, per award funding range, or period of performance. Those figures are set at the individual QBIT level. Any company evaluating fit should treat the PA as a signal of direction and intent, and wait for a specific QBIT before building a budget.

Timeline

Original posting date: November 14, 2025

Original closing date: November 14, 2026

Amendment 01 posted: July 29, 2026

Current closing date, as amended: December 30, 2026

Amendment 01 also changed the responsible office from the Microsystems Technology Office (MTO) to the Multi X Office (MXO), and replaced the Program Manager, moving from Dr. Joseph Altepeter to Dr. Micah Stoutimore. Individual QBIT due dates will be specified within each topic call and have not yet been published as part of the base PA.

Eligibility

Eligibility is not defined at the PA level. Each QBIT will specify its own eligibility criteria. What is defined at the PA level are the baseline requirements every awardee must meet regardless of QBIT:

Active registration in the System for Award Management (SAM.gov) at the time of proposal submission, maintained through the life of any award

Registration in Wide Area WorkFlow (WAWF) for electronic invoicing prior to award

A finding of responsibility from the DARPA Agreements Officer, and no suspension, debarment, or legal prohibition from receiving a federal award

DARPA also enforces an organizational conflict of interest policy. A company cannot simultaneously provide Scientific Engineering Technical Assistance (SETA) or Advisory and Assistance Services (A&AS) support to the government and act as a technical performer on the same effort.

Security and Data Handling

DARPA expects most QBI submissions to be unclassified but potentially Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI). All CUI must be handled in accordance with DoD Instruction 5200.48 and NIST Special Publication 800-171. A signed CUI Guide is attached to the PA as Attachment A. If a company believes its submission involves classified information, it must notify the MXO Program Security Officer by unclassified email before submitting anything classified.

Why This Matters for Startups

QBI is one of the few DoD funding mechanisms built specifically around unproven, high risk quantum computing architectures rather than incremental hardware improvement. If your company has a genuinely novel path to utility scale quantum computing, whether that is an unconventional qubit modality, a new error correction approach, or a fundamentally different system architecture, QBI is designed to fund exactly that kind of bet. It is also relevant if your core capability is testing, verification, or benchmarking methodology rather than building the quantum computer itself.

Because the PA has no fixed dollar amount, no single deadline for proposals, and no single eligibility standard, companies should treat this announcement as a heads up rather than an action item. The real opportunity, and the real deadline pressure, will show up when a specific QBIT drops.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is DARPA-PA-26-02? It is the Quantum Benchmarking Initiative (QBI) 2026 Program Announcement, an umbrella solicitation from DARPA that governs future QBI Topic (QBIT) calls focused on verifying whether any quantum computing approach can reach utility scale by 2033.

Can I submit a proposal directly to this PA? No. Proposals may only be submitted in response to a specific QBIT. Any proposal submitted directly against the PA will be disregarded.

When does DARPA-PA-26-02 close? The amended closing date is December 30, 2026. The original closing date was November 14, 2026 before Amendment 01 extended it.

Who runs the QBI program now? The Multi X Office (MXO), following Amendment 01's transfer of the program from the Microsystems Technology Office (MTO). The Program Manager is Dr. Micah Stoutimore.

How much funding is available? The PA does not specify a dollar amount. Funding levels, award sizes, and periods of performance are defined separately within each individual QBIT.

What type of award will this be? Other Transaction (OT) agreements, either for Research or for Prototype work, with the specific type determined by each QBIT.

Is this a competition between companies? Not in the traditional sense. While each QBIT call is competitive, DARPA has stated it wants to fund all viable approaches for which funding is available, rather than picking a single winner across the program.

Can companies already in QBI or US2QC apply again? DARPA does not intend this PA to solicit proposals from performers already selected under prior QBI or US2QC awards, but it does not prohibit them from applying if their new approach is genuinely distinct.

What kind of quantum computing approaches is DARPA interested in? Revolutionary, high risk, high reward approaches with a plausible near term path to utility scale operation. Evolutionary or incremental improvements to existing quantum computing approaches are explicitly excluded.

Does my company need to be registered anywhere before applying? Yes. Active SAM.gov registration is required at the time of proposal submission, and WAWF registration is required before any award can be made.

What if my technology involves classified information? You must notify the MXO Program Security Officer by unclassified email before submitting classified material. Security classification guidance will be issued by DARPA only if the award is determined to require it.

Where do I find the actual proposal opportunities? Monitor darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities for individual QBIT announcements, which will each carry their own deadlines, templates, and submission instructions.

DARPA LUC (HR001126S0014): What Startups Need to Know

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

Quick Answer

DARPA's Information Processing Techniques Office (IPTO) has released the Lightweight Universal Codec (LUC) Broad Agency Announcement, solicitation number HR001126S0014. LUC funds development of a universal, adaptive encoder-decoder that can send and receive information using any known error correction code, and can switch between codes on the fly without redesigning the hardware or software. The program is 39 months across two phases, with only one technical area open for performers. Abstracts are required and due July 22, 2026. Full proposals are by invitation only, following abstract review, with a submission closing date of August 28, 2026. Multiple awards are anticipated, using Procurement Contracts, Other Transaction Agreements, Cooperative Agreements, or Grants.

Program Overview

LUC ("luck") is built on top of DARPA's earlier GRAND (Guessing Random Additive Noise Decoding) research, which produced a universal decoder capable of decoding many different families of error-correcting codes using a single algorithm, rather than needing a separate decoder built for each code type. LUC's job is to build the other half of that pair: a universal encoder that can dynamically select among many error-correcting codes in real time, pair it with a GRAND-style universal decoder, and integrate the resulting codec into an existing communication system.

The practical problem DARPA is solving: today's communication systems lock in a specific error-correcting code (or a very small set of them) before a transmission ever happens, because dynamically evaluating and switching codes has historically been too computationally expensive. That means systems can't adapt in real time as channel conditions and noise environments change. LUC removes that constraint by making the code selection itself dynamic, informed by the decoder's own noise model and mission-specific optimization goals.

Importantly, LUC assumes the set of codes it adapts across is already known in advance. Inventing entirely new codes on the fly is explicitly out of scope. This program is about universal, adaptive switching among known codes, not code discovery.

DARPA is explicit that it wants revolutionary advances here, not evolutionary improvements to existing codec practice.

Who This Is For

LUC is a strong fit for organizations working in:

• Forward error correction and channel coding

• Communications hardware and software-defined radio

• Decoder architectures, including GRAND-style universal decoding

• Low-power, low-latency signal processing and ASIC/FPGA design

• Adaptive and cognitive communication systems

• Integration of novel codecs into existing transceiver platforms

This is a narrowly scoped, single-technical-area program. It is not a fit for teams proposing new code families themselves, systems that require classified handling (classified submissions won't even be accepted), or work centered on platform changes like moving from a software-defined codec to a chip-based codec within the same device, since that kind of comparison is explicitly excluded from the metrics.

Program Structure

LUC has one technical area, TA1, Codec Design and Integration. DARPA is only soliciting performers for TA1. Government test and evaluation (T&E) partners will support assessment of every candidate technology, but performers do not propose into a separate T&E technical area the way some other DARPA BAAs are structured.

TA1 performers are asked to do three things:

1. Build a universal encoder that can adaptively select among multiple classes of error-correcting codes in real time

2. Integrate that encoder with a universal decoder, such as a GRAND implementation, to form a complete universal codec

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

The program runs 39 months across two phases:

Phase 1, Base (12 months): Codec and system design, modeling, and simulation. DARPA and its T&E partners formally assess progress twice, once at month 6 with an initial codec design review and again at month 11 with an end-of-phase evaluation against the Phase 1 metrics. Performers who submit all deliverables and successfully meet every criterion may be advanced early into Phase 2.

Phase 2, Optional (27 months): Integration, field testing, and hardware delivery. Performers whose option is exercised integrate their codec into transceivers and run field tests at multiple locations, with one field test and one design review occurring in year two and again in year three. Each performer must deliver at least two LUC-enhanced communication devices and two unmodified "stock" devices to the government T&E team for A/B testing on size, weight, and power. LUC-enhanced devices must run at full rate in real time on fixed codes, meaning they can't be slower than a stock device except during the moment of an actual code switch.

Program Metrics

DARPA will score TA1 performers against six metrics, each with separate targets for Phase 1 and Phase 2, measured relative to the performer's own selected technology platform:

Codes supported on a single algorithm: Phase 1 requires catalogued Polar Codes for control channels per 3GPP TS 38.212 v19.3.0, five representative Reed-Solomon or Turbo codes, and one example of Modular Polar Long Codes. Phase 2 expands this to two examples of Advanced Modular Polar Long Codes, one representative AI-enabling 3GPP LDPC code, and 100 additional codes supplied by mission partners.

Channel latency: 25 percent reduction versus state of the art in Phase 1, 50 percent reduction in Phase 2, tested across multiple error-laden environments.

Signal gain in dynamic noise environments: 1 dB gain over state of the art in Phase 1, 6 dB gain in Phase 2.

Block Error Rate at Eb/No of 5 dB: 1 percent in Phase 1, 0.1 percent in Phase 2.

Receiver decoder power requirements: 10 times better than state of the art in Phase 1, 15 times better in Phase 2.

Time to switch code classes: Within 1 second after the initial complete communications frame in Phase 1, dropping to within 100 milliseconds in Phase 2.

Funding Structure

LUC does not publish a specific dollar ceiling or per-award funding range in the BAA. What is specified:

• Multiple awards are anticipated

• Award instruments may include Procurement Contracts, Research Other Transaction Agreements (10 U.S.C. Section 4021), OT for Prototype Agreements (10 U.S.C. Section 4022), Cooperative Agreements, and Grants

• Resource sharing may be required for Research OT or OT for Prototype Agreements

• DARPA explicitly discourages budgets that aren't tightly calibrated to the proposed technical approach. Submissions with a budget number that isn't backed by clear evidence connecting the level of effort to the cost will be reflected negatively in the evaluation

The IP and data rights section of this BAA is unusually detailed and worth understanding before you propose. DARPA is explicit that this solicitation is for research and experimentation only, not for production, procurement, fielding, or commercialization of any resulting technology. Any prototypes or test articles built under LUC are test articles only, not end items, and the government does not intend to rely on any LUC output for operational use. If DARPA later wants to move a LUC technology toward production or deployment, that requires a completely separate agreement with independently negotiated terms. Proposers are also required to submit an IP Management Plan and a Software Bill of Materials with their proposal, disclosing background IP, known third-party patents, licensing needs, and mitigation strategies, and performers carry Freedom-to-Operate responsibility and patent indemnification obligations for their own technology.

Key Dates

• Posting Date: July 6, 2026

• Proposers Day: July 8, 2026

• Question Submittal Closes: July 17, 2026, 2:00 PM ET

• Abstract Due Date: July 22, 2026, 2:00 PM ET (required)

• Proposal Submission Closing Date: By government invitation only, August 28, 2026, 5:00 PM ET

• Oral Presentations: By government invitation only, estimated to begin September 1, 2026, with the exact date confirmed in writing by DARPA

Unlike a lot of DARPA BAAs, an abstract here is not optional. Every proposer must submit one, and only proposers who receive an Invitation to Proceed are permitted to submit a full proposal or participate in oral presentations. There is no path to a full proposal without first clearing the abstract stage.

Eligibility

Open to all responsible U.S. and non-U.S. sources, including small businesses, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and minority institutions, though there is no funding set-aside reserved for any of these categories. Non-U.S. participants must comply with applicable nondisclosure agreements, security regulations, and export control laws.

FFRDCs, UARCs, and government entities including national labs face significant restrictions here. DARPA will not award new contracts to these entities as prime performers under this solicitation, and any direct prime proposal from one of them may be deemed non-conforming. They can potentially participate as subcontractors, but only if their role and point of contact are clearly defined in the technical proposal, their costs are excluded from the cost proposal (a rough order of magnitude estimate in the technical proposal only), and, if UARCs are involved, an organizational conflict of interest mitigation plan is included. Any of these entities that do get funded will be required to share their work with other performers on the same program.

Organizations cannot simultaneously act as a technical performer and provide Systems Engineering Technical Assistance, Advisory and Assistance Services, or similar support services on this program, unless the DARPA Deputy Director grants a written waiver.

Security and Compliance Requirements

LUC work is expected at both the unclassified and CUI levels. Classified abstracts or proposals will not be accepted under any circumstances.

CMMC Level 2 is required for this entire solicitation, which is a notably higher bar than a lot of other DARPA programs that only require Level 1 at submission. To even be eligible for award, the proposer's CAGE code must already have a valid, unexpired Final Level 2 CMMC status for TA1 recorded in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS), along with a current annual CMMC affirmation from an authorized Affirming Official. This needs to be in place before award, not something you can acquire afterward. CMMC requirements flow down to any subcontractor touching FCI or CUI. Awards made after November 10, 2026 additionally require a CMMC Third-Party Assessment posted in SPRS.

Because some LUC research may disclose performance characteristics of systems or manufacturing technologies unique and critical to defense, some awards will carry publication restrictions requiring DARPA's permission before releasing results, even though DoW policy generally favors unrestricted publication of fundamental research.

How the Selection Process Works

LUC uses a two-stage gate that's stricter than most DARPA BAAs. You cannot skip straight to a full proposal.

Stage 1, Abstract (required): Evaluated against four criteria in descending order of importance: Technical Comprehension (does the proposed universal encoding-decoding approach make sense, including channel inference, code selection, code convergence, and a concrete integration and backward-compatibility plan), Technical Ability (does the team have verifiable, demonstrated expertise in error-correcting codes, decoders, and communications systems), IP Considerations (are data, software, and patent rights clearly identified along with third-party risk and mitigation), and Cost Considerations (is the proposed level of effort logically tied to the resource ask).

Every proposer gets one of two outcomes: an Invitation to Proceed, or a non-selection notice. Non-selected proposers cannot submit a full proposal or participate in oral presentations under this BAA. An Invitation to Proceed does not guarantee an eventual award.

Stage 2, Full Proposal and Oral Presentation: Only for proposers who received an Invitation to Proceed. The full proposal package (slide deck, cost proposal spreadsheet and narrative, FRRBS Common Forms, and a redlined sample agreement if requesting an OT) is submitted and then presented in person at DARPA's Arlington, VA offices. Each oral presentation session runs 1 hour and 15 minutes: 5 minutes of DARPA opening remarks, a 30-minute presentation, a 10-minute break, and a 30-minute Q&A. DARPA records every session. Presentations should be technical, not promotional, and DARPA expects the actual technical personnel who can field detailed questions to be in the room.

Full proposals and oral presentations are then scored against four criteria in descending order of importance: Overall Scientific and Technical Merit, Proposer's Capabilities or Related Experience (including the ability to meet the CMMC Level 2 requirement), Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission (including how well you've identified and mitigated patent and Freedom-to-Operate risk), and Schedule and Cost Realism.

What You Need to Submit

Abstract (required): Submitted through the DARPA BAA Tool (BAAT) using the required LUC Abstract Template, at the unclassified or CUI level.

Full Proposal (invitation only): Details are provided in your specific Invitation to Proceed letter, but proposers should expect to need a presentation slide deck in English, a cost proposal spreadsheet and narrative, the FRRBS Common Forms (Biographical Sketch and Current and Pending Support), and, if requesting an OT award, a redlined sample agreement showing your proposed negotiated terms.

Program Meetings and Reporting Cadence

• Kickoffs alternate between Washington, DC and San Diego, CA, starting in Washington, DC, and run one day

• Field tests run five to seven days

• The Phase 1 end-of-phase evaluation runs three days; the Phase 2 end-of-phase evaluation runs five days

• PI meetings and design reviews are conducted virtually

• Performers must meet with DARPA virtually no less than once every two weeks (roughly 30 minutes each) to report technical and administrative progress

• DARPA may conduct unannounced site visits to performer facilities at its discretion

Required deliverables include technical documents, prototype hardware with full installation and diagnostic documentation, commented source code and build scripts, annotated slide decks within one week of every program event, quarterly technical status reports within 15 days of quarter-end, monthly financial status reports within 15 days of month-end, a post-exercise report within 30 days of every field test and end-of-phase evaluation, a final phase report within 30 days of the end of each phase, and a final report at the close of the program.

Why This Matters Beyond the Award

Every modern communication system, from 5G handsets to satellite links to tactical radios, depends on error correction, and right now nearly all of them are locked into a fixed code chosen at design time. A universal, adaptive codec that can switch codes in real time based on actual channel conditions is directly relevant to commercial wireless, satellite communications, and IoT, not just defense radios. A company that builds real low-power, low-latency universal codec technology under LUC is building IP with a genuinely broad commercial runway, on top of getting exposure to DARPA's GRAND research base.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is DARPA LUC? LUC, or Lightweight Universal Codec, is a DARPA IPTO program funding the development of a universal, adaptive encoder-decoder that can send and receive information using any known error correction code, and dynamically switch between codes in real time without a hardware or software redesign.

What is the solicitation number for LUC? HR001126S0014.

When are LUC abstracts due? July 22, 2026, at 2:00 PM Eastern Time. Unlike many DARPA BAAs, submitting an abstract is required, not optional, and you cannot submit a full proposal without first receiving an Invitation to Proceed based on your abstract.

When are full LUC proposals due? Full proposals are by government invitation only. The proposal submission closing date is August 28, 2026, at 5:00 PM Eastern Time, but only for proposers who already received an Invitation to Proceed.

How long is the LUC program? 39 months across two phases: a 12-month base Phase 1 focused on design, modeling, and simulation, and a 27-month optional Phase 2 focused on integration and field testing.

How much funding does LUC provide? DARPA has not published a specific dollar ceiling in the BAA. Multiple awards are anticipated, and funding instruments may include Procurement Contracts, Research Other Transaction Agreements, OT for Prototype Agreements, Cooperative Agreements, and Grants. DARPA explicitly discourages budgets that aren't tightly tied to the proposed technical level of effort.

What technical area does LUC solicit performers for? Only one: TA1, Codec Design and Integration. Performers build a universal adaptive encoder, integrate it with a universal decoder such as a GRAND implementation, and integrate the resulting codec into an existing communication system.

Does LUC allow proposers to invent new error-correcting codes? No. LUC assumes the set of codes a codec will adapt across is known in advance. Generating novel codes on the fly is explicitly out of scope.

What CMMC level does LUC require? CMMC Level 2, which is required for the entire solicitation. Proposers must already have a valid, unexpired Final Level 2 CMMC status for TA1 recorded in the Supplier Performance Risk System, along with a current annual CMMC affirmation, before they are eligible for award.

Can classified work be proposed under LUC? No. LUC anticipates work at the unclassified and CUI levels only. Classified abstract or proposal submissions will not be accepted.

Does DARPA intend to produce or field LUC technology directly from this program? No. DARPA is explicit that this solicitation is for research and experimentation only. Any prototypes are test articles, not production end items, and the government does not intend to rely on LUC results for operational deployment. Any future production or fielding would require a completely separate agreement with independently negotiated terms.

Are FFRDCs, UARCs, and national labs eligible to propose on LUC? Not as prime performers. DARPA will not award new contracts to these entities directly under this solicitation, and a direct prime proposal from one may be deemed non-conforming. They may participate as subcontractors only under specific conditions, including a clearly defined role, excluded funding from the cost proposal, and, for UARCs, an organizational conflict of interest mitigation plan.

What happens if my LUC abstract isn't selected? You'll receive a non-selection notification and will not be permitted to submit a full proposal or participate in oral presentations under this BAA. There is no appeal path described in the solicitation.

DARPA DICE (HR001126S0010): What Startups Need to Know

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

Quick Answer

DARPA's Information Processing Techniques Office (IPTO) has released the Decentralized Artificial Intelligence through Controlled Emergence (DICE) Broad Agency Announcement, solicitation number HR001126S0010. DICE funds research into decentralized multi-agent AI systems that can coordinate and stay under control without a central orchestrator, for use in long, complex, contested missions. The program runs 36 months across three phases. Abstracts are due June 30, 2026, and full proposals are due August 25, 2026. Multiple awards are anticipated, using Procurement Contracts, Other Transaction Agreements, and Cooperative Agreements. There is no set-aside for small businesses, but all responsible U.S. and non-U.S. sources may compete.

Program Overview

DICE aims to move multi-agent AI systems away from today's brittle, centrally orchestrated model (where a single planner, router, or "boss agent" assigns tasks and aggregates results) and toward a decentralized architecture where heterogeneous AI agents self-organize, coordinate peer-to-peer, and stay aligned to mission intent without a central point of control or failure.

The core problem DARPA is trying to solve: current multi-agent systems (built on frameworks like LangGraph, CrewAI, or AutoGen) don't scale well, adapt slowly to changing conditions, struggle with incomplete or conflicting information, and are fragile to adversarial manipulation, since a single compromised orchestrator can take down the whole system. DICE wants a fundamentally different architecture, not an incremental improvement on existing orchestration tools.

The technical solution DARPA envisions is a "local adaptor" that plugs into any AI agent (regardless of vendor or model) and handles two jobs at once: peer-to-peer coordination with other agents, and local control that keeps that individual agent aligned to its role and mission over long stretches of time, even under adversarial pressure.

DARPA explicitly wants revolutionary advances, not evolutionary improvements to existing practice. Proposals that read as generic, boilerplate, or broadly aggregated will be found nonconforming before they're even substantively reviewed.

Who This Is For

This solicitation is a strong fit for organizations working in:

• Multi-agent AI systems and agent orchestration

• Distributed systems, consensus algorithms, and fault-tolerant computing

• Reinforcement learning, particularly multi-agent RL

• Mechanistic interpretability, activation steering, and representation engineering

• Game theory and mechanism design

• Formal methods and control theory

• AI red-teaming, adversarial robustness, and Byzantine fault tolerance

• Simulation environment and test infrastructure development for agentic systems

It is not a fit for teams proposing incremental improvements to existing orchestration frameworks, narrow cybersecurity network-simulation tools, or small-scale robotics work built around high-fidelity physics engines. DARPA calls both of those out explicitly as out of scope for the Test and Evaluation area.

The Three Technical Areas

DICE is structured around three Technical Areas (TAs). Proposers pick one lane: TA1 and TA2 must be proposed together as a combined effort, while TA3 is proposed on its own. Organizations selected to perform TA3 are not eligible to also perform TA1 or TA2.

TA1: Self-Organization via Peer-to-Peer Coordination and Distributed Consensus TA1 teams build the theory and algorithms that let AI agents form teams, divide up tasks, and reach consensus without a central planner. Approaches can include distributed auctions, multi-agent reinforcement learning, game-theoretic mechanism design, and Byzantine fault-tolerant consensus. Success is measured by scalability (how many agents, roles, and messages the system can handle), adaptability (how fast it recovers from failure or disruption), and resilience (how well it holds up under conflicting, deceptive, or adversarial information).

TA2: Role Coherence and Local Inference Control TA2 teams build inference-time control methods that keep individual AI agents faithful to their assigned role and mission over long conversations and many reasoning steps, without turning them into rigid, low-creativity systems. Approaches can include activation steering, representation engineering, memory editing, context pruning, and game-theoretic incentive design for closed, black-box models where internal activations aren't accessible. TA2 must work for both open-weight models and proprietary black-box models.

TA3: Test and Evaluation TA3 performers build the simulation environment, the defense-relevant use cases, and the evaluation infrastructure that everyone else's technology gets tested against. This includes building a baseline centrally orchestrated multi-agent system for Phase 1 comparison, running team-vs-team playoffs in Phases 2 and 3, and standing up a platform that can eventually simulate 100,000 agents exchanging a million messages. TA3 work can involve Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) and requires demonstrated CUI safeguarding capability as a condition of passing the initial conformance review.

Program Structure and Scale

DICE runs 36 months across three phases, with mission complexity scaling up dramatically at each stage:

Phase 1, Decentralization (9 months): Establish that a decentralized approach beats a centrally orchestrated baseline. Target scale is 500 agents and 5,000 interactions between them. Evaluated head-to-head against a DARPA-built SOTA orchestrated baseline in month 8.

Phase 2, Adversarial Robustness (15 months): Shift focus to surviving Byzantine failures, deception, and compromised agents. Target scale is 5,000 agents and 50,000 interactions. Evaluated through team-vs-team playoffs in months 13, 16, and 19, with a final playoff in month 23 that down-selects which TA1/TA2 teams advance to Phase 3.

Phase 3, Scale (12 months): Push the architecture to its limits. Target scale is 100,000 agents and 1 million interactions, with agents beginning to create other agents. Ends with a final team-vs-team competition in month 35.

For budgeting purposes, proposers should treat February 1, 2027, as the Month 1 start date, even though actual meeting locations and scheduling are notional and subject to change.

Funding Structure

DARPA has not published a specific dollar ceiling or per-award funding range in this BAA. What is specified:

• Multiple awards are anticipated

• Award instruments may include Procurement Contracts, Other Transaction (OT) Agreements for Prototype (10 U.S.C. Section 4022), OT Agreements for Research (10 U.S.C. Section 4021), and Cooperative Agreements

• The Government Contracting Officer has sole discretion over which instrument type is used, regardless of what a proposer requests

• Resource sharing may be required for OT Prototype or OT Research agreements under 10 U.S.C. Sections 4021 and 4022

• Cost realism is an official evaluation criterion, meaning proposed budgets need to be defensible and tied directly to the proposed labor hours, materials, and technical approach, not just a round number

Because DARPA intends to retain Government Purpose Rights in all deliverables and expects most DICE research to be open-sourced, proposers who do not intend to open-source their work need to explain why in the proposal itself.

Key Dates

• Proposers Day: May 29, 2026

• Posting Date: June 10, 2026

• Abstract Due Date: June 30, 2026, 2:00 PM ET (strongly encouraged, not mandatory)

• Question Submittal Closes: August 18, 2026, 2:00 PM ET

• Full Proposal Due Date: August 25, 2026, 2:00 PM ET

Submitting an abstract first is optional but strongly recommended. DARPA reviews abstracts in two steps: a strict technical conformance check, then a comprehensive review. Every proposer who submits an abstract gets a letter back marked Nonconforming, Encouraged, or Discouraged, each with DARPA's rationale attached. A Discouraged rating doesn't legally bar you from submitting a full proposal, but it's a strong signal about your odds.

Eligibility

Open to all responsible U.S. and non-U.S. sources, including small businesses, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and minority institutions, though there is no funding set-aside for any of these categories. Non-U.S. participants must comply with applicable nondisclosure agreements, security regulations, and export control laws.

Not eligible: Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs), University Affiliated Research Centers (UARCs), and government entities including national labs. UARCs and FFRDCs interested in the program should contact the DARPA point of contact before the abstract deadline to discuss joining as part of the government team instead.

Organizations cannot simultaneously act as a technical performer and provide Systems Engineering Technical Assistance, Advisory and Assistance Services, or similar support services on this program, unless the DARPA Deputy Director grants a written waiver.

Security and Compliance Requirements

TA1 and TA2 work is expected to be entirely unclassified. TA3 work spans both unclassified and Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI), and TA3 proposers must demonstrate CUI safeguarding capacity as part of the mandatory conformance review, or they will be found unacceptable before technical merit is even evaluated.

CMMC (Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification) applies to any resulting procurement contract. CMMC Level 1 certification is required at the time of proposal submission. Level 2 applies to any work touching CUI. A current CMMC self-assessment must already be recorded in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) before award, and a valid, current CMMC certification is a hard condition of award, meaning proposers without it are ineligible to be awarded regardless of technical score. Contracts awarded after November 10, 2026 that involve CUI will additionally require a CMMC Third-Party Assessment on file in SPRS before award.

Because some fundamental research under this program may disclose performance characteristics of military systems considered unique and critical to defense, some awards will carry publication restrictions requiring DARPA's permission before releasing results, even though DARPA's default policy favors unrestricted publication of fundamental research.

How Proposals Get Evaluated

Evaluation happens in two steps.

Step 1, Mandatory Technical Conformance: DARPA checks whether the technical approach is genuinely original. Proposals that read as generic, boilerplate, or broadly aggregated without mission-specific synthesis are found nonconforming and go no further, regardless of everything else in the proposal. TA3 proposals face an additional conformance check on demonstrated CUI safeguarding capacity.

Step 2, Comprehensive Evaluation: Conforming proposals are then scored against five criteria, listed here in descending order of importance:

1. Overall Scientific and Technical Merit: Is the approach innovative, feasible, and complete, with clear tasks, deliverables, identified risks, and a realistic schedule?

2. Technical Qualifications: Does the team have the expertise and demonstrated commitment to actually execute?

3. Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission: Does this create or prevent technological surprise and strengthen the national security technology base?

4. Plans and Capability to Accomplish Technology Transition: Is there a credible path to transition the technology, and does the proposed IP structure help or hurt the government's ability to transition it?

5. Cost Realism: Are the proposed costs defensible, tied to actual labor hours and materials, and does the approach make efficient use of prior related research already available?

What You Need to Submit

Abstract (optional but strongly encouraged): Submitted through the DARPA BAA Tool (BAAT) using the required A1 Abstract Template. Anything not explicitly requested in the template will not be reviewed, so following the format matters as much as the content.

Full Proposal: Also submitted through BAAT, and must include:

• P1, Volume I Proposal Template (Technical and Management)

• P2, Volume II Proposal Template (Cost)

• P3, Proposal Summary Slide Template

• P4, DARPA Standard Cost Proposal Spreadsheet

• Associate Contractor Agreement (for informational purposes)

If requesting an OT Agreement or Cooperative Agreement, key personnel must also submit a CF Biographical Sketch and CF Other Support form, using NSF's instructions for completing the Common Disclosure Forms.

DARPA strongly encourages proposers to submit red-lined, track-changes edits to the Model Contract or Model OT Agreement showing exactly what terms they would want to negotiate if selected, with comment boxes explaining the reasoning behind each requested change.

Program Meetings

• Month 1: Program Kickoff Workshop, Washington D.C.

• Month 5: Phase 1 PI Meeting, San Francisco, CA

• Month 10: Phase 2 Kickoff Workshop, Boston, MA

• Month 18: Phase 2 PI Meeting, Washington D.C.

• Month 24: Phase 3 Kickoff Workshop, Washington D.C.

• Month 30: Phase 3 PI Meeting, San Francisco, CA

• Month 35: Final PI Meeting and Demo, Washington D.C.

Locations are notional and subject to change.

Why This Matters Beyond the Award

DICE sits at the intersection of a real commercial trend and a real defense need. Every major AI lab is racing toward multi-agent systems right now, and almost all of them are built on centralized orchestration frameworks that DARPA is explicitly calling brittle and unfit for contested conditions. A company that builds a genuinely decentralized coordination or control architecture under DICE isn't just fulfilling a defense contract, it's building IP that's directly relevant to where commercial agentic AI is headed as multi-agent systems scale past what a single orchestrator can reasonably manage.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is DARPA DICE? DICE, or Decentralized Artificial Intelligence through Controlled Emergence, is a DARPA IPTO program funding research into multi-agent AI systems that coordinate peer-to-peer and stay aligned to mission intent without relying on a central orchestrator, so they can operate in contested, degraded-communication environments.

What is the solicitation number for DICE? HR001126S0010.

When are DICE abstracts due? June 30, 2026, at 2:00 PM Eastern Time. Abstracts are strongly encouraged but not required.

When are full DICE proposals due? August 25, 2026, at 2:00 PM Eastern Time.

How long is the DICE program? 36 months, split into three phases: 9 months for Phase 1 (Decentralization), 15 months for Phase 2 (Adversarial Robustness), and 12 months for Phase 3 (Scale).

How much funding does DICE provide? DARPA has not published a specific dollar ceiling in the BAA. Multiple awards are anticipated, and funding instruments may include Procurement Contracts, Other Transaction Agreements, and Cooperative Agreements. The government has sole discretion over which instrument type is used and negotiates terms individually with each selectee.

What are the three technical areas in DICE? TA1 covers peer-to-peer coordination and distributed consensus among agents. TA2 covers local inference-time control that keeps individual agents aligned to their role and mission. TA3 covers test and evaluation, including building the simulation environment and running competitive evaluations. TA1 and TA2 must be proposed together; TA3 is proposed separately, and TA3 performers cannot also perform TA1 or TA2.

Is DICE open to small businesses and non-U.S. companies? Yes. All responsible U.S. and non-U.S. sources may propose, including small businesses, Historically Black Colleges and Universities, and minority institutions, though there is no funding set-aside reserved for any of these groups. Non-U.S. participants must comply with applicable export control and security requirements.

Who is not eligible to propose on DICE? Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs), University Affiliated Research Centers (UARCs), and government entities including national labs cannot propose. These organizations can contact DARPA before the abstract deadline about joining the government team instead.

Does DICE require security clearances or CMMC certification? TA1 and TA2 work is expected to remain fully unclassified. TA3 work spans unclassified and CUI. Any resulting procurement contract requires CMMC Level 1 certification at the time of proposal submission, with Level 2 required for work involving CUI, and a valid CMMC certification is a hard condition of contract award.

What happens if my abstract is found nonconforming? DARPA will notify you that it was not reviewed in the comprehensive step and will explain its rationale. You can still submit a full proposal even after a Discouraged or Nonconforming abstract determination, but DARPA's feedback is a strong signal of how competitive your approach is likely to be.

Does DARPA retain rights to the technology developed under DICE? DARPA intends to retain Government Purpose Rights in all DICE deliverables across all three technical areas, including source code. DARPA also expects most DICE research to be open-sourced. If a proposer does not intend to open-source their work, they need to explain that rationale directly in the proposal.

What kind of use cases will DICE be tested against? DARPA-relevant use cases such as operational planning for conflict scenarios, resource acquisition, logistics, and battle management, tested in simulation environments rather than physical hardware. Explicitly out of scope are use cases centered purely on cybersecurity network simulation and small-scale robotics with high-fidelity physics engines.

ARPA-H FASTPASS Program: Rapid Drug Quality Screening Funding

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

Quick Answer

FASTPASS (Fast Assessment of Solutions, Therapeutics, Pharmaceuticals, and Supplies) is an ARPA-H program funding development of rapid, non-destructive screening tools that can verify pharmaceutical quality and safety through packaging, without opening boxes, in near real-time. The program targets ports, warehouses, and distribution centers where drug shipments currently face slow, low-coverage inspection. The solicitation is expected to release in mid-August 2026 and will be posted on SAM.gov. A virtual Proposer Workshop is scheduled for August 24, 2026, with registration required by August 20.

What problem is FASTPASS trying to solve?

Drug-related morbidity and mortality cost the U.S. healthcare system $528 billion per year. Drug recalls affect medication used by over 150 million Americans annually, and most recalls only surface after patients have already been exposed. Rising import volumes have outpaced FDA's ability to sample and test drugs at ports, where testing today only covers a small percentage of shipments and can take weeks to complete.

What is FASTPASS funding?

The program is structured around two technical areas.

TA1 SAMPLE funds advanced through-packaging sensing technologies that evaluate a product's chemical makeup using spectrographic or other non-contact, non-destructive methods.

TA2 DETECT funds analytics and models that transform existing spectroscopic techniques and address the technical gaps needed to bring next-generation detection methods into practice, building on what TA1 performers develop.

ARPA-H is looking for teams that combine expertise in non-contact spectroscopy, artificial intelligence and machine learning, pharmaceutical chemistry, and hardware engineering.

When does FASTPASS open?

The solicitation notice ID has not yet been assigned. ARPA-H expects to release the solicitation in mid-August 2026 on SAM.gov, with full details on requirements, deadlines, submission templates, and evaluation criteria to follow at that time.

Are there events for proposers?

Yes. A virtual Proposer Workshop (Notice ID ARPA-H-SN-26-157) is scheduled for August 24, 2026, with registration required by August 20 at 12:00 PM ET through the ARPA-H Solutions site. A second hybrid Proposers' Day will follow after the solicitation is published. ARPA-H recommends attending both to improve teaming opportunities.

Does FASTPASS require teaming?

ARPA-H anticipates teaming will be necessary given the breadth of expertise required. A teaming page is available on the ARPA-H Solutions site for proposers to post profiles and connect with potential partners. Listing on this page does not represent ARPA-H endorsement or evaluation of any team or individual.

Who runs the FASTPASS program?

James Coburn, CAPT, serves as Program Manager.

FAQs

Q: What does FASTPASS stand for?
A: FASTPASS stands for Fast Assessment of Solutions, Therapeutics, Pharmaceuticals, and Supplies. It's an ARPA-H program focused on rapid, non-destructive drug quality screening.

Q: When will the FASTPASS solicitation be released?
A: ARPA-H expects to release the solicitation in mid-August 2026. It will be posted and maintained on SAM.gov once available. A specific Notice ID has not yet been assigned.

Q: What are the two technical areas in FASTPASS?
A: FASTPASS has TA1 SAMPLE, which funds through-packaging sensing technology using spectrographic or other non-contact methods, and TA2 DETECT, which funds analytics and models that build on TA1 sensing data to support next-generation detection.

Q: What kind of companies should apply to FASTPASS?
A: Companies working in non-contact spectroscopy, sensor hardware, artificial intelligence and machine learning, pharmaceutical chemistry, or hardware engineering are strong candidates. ARPA-H is specifically looking for cross-disciplinary teams rather than single-domain solutions.

Q: Is teaming required for FASTPASS?
A: ARPA-H anticipates that teaming will be necessary given the breadth of expertise the program requires. A teaming profile page is available on the ARPA-H Solutions site for proposers to find potential partners. Being listed does not mean ARPA-H has endorsed or evaluated that team.

Q: What is the Proposer Workshop and when is it?
A: The Proposer Workshop is a virtual event for the proposer community to learn more about FASTPASS, ask questions, and make connections. It's scheduled for August 24, 2026, and registration is required by August 20, 2026 at 12:00 PM ET on the ARPA-H Solutions site.

Q: Is there a second event after the solicitation is released?
A: Yes. ARPA-H will hold a hybrid Proposers' Day after the solicitation publishes to give additional guidance on the process. ARPA-H recommends attending both events to maximize teaming opportunities.

Q: Who is the Program Manager for FASTPASS?
A: James Coburn, CAPT, is the Program Manager for FASTPASS.

Q: What problem is FASTPASS trying to solve?
A: Drug-related morbidity and mortality cost the U.S. healthcare system $528 billion annually, and drug recalls affect over 150 million Americans each year, usually only surfacing after patients are already exposed. Current port inspection only samples a small fraction of imported drugs and can take weeks. FASTPASS aims to close that gap with in-minutes, non-destructive screening.

Q: Where can I find the FASTPASS teaming and FAQ pages?
A: Both are hosted on the ARPA-H Solutions site. You'll need to create an account or sign in to submit teaming profiles or ask questions in the FAQ section.

USAMRDC/Defense Health Agency Broad Agency Announcement for Extramural Medical Research:

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

Overview of the Funding Opportunity

This is the USAMRDC/Defense Health Agency Broad Agency Announcement for Extramural Medical Research, funding opportunity number HT942523SBAA1. It's continuously open for a full five-year window, October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027, so there's no application deadline in the usual sense. Instead, organizations submit a pre-proposal through eBRAP at any time, and if invited, follow with a full proposal/application. This is one of the largest standing military medical research vehicles in the federal system, and it funds applied research, preclinical research, clinical research, and clinical trials across nine program areas ranging from infectious disease to psychological health to traumatic brain injury.

Program Areas of Interest

The BAA covers nine research portfolios:

• Military Infectious Diseases

  • This portfolio covers the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of infectious diseases that threaten deployed forces, including combat-associated wound infections and multidrug-resistant organisms that show up more often as casualties move through prolonged care. DHA is organizing this work around three capability buckets: preventing infections before they start, diagnosing them fast in far-forward settings, and treating both initial infections and resistant strains across the full continuum of care. Companies with diagnostics, prophylactics, or wound-care technology aimed at combat environments are a strong fit here.

• Combat Casualty Care

  • This is the broadest and most technology-forward portfolio in the BAA. It spans point-of-need trauma care, resuscitation, complex injury and organ support, forward surgical care, wound and burn recovery, transport physiology, en route care, virtual health and monitoring, scalable triage, and autonomous systems. DHA is specifically calling out AI-enabled decision support, telemedicine platforms, and autonomous or robotic evacuation and care technology as capability gaps, which makes this the natural landing spot for medtech and defensetech companies building anything that helps stabilize, monitor, or move a casualty when evacuation is delayed or contested.

• Traumatic Brain Injury

  • This program funds diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of TBI across the full severity spectrum, from mild concussion to penetrating injury, including blast overpressure and polytrauma cases. Focus areas include noninvasive far-forward assessment tools, fluid-based biomarkers, minimally invasive intracranial access, and return-to-duty validation. Any TBI-related clinical research funded here that includes 50 or more subjects has to be shared through the DOD-NIH FITBIR data system, so companies should budget for that requirement. Training, chronic TBI management, neurodegenerative disease, and spinal cord injury are explicitly out of scope.

• Psychological Health

  • This portfolio funds research that assesses, protects, and optimizes the psychological readiness of Service Members, their families, and the broader military community. It's organized around seven capability areas: objective assessment tools, countermeasures tailored to military community needs, prevention strategies against emerging threats, better models of care for both early intervention and tailored treatment, return-to-duty guidelines, and tools that help Service Members and units build psychological readiness. It's intentionally broad across clinical conditions rather than tied to one specific diagnosis.

• Sensory Systems

  • This program covers pain, ocular, auditory, and vestibular injuries and illnesses tied to military service. The capability requirements focus on mechanistic characterization of injury, better assessment and diagnostic tools, point-of-injury stabilization, and treatment development, with named focus areas in pain control and anesthesia, temporary corneal repair, and auditory injury assessment. Chronic pain, regenerative or transplant approaches, and anything overlapping with TBI are out of scope.

• Musculoskeletal Injury

  • This portfolio funds prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and rehabilitation of musculoskeletal injuries, with the goal of reducing injury risk and speeding safe return to duty. Priority areas include rehabilitation interventions and technologies usable in pre-hospital settings, therapeutics that accelerate recovery, and broader musculoskeletal health preservation. Spinal cord injury treatment is excluded.

• Environmental Exposures

  • This program addresses health threats from extreme heat and cold, high altitude, military diving, toxic exposures, aviation medicine, and vibration or acceleration, across basic, applied, and advanced technology development research. Weaponized CBRN, blast injury, infectious disease, and noise are handled elsewhere in the BAA and are out of scope here. This is a narrower portfolio but a real fit for companies with environmental monitoring or countermeasure technology relevant to operational medicine.

• Directed Energy/Radiation Health

  • This portfolio splits into two lanes. Directed energy research looks at distinguishing a harmless "bioeffect" from an actual adverse health effect following radiofrequency, optical, or acoustic exposure, with an eye toward informing safety standards and clinical guidelines. Radiation health research covers pre-exposure prophylaxis, biomarkers for diagnosis and treatment, and characterization of radiation injury mechanisms, including combined injuries where radiation exposure overlaps with trauma like hemorrhage or burns.

• DOD Working Dogs

  • This is the only portfolio focused on military working dogs rather than human Service Members. It funds research into canine musculoskeletal injury prevention, wound recovery and therapeutics, and pain management, including breed and genetics-based risk factors and return-to-duty protocols for MWDs. It's a small niche but a real one, and it's worth flagging for any client with veterinary or animal health technology.

Each portfolio has its own capability requirements and detailed Research Areas of Interest laid out in Appendix I, and applicants are expected to align tightly to those before writing a pre-proposal. A few areas stand out for dual-use technology companies: Combat Casualty Care explicitly calls out autonomous systems, AI-enabled clinical decision support, and virtual health/telemedicine platforms as capability gaps, and Traumatic Brain Injury calls for noninvasive diagnostic tools and fluid-based biomarkers. Environmental Exposures and Directed Energy/Radiation Health are narrower but still open to biotech and medtech companies with relevant countermeasure or biomarker technology.

Funding and Award Structure

There's no funding ceiling or floor specified. Budgets should scale to the complexity of the proposed work, and awards can take the form of a grant, cooperative agreement, procurement contract, or Other Transaction Agreement for research or prototypes, at the government's discretion. Assistance agreements can run up to 4 years, contracts up to 5 years, and no proposal will be funded more than 24 months after it's submitted. There's no cost-sharing requirement in the general case.

Eligibility

Eligibility is broad: for-profit, nonprofit, academic, and public/private organizations of any size can apply, including international entities, as long as they're extramural to DOD (FFRDCs and DOD intramural investigators are excluded from direct awards, though teaming and collaborator arrangements are allowed). Small businesses, including veteran-owned, HUBZone, and woman-owned firms, get preference for subaward participation. Awards go to organizations, not individuals, so the PI needs an eligible organizational home.

Submission Process

This is a two-step process. Step one is a pre-proposal/pre-application submitted through eBRAP.org at any time before the BAA closes. It has to describe a specific idea or project tied to one of the nine program areas above, no vague capability statements. If DHA likes it, the organization is invited to submit a full proposal through Grants.gov. Because this BAA never closes and reopens on a schedule, companies with a clear technical fit can move whenever they're ready rather than waiting on a cycle.

Why This Matters for BW&CO Clients

This BAA is a strong long-running fit for any client doing combat casualty care tech, TBI diagnostics or biomarkers, psychological health tools, sensory injury devices, or musculoskeletal recovery technology, especially companies with AI-enabled monitoring, autonomous care, or diagnostic platforms that map to the Combat Casualty Care and TBI focus areas. Because there's no deadline pressure, this is a good one to keep in the pipeline as a standing opportunity rather than a one-time push.

FAQs

Is there a deadline to apply for this BAA?
No. It's continuously open from October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2027. Organizations can submit a pre-proposal at any time before it closes.

How do I actually apply?
It's a two-step process. First you submit a pre-proposal/pre-application through eBRAP.org describing a specific project idea tied to one of the nine program areas. If DHA is interested, you're invited to submit a full proposal through Grants.gov.

How much funding is available, and is there a cap on award size?
There's no specified funding limit and no set number of awards. Budgets should be sized to the complexity of the proposed research, and the government funds proposals based on technical merit, program fit, and available funding, which varies year to year.

What kind of award will I get, a grant or a contract?
That's up to the government. Awards can be procurement contracts, grants, cooperative agreements, or Other Transaction Agreements for research or prototypes. The choice depends on the nature of the work and the relationship the government wants with the recipient.

How long can the project run?
Assistance agreements (grants and cooperative agreements) can run up to 4 years. Contracts can run up to 5 years. Regardless of instrument type, no proposal will be considered for funding more than 24 months after it was submitted.

Is cost-sharing required?
No, not in the general case. There's no cost-sharing or matching requirement to be eligible, except in specific situations involving Other Transaction Agreements, where separate cost-sharing rules under 10 USC 4021/4022 or 32 CFR 37 apply.

Who's eligible to apply?
Any extramural organization: academic institutions, biotech and medtech companies, foundations, non-DOD government agencies, and research institutes, regardless of nationality. FFRDCs can't receive awards directly but can team with eligible organizations. DOD intramural investigators can't apply directly either, though they can participate as named collaborators with command authorization.

Do awards go to individuals or organizations?
Organizations only. A principal investigator has to be affiliated with an eligible organization to be part of a proposal.

Does this BAA fund clinical trials?
Yes. It supports applied research, preclinical research, clinical research, and clinical trials. Proposals involving a clinical trial have additional requirements laid out in Appendix II, including IRB-approved informed consent forms posted to a public federal website.

What happens if I want continuation or follow-on funding?
You'll need to submit a new pre-proposal and go through the invitation process again. Continuation funding isn't automatic.

Are there research areas that are explicitly out of scope?
Yes, and they vary by program. Examples include weaponized CBRN, blast, infectious disease, and noise under Environmental Exposures, chronic pain and regenerative/transplant work under Sensory Systems, and spinal cord injury under both TBI and Musculoskeletal Injury. Check Appendix I for the specific program you're targeting before writing a pre-proposal.

Where can I find the detailed research priorities for each program?
Appendix I of the BAA lists Research Areas of Interest for all nine portfolios in detail, and DHA strongly encourages applicants to review those before drafting anything.

DARPA IPTO Office-Wide BAA: HR001126S0011

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

Quick Answer

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's Information Processing Techniques Office (IPTO) has issued an office-wide Broad Agency Announcement, HR001126S0011, to fund revolutionary information science and technology research across three thrust areas: AI Innovation and Execution, Inherent Security and Privacy, and Resilient Megasystems. This is a standing, rolling opportunity. Abstracts are due by June 22, 2027, at 2:00 PM ET, and full proposals are by invitation only following abstract review. DARPA anticipates multiple awards through Procurement Contracts, Grants, Cooperative Agreements, and Other Transaction (OT) Agreements for both prototypes and research. This BAA is best suited for organizations proposing unconventional, high-risk, high-reward approaches that go well beyond incremental improvements to the current state of the art.

What Is the DARPA IPTO Office-Wide BAA?

This solicitation is IPTO's standing mechanism for soliciting concepts that create technological surprise through groundbreaking information science and new information capabilities for national security. Rather than targeting a single narrow topic, it spans IPTO's full portfolio and welcomes proposals that fall outside its named thrust areas as long as they promise a decisive information or computational advantage for the United States and its allies. DARPA is explicit that it wants unconventional approaches that challenge accepted assumptions, and that research resulting only in evolutionary improvements to existing capability is out of scope.

A recurring theme throughout the BAA is software resilience. DARPA's preferred path to delivering secure, high-quality software is through formal methods, mathematically rigorous techniques that produce machine-checkable evidence that software does what it is supposed to do and does not do what it is not supposed to do. Proposers should expect this expectation to surface directly in proposal evaluation.

The Three IPTO Thrust Areas

AI Innovation and Execution focuses on energy-efficient, assured artificial intelligence systems that deliver trustworthy, understandable AI to warfighters at the edge of the network, along with work to mitigate risks of misalignment between machine actions and human interests.

Inherent Security and Privacy targets a new generation of systems that are inherently secure and inherently private by design, paired with security and privacy tools that are more adaptable than current solutions in both moving-target and reactive contexts, with the goal of creating an asymmetric cyberspace advantage.

Resilient Megasystems seeks machine-derived abstractions and models that expose the governing principles of highly complex, interconnected systems such as supply chains and power grids, in order to identify hidden systemic risk and enable precise, proactive intervention.

Key Dates:

Key Dates Posting date: June 22, 2026

Abstract due date: June 22, 2027, at 2:00 PM ET

Question submittal closes: June 22, 2027, at 2:00 PM ET

Proposal due date: By invitation only, following abstract review

Award Instruments and Cost Sharing

DARPA anticipates multiple awards under this BAA using Procurement Contracts, Grants, Cooperative Agreements, OT for Prototype Agreements, and OT for Research Agreements. Cost sharing may be required for OT for Prototype or OT for Research Agreements under 10 U.S.C. § 4022. The relevant NAICS code is 541715.

Two-Step Abstract and Proposal Review

Abstracts are required before any full proposal and go through a two-step review. Step 1 is a mandatory technical conformance check for scientific and technological originality, depth of mission understanding, and operational realism; generic or boilerplate abstracts are found non-conforming at this stage. Step 2 evaluates conforming abstracts on Technical Comprehension, Technical Ability, and Cost Considerations, in that order of importance.

Full proposals, submitted by invitation only, follow the same two-step structure. Step 2 evaluation criteria, in descending order of importance, are Overall Scientific and Technical Merit, Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission, Plans to Implement Resilient Software, and Cost Realism.

Security and Compliance Considerations

Proposers anticipating classified work must include a security plan and cannot generate classified material until DARPA issues a solicitation-specific DD Form 254. Unclassified submissions go through the DARPA BAAT tool or Grants.gov, and any Controlled Unclassified Information must be handled on systems meeting CMMC Level 2 requirements. CMMC Level 1 certification is required at proposal submission for awards structured as procurement contracts, with the government designating the applicable level at award. Proposers requesting a Grant, Cooperative Agreement, or OT Agreement for fundamental research must also complete DARPA's Fundamental Research Risk-Based Security (FRRBS) forms, including a Common Form Biographical Sketch and Common Form Current and Pending Support, for all proposed key personnel.

Who Should Apply

This BAA fits organizations, including small businesses, universities, and non-U.S. entities complying with applicable export control and security requirements, that can propose revolutionary rather than incremental advances in AI, cybersecurity, or complex systems modeling. It is not the right mechanism for teams whose approach amounts to an incremental improvement on existing capability, or who cannot support the security, CMMC, and FRRBS documentation requirements that come with DARPA-funded research. FFRDCs, UARCs, and government entities such as national laboratories may participate but must submit detailed eligibility documentation at the abstract stage.

FAQs

What is the DARPA IPTO Office-Wide BAA HR001126S0011?

It is a standing Broad Agency Announcement from DARPA's Information Processing Techniques Office funding revolutionary research in AI, cybersecurity and privacy, and resilient complex systems, with multiple awards anticipated across several instrument types.

When is the abstract due?

Abstracts are due June 22, 2027, at 2:00 PM ET. Questions must also be submitted by that date and time.

When can a full proposal be submitted?

Full proposals are by invitation only. DARPA will provide a due date in the Invitation to Proceed after reviewing a proposer's abstract.

What types of awards can result from this BAA?

Procurement Contracts, Grants, Cooperative Agreements, OT for Prototype Agreements, and OT for Research Agreements. Cost sharing may apply to OT Agreements under 10 U.S.C. § 4022.

What are IPTO's three thrust areas?

AI Innovation and Execution, Inherent Security and Privacy, and Resilient Megasystems. Proposals outside these areas are still eligible if they offer a decisive information or computational advantage.

Does DARPA fund incremental improvements under this BAA?

No. DARPA specifically excludes research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of the art, and abstracts or proposals judged generic or boilerplate will be found non-conforming.

Is classified work allowed under this BAA?

Yes, but proposers must first receive a solicitation-specific DD Form 254 before generating any classified material, and must include a security plan addressing facilities, clearances, and related requirements.

Is CMMC certification required?

Yes, for awards that will result in procurement contracts. CMMC Level 1 is required at proposal submission, with the government designating the required level, 1, 2, or 3, in the resulting contract.

Are FFRDCs, UARCs, or government laboratories eligible to participate?

Yes, but each must submit specific eligibility documentation, such as sponsor letters or statutory authority citations, at the time of abstract submission, or their submission may be deemed non-conforming.

Where can proposers get more information?

Questions should be directed to HR001126S0011@darpa.mil. Proposers are also encouraged to contact DARPA Program Managers before submitting an abstract to confirm alignment with IPTO priorities.

PCORI Broad Pragmatic Studies PFA: Cycle 3 2026

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

Quick Answer

The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) will open its Broad Pragmatic Studies (BPS) PCORI Funding Announcement (PFA) for Cycle 3 2026 on August 4, 2026. This funding opportunity supports patient-centered comparative clinical effectiveness research (CER) that compares two or more existing health treatments, services, or care delivery strategies. PCORI will commit up to $120 million in direct costs across three funding categories, with individual awards ranging from under $5 million to as much as $12 million and project periods of up to five years. The Letter of Intent (LOI) is due September 9, 2026, and the full application deadline is January 12, 2027. This opportunity is open to research teams, clinicians, health systems, and organizations conducting patient-centered CER, rather than early-stage product development, so it is best suited for applicants with an established research infrastructure and patient partnership plan already in place.

What Is the PCORI Broad Pragmatic Studies PFA?

The BPS PFA is one of PCORI's core recurring funding mechanisms, issued three times per year, designed to fund large-scale, high-impact comparative clinical effectiveness research. Unlike early-stage federal SBIR/STTR awards focused on technology development, PCORI funding is built around answering real-world clinical questions: which of two or more available treatments, services, or care delivery approaches produces better outcomes for patients. Studies must directly compare interventions already in use or shown to be efficacious, not develop new drugs, devices, or diagnostics from scratch.

Applicants are strongly encouraged to propose individual- or cluster-randomized controlled trials, though well-designed natural experiments and observational studies will also be considered. PCORI expects proposed outcomes to be clinically meaningful, validated, and important to patients themselves, and every application must meaningfully incorporate patient and stakeholder partnership consistent with PCORI's Foundational Expectations for Partnerships in Research.

Key Dates

PFA opens: August 4, 2026

Applicant Town Hall: August 13, 2026, 11:30 am ET

Letter of Intent deadline: September 9, 2026, 5 pm ET

LOI status notification: October 14, 2026

Full application deadline: January 12, 2027, 5 pm ET

Merit review: March 2027

Awards announced: August 2027 (subject to change)

Earliest start date: December 2027

Funding Amounts and Categories

PCORI will commit up to $120 million in direct costs across all categories in this cycle. The BPS PFA is structured into three distinct funding categories, and applicants must select the category that matches the scale and design of their proposed study.

Category 1 supports research projects with direct costs up to and including $5 million. This is the standard entry point for most single-site or moderately scaled pragmatic trials.

Category 2 supports research projects with direct costs greater than $5 million, up to a maximum of $12 million. Applicants pursuing Category 2 funding must provide additional justification in both the LOI and full application explaining why the scale, scope, and complexity of the research question requires the larger budget, and must include planned subgroup analyses that generate clinically actionable information.

Category 3 supports research projects with direct costs up to $12 million that use PCORnet, PCORI's national clinical research network, to conduct observational studies or pragmatic trials at a national scale. Category 3 studies must involve two or more Clinical Research Networks and are expected to leverage the PCORnet Common Data Model, along with sharing study progress and performance metrics across the network.

All three categories allow project periods of up to five years, and applicants may request coverage of patient care costs, including medical products, procedures, and care services, as part of the overall direct cost budget.

Special Areas of Emphasis for Cycle 3 2026

PCORI has identified five Special Areas of Emphasis (SAEs) it is particularly interested in for this cycle. These SAEs are meant to encourage, not restrict, applications, so proposals outside these areas remain eligible and competitive.

Mental health and substance use outcomes in pregnant and postpartum populations. PCORI is prioritizing research comparing efficacious or widely used interventions addressing mental health and substance use during pregnancy and through 12 months postpartum, including pharmacological approaches to perinatal mental health, suicide prevention strategies, and substance use treatment tailored to this population. Applicants proposing retrospective-only observational designs requesting more than $2 million in direct costs will receive lower funding priority.

Post-treatment follow-up care for cancer survivors. PCORI is interested in comparing different models of post-treatment follow-up care, including risk-based stratified approaches and models integrating rehabilitation and mental health services. Priority populations include adolescent and young adult survivors, older survivors with multiple chronic conditions, metastatic cancer survivors, long-term survivors, and studies addressing rural care settings or pediatric-to-adult care transitions.

Diabetes prevention, care, and treatment. This SAE covers pharmacological interventions and combination therapies, multi-component approaches integrating lifestyle and medication strategies, advanced diabetes technologies such as continuous glucose monitoring and automated insulin delivery, and care delivery or coordination models across settings and populations, including patients with multiple chronic conditions.

Management of neuropathic pain. PCORI seeks comparative research on strategies to improve screening, diagnosis, treatment, and management of pain associated with neuropathy, including painful diabetic neuropathy and neuropathy resulting from cancer treatment. Applications are encouraged to include at least one validated primary pain outcome.

Management of pain in individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities or Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. This SAE covers comparative strategies for prevention, screening, diagnosis, treatment, and management of pain in these populations, again with a validated primary pain outcome encouraged.

Structured Mentorship

Applicants to any category of this PFA may propose coverage of structured mentorship activities to support early- or mid-career investigators, investigators transitioning into patient-centered CER, or patient and community partners. Specific criteria apply, and PCORI notes that funding for requested mentorship activities is not guaranteed even if proposed.

Application Deferral Policy

Applicants who submit an LOI and are invited to submit a full application may defer their submission one time to the immediate next PFA cycle, and this deferral may cross calendar years if needed. This gives teams additional runway to strengthen study design, secure partnerships, or finalize budgets without losing their place in the pipeline.

Research Project Agenda Topic Themes

Applicants may select up to three Topic Themes from PCORI's broader Research Project Agenda that best align with their proposed study, or select "other" if their research does not map cleanly to an existing theme. Selecting a Topic Theme or SAE is intended to help PCORI route and prioritize review, not to limit who can apply.

Who Should Apply

This opportunity is best suited for research teams, academic medical centers, health systems, and clinician-scientists with an existing capacity to conduct rigorous comparative effectiveness research at scale, along with genuine patient and stakeholder partnerships already established or in development. It is not the right mechanism for early-stage technology development, new drug or device discovery, or studies focused solely on implementation science, dissemination, or research methods development, as PCORI explicitly excludes these from consideration under this PFA.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the PCORI Broad Pragmatic Studies PFA Cycle 3 2026?

It is a funding announcement from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute supporting large-scale, patient-centered comparative clinical effectiveness research comparing existing treatments, services, or care delivery strategies, with up to $120 million available across three funding categories.

‍ ‍

When does the PFA open and when is the Letter of Intent due?

The PFA is expected to open August 4, 2026. The Letter of Intent deadline is September 9, 2026, at 5 pm ET, with LOI status notifications sent October 14, 2026.

‍ ‍

When is the full application due?

The full application deadline is January 12, 2027, at 5 pm ET. Merit review takes place in March 2027, with awards expected to be announced in August 2027 and an earliest project start date of December 2027.

‍ ‍

How much funding is available?

PCORI will commit up to $120 million in direct costs across Category 1, Category 2, and Category 3 combined. Category 1 supports awards up to $5 million, Category 2 supports awards between $5 million and $12 million, and Category 3 supports awards up to $12 million for PCORnet-based national studies.

‍ ‍

What is the maximum project period?

Up to five years for all three funding categories.

‍ ‍

Does this PFA fund new product or device development?

No. This PFA funds comparative effectiveness research on treatments, services, or care delivery approaches that are already in use or already shown to be efficacious. It does not fund early-stage technology development, new drug discovery, or studies focused only on implementation, dissemination, or research methods.

‍ ‍

What are the Special Areas of Emphasis for Cycle 3 2026?

Perinatal mental health and substance use, post-treatment follow-up care for cancer survivors, diabetes prevention and care, management of neuropathic pain, and pain management in individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities or Alzheimer's disease and related dementias.

‍ ‍

Is patient partnership required?

Yes. All applicants must address PCORI's Foundational Expectations for Partnerships in Research, ensuring patients and other research partners meaningfully contribute lived experience or professional expertise throughout the study.

‍ ‍

Can applicants defer a submission to a later cycle?

Yes. Applicants invited to submit a full application after an LOI may defer once to the immediate next PFA cycle, even across calendar years.

‍ ‍

Where can applicants get more information or ask questions?

Questions about Cycle 3 2026 can be directed to pfa@pcori.org. PCORI is also hosting an Applicant Town Hall on August 13, 2026, at 11:30 am ET.

CIRM RAPID: Funding for Rare Disease Platform Projects

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

Quick Answer

CIRM's RAPID program (Rare Disease Acceleration Through Platform Innovation and Delivery) funds California organizations developing platform-based in vivo genetic therapies for rare diseases (fewer than 200,000 US patients). There is no maximum award amount. The program has two tracks: RAPID Innovation (pre-IND through IND clearance, up to 3.5 years) for earlier-stage platforms, and RAPID Validation (IND-enabling through first-in-human trial completion, up to 6 years) for platforms with completed FDA Pre-IND alignment. Applicants must propose at least three in vivo genetic therapy candidates sharing common development infrastructure, commit a Principal Investigator (15% effort minimum) and Project Manager (50% effort minimum), and complete a mandatory pre-application consultation with CIRM before submitting. CIRM expects to fund 2–3 awards in the FY 26-27 cycle.

What Is the CIRM RAPID Program?

The California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) launched RAPID to accelerate the development of platform-based genetic therapies for rare diseases. Rather than funding one therapy at a time, RAPID supports platforms: a shared set of technologies, manufacturing processes, and clinical infrastructure that can be reused across multiple related therapeutic candidates. The goal is to reduce per-indication development cost and timeline by letting each new candidate leverage work already done for the platform, ultimately advancing 4–7 rare disease programs toward a Biologics License Application (BLA).

CIRM positions itself as an active development partner, not just a funder — awardees gain access to the CIRM Awardee Knowledge Network, the CIRM Product Development (PDEV) Expert Network of contracted CMC, clinical, nonclinical, and regulatory advisors, and optional use of the CIRM Clinical Network (Alpha Clinics) and CIRM Cell and Gene Therapy Manufacturing Network.

RAPID Validation vs. RAPID Innovation: Which Track Fits Your Program?

RAPID Innovation is for earlier-stage platforms spanning pre-IND through IND-enabling activities. It requires that an FDA INTERACT meeting has been completed, or that the meeting request has been submitted, at the time of application. The expected outcome is Master Protocol IND clearance for at least three in vivo candidates, and the maximum award duration is 3.5 years. RAPID Innovation does not fund clinical trial conduct — only start-up activities are allowable, with no patient recruitment, screening, or enrollment.

RAPID Validation is for more advanced platforms that have already completed an FDA Pre-IND meeting covering the platform and all proposed candidates. It supports activities spanning IND-enabling studies through full conduct of a first-in-human (FIH) master protocol clinical trial, with a maximum award duration of 6 years. The expected outcome is a completed FIH trial demonstrating clinical proof of concept for the platform.

Neither track specifies a maximum award amount. Both require the platform to maintain at least three shared in vivo genetic therapy candidates throughout the project period.

Who Is Eligible to Apply?

To be considered, an application must satisfy all 13 eligibility criteria in the RFA, most notably:

1. Platform scope — at least three in vivo genetic therapy candidates for rare diseases sharing preclinical, CMC, and clinical development elements.

2. Stage readiness — reproducible disease-modifying activity demonstrated in a relevant preclinical model for at least one candidate, plus a plausible mechanism of action for the additional candidates.

3. Regulatory readiness — a completed FDA Pre-IND meeting (RAPID Validation) or a submitted/completed FDA INTERACT meeting request (RAPID Innovation) covering the full platform.

4. Study design aligned to the applicable track's expected outcome (IND clearance for Innovation; completed FIH trial for Validation).

5. Principal Investigator committing a minimum of 15% effort.

6. Project Manager with relevant experience, committing a minimum of 50% effort.

7. Data Project Manager on the team (role may be shared with other Key Personnel).

8. IND sponsorship — the CIRM applicant organization (or PI, for an investigator-sponsored IND) must be the named IND sponsor.

9. California trial site — at least one clinical trial site located in California, with justification required for any out-of-state sites.

10. 90-day start — the applicant must be ready to initiate award activities within 90 days of ARS approval.

11. Complete, accurate application with no false or inaccurate information.

12. California Organization status per CIRM's standard definition.

13. Solvency (for-profit applicants) and good standing for all applicants and affiliates.

Both non-profit and for-profit California organizations may apply. An institution may submit more than one RAPID application per funding cycle.

What Does CIRM Fund — and What Won't It Fund?

Fundable activities span both tracks and include:

• IND-enabling nonclinical GLP studies (pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety/toxicology, mechanism-of-action and efficacy confirmation)

• Platform expansion studies requested by FDA to add candidates or indications

• GMP process development, technology transfer, and manufacturing of therapeutic candidates

• Analytical assay development and qualification, QTPP/CQA/CPP development

• Clinical protocol development, clinical operations planning, and (for RAPID Validation) full conduct of the FIH master protocol trial

• Preparation for and conduct of FDA Pre-IND/INTERACT meetings and master protocol IND submission

• Patient access, market access, and reimbursement strategy planning

• Data management, preservation, and sharing activities

Not funded under RAPID:

• Clinical trial conduct beyond start-up activities under RAPID Innovation (no patient recruitment, screening, or enrollment)

• Activities already budgeted, paid, or funded under another CIRM award or outside funder

• Costs for work performed by an out-of-state organization that retains independent IP or publication rights to project outputs

• Costs incurred on or before the date of ICOC (CIRM governing board) approval

See Appendix A of the RFA for a full category-by-category breakdown of allowable nonclinical, CMC, clinical, regulatory, and patient-access-planning activities by track.

How to Apply: Step by Step

1. Complete a mandatory pre-application consultation. Email preclinical@cirm.ca.gov with the subject line "RAPID Consultation Request" to receive and submit the online Consultation Form (core team, project title, award type, platform description, mechanism of action, indication, prior regulatory interactions, prior CIRM funding, and an Eligibility Upload Document using CIRM's template). This step is required before the online application will open to you.

2. Create a login at the CIRM Grants Management Portal (https://grants.cirm.ca.gov). Only the PI can access and submit the application, and a PI may submit only one RAPID application per review cycle.

3. Complete the online application, including the eligibility form, Key Personnel listing, and budget.

4. Prepare the Application Proposal using CIRM's required templates, covering: Project Summary, Target Product Profile, Value Proposition, Scientific Rationale, Preclinical and Clinical Studies summaries, Project Plan (preclinical, CMC, clinical), Milestones and Gantt timeline, FDA Correspondence summary, Patient Access and Commercialization Plans, Team Organization, Risk Mitigation and Financial Contingency plans, Resources and Project Environment, and a Data Sharing Overview.

5. Build an activities-based budget with justification detailed enough for CIRM budget staff to assess reasonableness; subcontracts over $500,000 require at least three comparative proposals or a sole-source justification.

Review Process and Timeline

The GWG — fifteen outside-California scientific experts plus patient advocate/nurse members of CIRM's governing board (ICOC) — scores applications 1–100 on scientific and technical merit. A median score of 85 or above is required to be recommended for funding, subject to fund availability. Patient advocate and nurse GWG members separately assign a 1–5 Patient Perspective Score, which does not determine the funding recommendation directly but can influence GWG discussion and the ARS's final funding decision.

Scientific review criteria cover five areas: Value Proposition, Rationale, Project Plan & Design, Project Team and Resources, and Population Impact. Patient Perspective criteria cover Relevance, Patient Benefit, Patient Centeredness, Patient Engagement, and California Benefit.

Award Size, Duration, and Budget Rules

• No maximum award amount for either track; total costs must be justified and are subject to adjustment by the GWG, CIRM staff, or the ARS.

• RAPID Innovation: up to 3.5 years. RAPID Validation: up to 6 years.

• CIRM expects to fund 2–3 awards in the FY 26-27 cycle.

• Supplemental funding may be requested at defined milestones (e.g., after a pre-IND meeting, or to add new candidates) but is not guaranteed.

• Direct Facilities Costs: limited to federally negotiated rates for non-profits with an existing agreement; capped at 35% of direct project costs for for-profit applicants or non-profits without a negotiated rate.

• Indirect Costs: capped at 20% of allowable direct research funding costs for non-profits; for-profit organizations may not claim indirect costs.

Ongoing Awardee Obligations

• 90-day start rule: award activities must begin within 90 days of ARS approval.

• Operational Milestones: funds are disbursed against CIRM-defined milestones; missing a milestone by more than four months (without CIRM-approved resolution) can result in termination.

• Data and knowledge sharing: awardees must manage, preserve, and share Applicable Data under a Data Sharing and Management Plan (DSMP), participate in the CIRM Awardee Knowledge Network, and publicly share FDA regulatory feedback (e.g., Pre-IND meeting minutes) within 90 days of receipt.

• PDEV Expert Network review: all regulatory strategies and submission packages must be reviewed with CIRM and PDEV advisors before FDA submission; non-participation can result in termination.

• Reporting: periodic written progress and financial reports; RAPID Validation awardees must also report clinical trial enrollee demographic data.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is there a maximum RAPID award amount? No. CIRM does not specify a funding cap for RAPID Validation or RAPID Innovation awards; the total requested amount must be well-justified and is subject to review and adjustment.

How many in vivo genetic therapy candidates must be included in a platform? At least three, maintained throughout the entire project period, sharing preclinical, CMC, and clinical development elements.

Do I need an FDA meeting before applying? Yes. RAPID Validation requires a completed FDA Pre-IND meeting covering the platform and all candidates. RAPID Innovation requires that an FDA INTERACT meeting request has been submitted (or completed) at the time of application.

Can RAPID Innovation funds be used to run a clinical trial? No. RAPID Innovation supports activities through Master Protocol IND clearance and trial start-up only — patient recruitment, screening, and enrollment are not allowable.

Who can apply? Non-profit or for-profit organizations that meet CIRM's definition of a California Organization, with at least one clinical trial site located in California.

Is a pre-application consultation really required? Yes — CIRM requires applicants to complete a consultation with the Preclinical Development team, including submission of an Eligibility Upload Document, before the online application becomes accessible.

How is scientific merit scored? The Grants Working Group scores applications 1–100. A median score of 85 or above is needed for a funding recommendation, subject to available funds.

What happens to FDA feedback shared with CIRM? RAPID has enhanced knowledge-sharing requirements: FDA Pre-IND meeting feedback must generally be shared publicly within 90 days of receipt to support broader regulatory learning across the field.

BW&CO Consulting advises deep-tech, biotech, and healthtech companies on non-dilutive federal and state funding strategy, including CIRM, SBIR/STTR, and other non-contingency-fee funding pathways. Contact us to evaluate your platform's fit for the RAPID program.

Navy ManTech sBAA N0001426SB002: What Startups Need to Know Before Applying

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

The Office of Naval Research (ONR) has released Special Broad Agency Announcement N0001426SB002, "Accelerating Maritime Modernization: Innovation in Naval Manufacturing, Sustainment, and Industrial Base Capability." This is a contract vehicle, not a grant, run through the Navy Manufacturing Technology (ManTech) Program, and it directly supports the Navy's Golden Fleet Initiative to build ships faster, repair them faster, and strengthen the naval industrial base.

For deep-tech, robotics, and dual-use startups, this is a rare non-dilutive funding opportunity with a clear commercialization thesis: the Navy wants technology that is close to production-ready and can transition into an actual shipyard or maintenance depot within a defined timeline.

What Is This Opportunity?

This sBAA funds two categories of work:

• 6.2 Applied Research: proof-of-concept development bridging science and defense application. ONR expects to fund 3 to 5 awards valued at $500K to $3M.

• 6.3 Advanced Technology Development: maturing and demonstrating technology in operationally relevant environments, targeting Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) 6 to 7. ONR expects to fund 5 to 10 awards valued at $1.5M to $5M.

Periods of performance run 1 to 2 years. Awards are procurement contracts, not grants or cooperative agreements.

Technology Areas ONR Wants

ONR is prioritizing innovations that support the Golden Fleet Initiative across five priority areas: speed/throughput/availability, advanced manufacturing, sustainment and repair, industrial base modernization, and supply chain capacity and logistics. Named priority platforms include the new BBG(X)/BBGN battleship, the FF(X) next-generation frigate, and unmanned surface vessels, though other Navy platforms may also be considered.

Specific technical focus areas span:

• Novel materials, non-metallic materials, and materials scale-up

• Advanced sensor integration and structural health monitoring

• Robotics, automation, and advanced manufacturing (including cobots and human augmentation)

• Digital tools, model-based engineering, and digital twins

• AI/ML for shipbuilding decision-making and predictive maintenance

• Autonomous systems for inspection and maintenance

• Advanced electronics, SOSA/MOSA modular design

• Non-destructive testing and advanced inspection

• Supply chain and logistics platforms, including additive manufacturing digital part libraries

• Cybersecurity for industrial control systems and operational technology

Two-Phase Structure and Key Dates

This sBAA runs on two tracks:

• Phase I: White papers are due 60 days after publication of the sBAA. Selected offerors submit a full proposal within 45 days of notification. Award decisions follow roughly 60 days after full proposal submission.

• Phase II: Opens the day after Phase I closes and stays open for one year from publication, so companies that miss the Phase I window still have a path in. Phase II full proposals follow the same 45-day submission clock after notification, with award decisions targeted in 45 days.

Missing the Phase I white paper deadline does not eliminate a startup from this opportunity. It shifts the company to the Phase II track, which is a meaningful difference from most SBIR-style solicitations with a single hard close.

Who Can Apply

All responsible sources from industry and academia are eligible, including both small and large businesses. There is no dollar amount set aside specifically for small business or socioeconomic categories, so startups compete on technical merit rather than in a reserved lane. Navy laboratories, warfare centers, and FFRDCs cannot apply directly, though teaming with them is allowed.

Before submitting, a company must be registered in SAM.gov with an active Unique Entity Identifier and CAGE code, and that registration must stay current through the life of any award.

What Gets Evaluated

Four criteria carry equal weight:

1. Scientific and technical merit: ManTech appropriateness and soundness of the technical approach

2. Naval relevance and contribution: how clearly the proposal defines the Navy need, quantifies impact and ROI, and lays out a credible transition plan to a named platform or facility

3. Organizational capability and teaming: this section explicitly weighs whether the team holds an active DD-2345 Joint Certification Program certification and the appropriate CMMC cybersecurity level

4. Financial and schedule feasibility: whether the proposed cost and milestones are realistic for the scope of work

Two details deserve early attention. First, for 6.3 Advanced Technology Development efforts, evaluators require a strict transition path to TRL/MRL 6 through 7, so proposals pitched at an earlier maturity level should target the 6.2 Applied Research category instead. Second, Intellectual Property and Data Rights assertions are evaluated directly, since ONR is checking whether the proposed rights (for example, Government Purpose Rights) support scaling across the naval industrial base without creating vendor lock. This is worth deciding deliberately, not defaulting to whatever a template suggests.

Cybersecurity Requirements to Plan For Early

This sBAA requires CMMC Level 2 (Self) status entered in the Supplier Performance Risk System for any contractor information system that will process, store, or transmit Federal Contract Information or Controlled Unclassified Information. Companies that have not started a CMMC self-assessment should begin that process well before a white paper is due, since award cannot proceed without a current CMMC status and affirmation of continuous compliance in SPRS.

White Paper Requirements

Phase I and Phase II both start with a 5-page white paper (12-point Times New Roman, one-inch margins) plus a one-page Project Lead resume. The white paper must cover, in this order: project classification and Golden Fleet alignment, organization background and teaming strategy, technical concept and appropriateness, Navy need and impact, path to transition (including IP and data rights posture), and a rough order of magnitude cost and schedule estimate.

Because ONR reviews white papers on a rolling basis rather than against each other in a single competition, a well-scoped white paper submitted early in the Phase II window is not disadvantaged relative to one submitted near the one-year close.

How BW&CO Consulting Helps

BW&CO Consulting helps deep-tech, robotics, and dual-use companies position competitive Navy ManTech proposals, including:

• Determining whether a technology fits the 6.2 Applied Research or 6.3 Advanced Technology Development category based on current TRL/MRL

• Mapping a company's technology to a specific Golden Fleet platform or industrial facility for a credible transition narrative

• Structuring IP and Data Rights assertions that satisfy ONR's transition and anti-vendor-lock evaluation criteria

• Coordinating CMMC and SAM.gov readiness ahead of submission

• Drafting the white paper and full proposal package, including the Statement of Work and cost proposal

Contact BW&CO Consulting to discuss Navy ManTech sBAA N0001426SB002 eligibility and proposal strategy.

DOE DE-FOA-0003634: Advancing Oil and Natural Gas Production and Delivery ($81.9M NOFO)

Quick Answer

The U.S. Department of Energy's Hydrocarbons and Geothermal Energy Office (HGEO) issued Notice of Funding Opportunity DE-FOA-0003634, "Advancing Oil and Natural Gas Production and Delivery," on July 22, 2026. The opportunity makes up to $81,875,000 available ($65,500,000 in federal funding plus a required 20% cost share) across four topic areas addressing natural gas flaring reduction, sour gas treatment, infrastructure resilience, and AI-enabled digital transformation of upstream and midstream oil and gas operations. Applications are due September 22, 2026, by 5:00 p.m. ET, submitted through DOE's NETL eXCHANGE portal. The NOFO uses cooperative agreements or Other Transaction Agreements and may remain open for up to 72 months with annual review cycles.

What Is DE-FOA-0003634?

‍ ‍

DE-FOA-0003634 is a Financial Assistance Notice of Funding Opportunity issued by DOE's Hydrocarbons and Geothermal Energy Office, Division of Transport and Storage. It funds research, development, and field validation of technologies that improve the efficiency, reliability, and resilience of the U.S. oil and natural gas supply chain, spanning extraction through processing, transport, and delivery.

‍ ‍

The program specifically targets three long-standing problems in the sector: natural gas that is flared or vented instead of captured, aging infrastructure prone to corrosion and unplanned downtime, and slow adoption of digital technologies such as AI, machine learning, digital twins, IoT, and edge computing in upstream and midstream operations.

Who Is Eligible to Apply for DE-FOA-0003634?

Eligible applicants are domestic entities, including:

‍ ‍

• Institutions of higher education

• For-profit organizations

• Nonprofit organizations

• State and local government entities

• Indian Tribes, as defined under 25 U.S.C. § 5304

‍ ‍

To qualify, an entity must be organized or incorporated under U.S. or state law, be majority domestically owned and controlled, and maintain a physical place of business in the United States.

‍ ‍

Important eligibility limitations:

‍ ‍

• DOE and non-DOE Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) may participate only as subrecipients, not as the prime recipient, and FFRDC effort cannot exceed 20% of total project cost.

• The National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) is not eligible as a recipient or subrecipient. Including NETL in either role makes an application non-responsive.

• Foreign entities are generally ineligible but may apply with an approved written waiver.

• All project work must be performed in the United States unless a waiver is granted.

• Entities debarred or suspended from federal programs, those on the OFAC Specially Designated Nationals list, and 501(c)(4) nonprofits that lobbied after 1995 are ineligible.

• Entities of Concern are prohibited from participating.

‍ ‍

Applicants may submit more than one application, provided each describes a scientifically distinct project.

‍ ‍

How Much Funding Is Available, by Topic Area?

‍ ‍

DOE structured DE-FOA-0003634 around four topic areas, each with its own funding pool, award size, and project period.

‍ ‍

Topic Area 1a: Laboratory Validation of Catalysts and Unit Operations

‍ ‍

• Federal funding available: $7,500,000

• Anticipated number of awards: 5

• Typical award size: $1,500,000 federal (plus 20% cost share)

• Project period: approximately 24 months

• Starting TRL: 3 | Ending TRL: 5

‍ ‍

Topic Area 1b: Field Validation of Full System Prototypes

‍ ‍

• Federal funding available: $18,000,000

• Anticipated number of awards: 3

• Typical award size: $6,000,000 federal

• Project period: approximately 48 months

• Starting TRL: 5 | Ending TRL: 7

• Requires a letter of intent from an industry partner providing field site access, and a project team member committed to commercialization

‍ ‍

Topic Area 2: Resilient Infrastructure Technologies Enhancement (RITE)

‍ ‍

• Federal funding available: $12,000,000

• Anticipated number of awards: 4

• Typical award size: $3,000,000 federal

• Project period: approximately 48 months

• Starting TRL: 5 | Ending TRL: 7

• Also requires an industry field-site letter of intent and a commercialization-focused team member

‍ ‍

Topic Area 3: Hydrocarbon Infrastructure Test Sites (HITS)

‍ ‍

• Federal funding available: $28,000,000

• Anticipated number of awards: 4

• Typical award size: $7,000,000 federal

• Project period: approximately 60 months

• Requires a defined physical field test site and an industry letter of intent providing site access

‍ ‍

All topic areas require a minimum 20% cost share from nonfederal sources.

‍ ‍

What Technologies Is DOE Looking to Fund?

‍ ‍

Topic Area 1: Enhanced Resource Utilization and Production Technologies (ERUPT)

‍ ‍

This topic area targets the roughly $15 billion in natural gas value lost to flaring and venting over the past decade, along with stranded sour gas and stranded natural gas liquids (NGLs). DOE is interested in:

‍ ‍

• AI- and quantum-scale simulation-driven catalyst and reactor design to convert associated gas and NGLs into valuable products

• Modular, low-cost sour gas treatment systems capable of handling hydrogen sulfide (H2S) concentrations found across the Permian Basin, where more than 85% of gas contains some H2S and over 40% contains up to 10,000 ppm

• Novel separation technologies and chemical pathways that improve the economics of NGL recovery

• Sub-topic 1a covers laboratory-to-prototype-scale validation (TRL 3 to 5); sub-topic 1b covers field validation of full system prototypes (TRL 5 to 7) and requires an industry field-testing partner

‍ ‍

Topic Area 2: Resilient Infrastructure Technologies Enhancement (RITE)

‍ ‍

This topic area addresses the roughly $875 million in annual product losses and $1.37 billion in annual corrosion-related costs facing U.S. oil and gas infrastructure. Areas of interest include:

‍ ‍

• High-efficiency engines and compressors, including retrofit solutions, targeting a 10% increase in compressor performance and 25% increase in engine thermal efficiency

• AI/ML-driven, digital-twin-enabled real-time optimization of legacy compressor and engine performance, targeting a 20% reduction in maintenance costs

• Corrosion- and friction-resistant materials such as advanced coatings, composites, and alloys, targeting a 2 to 3% increase in pipeline deliverability

• Requires field testing and an industry partner letter of intent

‍ ‍

Topic Area 3: Hydrocarbon Infrastructure Test Sites (HITS)

‍ ‍

Modeled on the successful Hydraulic Fracture Test Sites (HFTS) program, HITS funds the establishment of physical field test sites, at existing operator assets, university facilities, private consortium facilities, national labs, or public-private partnerships, where applicants validate:

‍ ‍

• Digital twin development for surface production, processing, and transportation assets

• Predictive analytics for anomaly detection, remaining useful life prediction, and production forecasting

• Edge computing and cybersecurity for the edge-to-cloud continuum

• Autonomous and robotic inspection and maintenance systems

‍ ‍

Target outcomes include a 10 to 20% increase in hydrocarbon throughput, a 20% reduction in pipeline and facility downtime, and a 15% reduction in operating costs. Applications must include both a defined physical test site and an industry letter of intent providing site access.

‍ ‍

What Are DOE's Expected Performance Outcomes for This Program?

‍ ‍

DOE has set specific, quantifiable targets applicants should address in their technical volumes:

‍ ‍

• Increase natural gas utilization to 80% by 2035

• Reduce annual flaring losses by approximately $1.5 billion

• Unlock production from an estimated 7,500 remaining wells in the eastern Delaware Basin currently limited by sour gas

• Reduce sour gas treatment costs by more than 20%

• Increase U.S. natural gas delivery system efficiency from 92% to 94% by 2030

• Increase pipeline deliverability by 2 to 3%

• Reduce operational disruptions and maintenance costs by at least 20%

• Increase saleable hydrocarbon throughput by 10 to 20% and reduce OPEX by 15% or more through digital and physical optimization

‍ ‍

What Applications Will DOE Not Consider?

‍ ‍

DOE will not review applications that:

‍ ‍

• Fall outside the technical scope defined in the Topic Areas

• Rely on approaches inconsistent with established scientific principles

• Fail to articulate impact on U.S. energy security, economic competitiveness, domestic manufacturing, or job creation

• Lack cost share commitment letters at submission

• Propose technologies that are already commercially mature and widely deployed without demonstrating a genuine advancement

• Propose chemical conversion to fuels such as gasoline or diesel (Topic Area 1)

• Propose traditional, centralized amine treatment or cryogenic NGL recovery without a novel, modular, or cost-reducing angle (Topic Area 1)

• Focus solely on sensor hardware without system-level integration (Topic Areas 2 and 3)

• Fall outside the specified beginning or ending TRL range for the topic area

• Omit a required industry letter of intent for field site access (Topic Areas 1b, 2, and 3)

What Does an Application Require?

Applications are submitted as a single phase through NETL eXCHANGE. Core components include:

• Technical Volume (20-page limit): covers project objectives, Buy America/Buy America (BABA) applicability, discussion of each technical review criterion, relevance and expected outcomes, participant roles, facilities, and equipment

• Statement of Project Objectives (SOPO): 8-page limit, Word format

• Project Management Plan (PMP): 8-page limit

• SF-424 and SF-424A: standard federal assistance and budget forms

• Budget Justification Workbook and, if applicable, Subrecipient Budget Justification

• Letters of Commitment/Intent: 1 page each, required for Topic Areas 1b, 2, and 3 to demonstrate field site access

• Biographical Sketch and Current and Pending (Other) Support for every Covered Individual, produced via SciENcv, consistent with NSPM-33 disclosure requirements

• Impacted Indian Tribes Documentation, where applicable

• Locations of Work, Environmental Questionnaire, Summary for Public Release, and Summary Slide

Applicants are strongly encouraged to submit at least 48 hours before the deadline. DOE does not extend deadlines for server or connectivity issues.

How Will DOE Evaluate Applications?

Applications are scored against three weighted technical review criteria:

1. Scientific and Technical Merit, 45%: technical soundness, degree of advancement over baseline technologies, and alignment with topic area performance targets

2. Technical Approach and Understanding, 25%: quality of the Statement of Project Objectives, completeness of the Project Management Plan, and financial viability of the proposed budget

3. Technical and Management Capabilities, 30%: organizational structure, relevant corporate experience, key personnel qualifications, and adequacy of facilities and field sites

DOE may also weigh other selection factors, including technological diversity relative to its existing portfolio, industry involvement and commercialization potential, domestic manufacturing and job creation impact, and geographic distribution of upstream and midstream assets.

Why This Matters for Deep-Tech and Energy Innovators

DE-FOA-0003634 is one of the larger non-dilutive funding opportunities currently open for hydrocarbon-adjacent technology developers, and it explicitly rewards teams that pair strong science with a credible path to commercialization. Every topic area beyond 1a requires DOE's Technology Maturation Plan, Techno-Economic Analysis, and Adoption Readiness Level framework, meaning applicants need to show DOE not just that a technology works, but that it can be adopted and scaled by small and mid-size operators.

For companies working in catalysis, separations, sour gas treatment, corrosion-resistant materials, industrial AI/ML, digital twins, or autonomous field robotics, this NOFO represents a substantial, multi-year funding pathway, with the caveat that Topic Areas 1b, 2, and 3 all require a committed industry partner willing to provide field site access before an application can even be considered responsive.

Need Help With Your DE-FOA-0003634 Application?

BW&CO Consulting helps deep-tech, energy, and infrastructure companies secure non-dilutive federal funding through programs like this one. If your team is evaluating a Topic Area 1, 2, or 3 submission, including securing an industry field-site partner or building out your Technology Maturation Plan, contact BW&CO to discuss fit and strategy before the September 22, 2026 deadline.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is DE-FOA-0003634? DE-FOA-0003634 is a DOE Notice of Funding Opportunity titled "Advancing Oil and Natural Gas Production and Delivery," issued by the Hydrocarbons and Geothermal Energy Office to fund technologies that improve efficiency, reliability, and digital transformation across the U.S. oil and gas supply chain.

How much funding is available under DE-FOA-0003634? Up to $81,875,000 total, made up of $65,500,000 in federal funding and $16,375,000 in required cost share, spread across four topic areas.

When is the DE-FOA-0003634 application deadline? Applications are due September 22, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. ET, submitted through DOE's NETL eXCHANGE portal.

Who can apply for DE-FOA-0003634? Domestic institutions of higher education, for-profit and nonprofit organizations, state and local government entities, and Indian Tribes. FFRDCs may only participate as subrecipients, and NETL is barred from participating in any role.

Is cost share required? Yes. A minimum 20% cost share of total project costs is required from nonfederal sources, and applications without a cost share commitment letter at submission will not be reviewed.

Does this NOFO require an industry partner? Yes, for Topic Areas 1b, 2, and 3. Each requires a letter of intent from an industry partner providing access to a field test site, and a project team member committed to pursuing commercialization.

When will DOE announce selections and make awards? DOE anticipates notifying selected applicants by December 11, 2026, with an anticipated award date of March 1, 2027.

Chain Reaction Innovations 2027 Cohort: DOE-Funded Entrepreneurship Program at Argonne National Laboratory

Quick Answer

Chain Reaction Innovations (CRI) is a Department of Energy entrepreneurship program at Argonne National Laboratory that embeds individual innovators in physical science and energy technology fields for up to two years. Selected innovators receive a personal stipend, travel allowance, and health benefits through an ORISE fellowship, along with lab space, technical collaboration, and structured mentorship at Argonne. The program is open to individuals, not companies, and applicants must have at least five years of technology R&D experience and be a U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident. Applications are submitted through the CRI online portal at chainreaction.anl.gov.

What Is Chain Reaction Innovations?

Chain Reaction Innovations was created at Argonne National Laboratory to accelerate the applied research, development, and deployment of physical science-based technologies, including materials and manufacturing innovations, capable of transforming the nation's energy systems. The program addresses a specific gap in the innovation pipeline: early-stage technologies that are too scientifically or technically uncertain for venture capital funding, but that hold significant potential for energy and manufacturing impact.

Rather than funding a company or research proposal directly, CRI funds the innovator. The program embeds selected entrepreneurial researchers within Argonne National Laboratory, pairing them with scientific and technical mentorship, unique R&D assets, and national laboratory expertise. The goal is to help innovators move their technology from proof-of-concept to proof-of-product within a defined period, while simultaneously developing the entrepreneurial skills needed to commercialize it.

CRI is a Lab-Embedded Entrepreneurship Program (LEEP), a DOE Office of Technology Transitions initiative that places entrepreneurs inside national laboratories. Argonne is currently recruiting its 2027 cohort through this solicitation.

Program Benefits

Selected innovators may receive up to 24 months of program resources, subject to performance reviews and availability of funding. Benefits include:

A personal stipend, travel allowance, and health benefits through an Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) fellowship for up to 24 months

Lab space and technical collaboration support from Argonne National Laboratory for up to 24 months

Structured Chain Reaction Innovations programming and mentorship

Participation is governed by a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) between Argonne and the innovator's company. Either party may terminate the CRADA with sixty days written notice. All benefits are contingent on funding availability, negotiation of a mutually agreeable scope of work, innovator performance, DOE selection and site access approval, and CRADA approval by DOE, including any required reviews under DOE O 142.3 (Unclassified Foreign National Access Program) and DOE P 485.1 (Foreign Engagements with DOE National Laboratories).

At the end of the first year, innovators undergo a midpoint review to confirm their performance and progress meet the minimum criteria to continue into the second year of the CRADA period.

Program Structure: Two Budget Periods

Scope and Planning Phase (Budget Period 1): Typically lasting less than six months, this phase involves paper-based analysis such as market studies, refinement of the research scope alongside Argonne personnel, and a survey of the intellectual property landscape surrounding the innovator's technology. During this phase, innovators must develop an Intellectual Property (IP) Management Plan, which requires approval from the DOE Technology Manager with concurrence from DOE Patent Counsel before the project can proceed. Innovators must obtain a license or option to license any necessary background IP no later than the one-year review, or risk termination from the program. In some cases, this phase may be shortened or skipped entirely.

Research and Development Phase (Budget Period 2): Once the Scope and Planning phase is complete, or deemed unnecessary, the R&D phase proceeds subject to DOE approval. This is the core technical development period of the CRADA.

Who Is Eligible

Eligibility for the CRI 2027 cohort is specific and individual-based:

Applicants apply as individuals, not as companies or organizations, although a CRADA will ultimately be established between Argonne and the selected innovator's company

Technical leads must have a minimum of five years of technology R&D experience

Technical leads must be a U.S. citizen or a lawful permanent resident at the time of initial application submission

The proposed work must have the potential for broad impact aligned with DOE's mission to advance the national, economic, and energy security of the United States

Only individuals may apply; incorporated entities may not apply, though applicants may have an incorporated entity associated with their work

Innovators who have raised more than $2 million in private-sector equity at the time of application are not eligible

Current Argonne National Laboratory employees are not eligible to participate while directly employed by the Laboratory; Argonne employees may apply but must take Entrepreneurial Leave or terminate their employment with the Laboratory to participate if selected

What CRI Looks For: Selection Criteria

Argonne evaluates applicants across three core dimensions:

Project Leader. Reviewers look for outcome-oriented, entrepreneurial technical innovators capable of building a foundational technology vision and leading a team. Ideal candidates demonstrate technical strength (detailed knowledge and conceptual depth), outcome orientation (systems-level thinking, risk evaluation, commercial awareness), and personal excellence (drive, resourcefulness, communication skills, integrity, and adaptability).

Project Concept. While concepts may evolve over the course of the program, the initial idea should be technically sound, reasonably differentiated, and framed around a well-defined problem with significant long-term impact potential. Reviewers assess economic impact potential, technical merit and differentiation, business idea maturity (market research, IP position, understanding of barriers to entry and incumbents), and CRI fit, meaning how much the program's support would change the innovator's timeline or probability of success.

Technology Fit. Proposed innovations must align with the technology mission space of the CRI program sponsors. Additional detail is available through the DOE Lab-Embedded Entrepreneurship Program (LEEP) website and the Chain Reaction Innovations application page.

All applicants are reviewed by Argonne National Laboratory and must ultimately be selected by a Federal Official from the Department of Energy.

Required Application Materials

Applicants must submit the following through the CRI online portal at chainreaction.anl.gov:

1. Innovator narrative: Background on the applicant and their project, including the origin of the idea, current status of the technology and team, and the applicant's motivation and qualifications

2. Innovator's vision: A description of the technology concept, with commentary on its potential impact on U.S. energy and manufacturing competitiveness

3. Why Chain Reaction Innovations: An explanation of what attracts the applicant to the program specifically, why CRI is the ideal home for the project compared to alternative paths, and which Argonne people or facilities would be most valuable to the work

4. Business idea: A description of how the applicant envisions commercializing the technology, including target market, customers, potential suppliers and distributors, relevant intellectual property status, barriers to entry, and market incumbents

5. Argonne affiliation disclosure: A statement identifying any affiliation with Argonne National Laboratory, UChicago Argonne LLC, or the University of Chicago, or confirmation that no affiliation exists

6. Optional additional materials: Anything else the applicant chooses to include

7. One-page resume for the innovator

8. Technical deck: A five-page high-level overview of the proposed innovation's technical components

Intellectual Property Considerations

Argonne makes no claim to any background intellectual property an innovator brings into the program. Under the CRADA, selected innovators may copyright and publish materials developed during the program, subject to national security considerations and a royalty-free license retained by the government. Innovators generally retain principal worldwide patent rights to inventions they develop under the CRADA, subject to a reserved government use license and the limitations set out in 37 CFR 401.

For inventions developed by Argonne itself under the CRADA, the innovator does not own the invention but receives an option for up to an exclusive license for the term of the CRADA plus six months.

Every participant is required to establish an IP Management Plan that sets clear, mutual expectations for handling both background IP and any IP developed during the program.

Conflict of Interest and Confidentiality Notes

Work conducted through CRI must comply with Argonne's Prime Contract and its conflict of interest policies. Innovators affiliated with Argonne, UChicago Argonne LLC, or the University of Chicago are subject to an organizational conflict of interest management plan.

Applicants should also be aware that the CRI application review involves independent advisors external to Argonne and DOE, and that CRI finals and related events are open to the public. No proprietary information should be included in any application, since submitted information is treated as non-proprietary and not subject to any obligation of disclosure.

How BW&CO Consulting Can Help

Navigating a program like Chain Reaction Innovations involves more than a strong technology story. It requires positioning an individual innovator's narrative, business case, and technical deck to meet DOE's mission alignment criteria, structuring an IP Management Plan that will satisfy DOE Patent Counsel, and understanding how a CRADA fits alongside other non-dilutive funding sources like SBIR and STTR. BW&CO Consulting helps deep-tech and energy technology innovators build application materials that speak the language federal reviewers are looking for, and helps applicants understand how a lab-embedded entrepreneurship award like CRI can complement a broader federal funding strategy.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Chain Reaction Innovations a grant to my company? No. Innovators apply as individuals, not as companies or organizations. Once selected, Argonne establishes a CRADA with the innovator's company, but the initial application and eligibility criteria apply to the individual.

Can I apply if I already have a company? Yes. Individuals with an incorporated entity may apply, but the incorporated entity itself cannot be the applicant. However, innovators who have raised more than $2 million in private-sector equity at the time of application are not eligible.

How much funding does CRI provide? CRI does not provide a lump-sum grant. Instead, selected innovators receive up to 24 months of an ORISE fellowship stipend, travel allowance, and health benefits, plus Argonne lab space, technical collaboration, and mentorship, contingent on funding availability and performance.

Can current Argonne employees apply? Yes, but they cannot participate while directly employed by Argonne. Selected Argonne employees must take Entrepreneurial Leave or terminate their employment with the Laboratory to participate in the program.

What happens after the first year? Innovators undergo a midpoint review at the end of year one to confirm their progress meets the minimum criteria required to continue into the second year of the CRADA period.

Who owns the intellectual property I develop at Argonne? Innovators generally retain principal worldwide patent rights to inventions they personally develop under the CRADA, subject to a reserved government use license. If Argonne itself develops an invention under the CRADA, the innovator instead receives an option for up to an exclusive license for the CRADA term plus six months.

Where do I apply? Applications are submitted through the online portal at chainreaction.anl.gov.

FDA RFA-FD-26-012 | Digital Health Technologies for Drug Development Funding (U01)

Quick Answer:

FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) and Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) are jointly funding a U01 Research Project Cooperative Agreement focused on using digital health technologies (DHTs) — actigraphy, photography, contactless sensors — for remote data acquisition in drug and biologic clinical trials. CDER intends to fund up to 2 awards, totaling $2.2 million in FY2026, with each award providing up to $1.1M/year across a 2-year project period. Unlike a standard SBIR, this is a cooperative agreement, meaning FDA scientific staff will be substantially involved in protocol review and study design throughout the project.

Applications are due August 20, 2026, by 11:59 PM local time.

What Does This Opportunity Fund?

Four illustrative (non-exclusive) project types:

• Comparing digital measurements to traditional clinical trial measurements

• Developing novel DHT-based endpoints for unmet drug development needs (e.g., contactless sensors detecting pediatric apnea)

• Comparing continuous measurement metrics (e.g., activity/stamina)

• Capturing early manifestations of chronic disease through DHTs (e.g., balance or reaction-time testing for early dementia signs)

What Makes This Different From a Standard NOFO?

• Cooperative agreement (not a grant) — FDA retains substantial programmatic involvement, including protocol review at milestones

• Clinical Trial Optional — applicants can propose a trial or non-trial project

• Applies to drugs/biologics only, not devices

• Research Strategy section capped at 12 pages (FDA does not follow standard NIH page limits)

How Is It Reviewed?

Standard FDA Objective Review Process, scored across five weighted criteria:

• Significance (20 pts)

• Investigator(s) (20 pts)

• Innovation (25 pts)

• Approach (25 pts)

• Environment (10 pts)

Who Is Eligible?

Broad eligibility — universities, nonprofits, small businesses, other for-profits, and eligible government entities. Foreign organizations and foreign components are not eligible. No cost-sharing required. Multiple applications allowed if scientifically distinct.

Key Dates

• Posted: July 20, 2026

• Open Date: July 20, 2026

• Application Due: August 20, 2026

• Expiration: August 21, 2026

How Can BW&CO Help?

This is a cooperative agreement, not a typical grant — framing the Research Strategy to anticipate FDA's ongoing programmatic involvement (not just initial review) is critical. Our approach helps clients position DHT-based endpoints and study designs that align with FDA's DHT Framework priorities from the outset.

DOE Genesis Mission | SBIR/STTR Phase I Funding Opportunity

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

Quick Answer:

DOE's Office of Technology Commercialization, working through ConnectWerx, is opening the first Phase I SBIR/STTR opportunity under its new Genesis Mission umbrella. The opportunity targets four AI-driven topic areas: biotechnology, quantum computing, materials design, and autonomous laboratories. DOE intends to make approximately 40 awards totaling $10,000,000, representing up to $44,000,000 in cumulative funding across the projects' full lifecycles. Unlike a standard SBIR proposal, this program requires a short Pitch application first; only companies invited after Pitch review can submit a full application.

Pitch applications are due September 10, 2026, at 2:00 PM ET.

What Topics Does This Opportunity Cover?

Four topic areas are open under this Genesis Mission Phase I opportunity:

• Scaling the Biotechnology Revolution — AI tools for biomolecular design, genotype-phenotype relationships, predictive microbiome engineering, and accelerated bioreactor design and biomanufacturing.

• Realizing Quantum Systems for Discovery — AI for qubit decoherence characterization, quantum error correction, quantum processing unit control, resource estimation, and hybrid classical-quantum-AI workflow management.

• Designing Materials with Predictable Functionality — AI frameworks enabling inverse design, where materials are engineered from the start to meet specific property requirements.

• Achieving AI-Driven Autonomous Laboratories — AI integrated directly into experimental workflows, including advanced robotics, remote handling, diagnostics, and neuromorphic computing circuit primitives.

What Is the Pitch-First Process?

All applicants must first submit a short Pitch application before gaining access to the full application. Only Pitch applications selected in review are invited to submit a full proposal. The Pitch consists of four open-text questions, each with strict word-count limits, plus an optional bibliography. DOE recommends drafting responses outside the application portal before pasting them in.

How Is a Pitch Evaluated?

Pitch applications are scored across four equally weighted areas:

• Summary, Topic, and Mission Alignment — fit with the chosen topic and DOE's mission priorities.

• Technical Promise — significance of the problem, novelty of the approach, and feasibility within the proposed timeline and budget.

• Commercialization Potential — value proposition, competitive landscape, and go-to-market strategy including supply chain and sales channels.

• Team Qualifications — relevant company experience, strength of partnerships, and a credible plan for follow-on funding.

Beyond reviewer scores, the DOE Selection Official retains discretion to weigh additional program policy factors in final funding decisions.

[Complimentary Assessment]

What Is the Funding Amount and Timeline?

DOE intends to make approximately 40 awards from a combined $10,000,000 Phase I budget, representing up to $44,000,000 in potential cumulative funding across Phase I, Phase II, Phase II.2, and Strategic Breakthrough Awards over each project's lifecycle. Selection for award negotiations is not a funding commitment; DOE may cancel negotiations at any point before an award is issued. Later-phase awards depend on milestone performance and future funding availability.

What Is the Application Timeline?

• July 22, 2026 — Opportunity announced; Acquisition Management Portal (AMP) access requests open.

• Mid-August 2026 — AMP applications open; two virtual Office Hours sessions with DOE and ConnectWerx.

• September 10, 2026, 2:00 PM ET — Pitch application deadline. Late submissions are not accepted, though submitted Pitches can be updated up to the deadline.

How Do I Submit a Pitch?

Pitches are submitted through the Acquisition Management Portal (AMP). Applicants download the Pitch Development Guide, answer four questions within the specified word limits, optionally attach a bibliography, and submit through AMP. All files must be print-ready PDFs under 5MB, without passwords, and free of special characters in filenames.

Who Is Eligible?

Eligibility follows standard SBIR/STTR Phase I requirements. Applicants should confirm specific criteria on DOE's eligibility page before applying.

Key Dates

Pitch due date: September 10, 2026, 2:00 PM ET

Anticipated AMP access requests open: July 22, 2026

Office Hours sessions: Mid-August 2026

How Can BW&CO Help With a Genesis Mission Pitch?

This will be a competitive opportunity. Our “Back Door” approach will help you understand what DOE is really looking for and how to frame your project to give you a competitive edge.

Contact BW&CO Consulting to discuss DOE Genesis Mission SBIR/STTR Phase I eligibility and Pitch strategy.

NASA ROSES | C.4 Planetary Science Enabling Facilities

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

Quick Answer:

NASA's Planetary Science Enabling Facilities (PSEF) program element, amended July 21, 2026, funds experimental and analytical research facilities that support the planetary science community. This is a new addition to ROSES-2025, previously listed as not solicited for the year. Proposals are due November 10, 2026, and unlike prior PSEF cycles, no Step-1 submission or Notice of Intent is required this year. Proposals will be evaluated for the first time under NASA's dual-anonymous peer review process. The program expects to fund about 2 to 8 new awards from an annual budget of roughly 5 million dollars, with awards running up to 4 years.

What Is a Planetary Science Enabling Facility?

NASA defines a Planetary Science Enabling Facility as a combination of equipment, instrumentation, infrastructure, and staff, typically supporting complex or challenging experiments or measurements, that is not otherwise widely available to the research community. Facilities must enable or enhance research funded under Solar System Science, Interdisciplinary Consortia for Astrobiology Research, the Exoplanets Research Program, or the Planetary Science Internal Scientist Funding Model.

What Types of Facilities Can Be Proposed?

Eligible facilities must be dedicated to one or more of four activities: characterization of chemical, isotopic, or physical properties of materials; experimentation on materials under defined environmental conditions; synthesis of new materials under defined conditions; or sample preparation, which must also pair with one of the other three activities. Proposed activities can include acquiring instruments or equipment, supporting technicians and operational personnel, developing new laboratory instruments or analytical methods and standards, and supporting instrument maintenance.

What Is Excluded From This Program?

PSEF does not fund scientific research itself, reference dataset acquisition, development of new flight instruments, facilities primarily supporting mission development rather than fundamental research, computing facilities, astronomical or observing facilities, data archiving facilities, laboratory construction and outfitting, or sample curation and repository facilities.

What Priorities Does NASA Emphasize This Year?

Three priority areas are specifically emphasized for ROSES-2025: facilities enhancing lunar science in the Artemis era, with particular encouragement for proposals pushing technology limits such as quantum sensors, artificial intelligence, integrated systems, parallel sensing, robotics and automation, and cold or cryogenic analysis capabilities; facilities enhancing Mars science aligned with Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group goals; and facilities enhancing astrobiology and planetary protection research, including bioburden detection, terrestrial microbe classification, and contaminant transport studies.

Who Is Eligible?

Proposals are welcomed from all research institutions, including emerging research institutions, institutions that have rarely or never received Planetary Science Division funding, and Primarily Undergraduate Institutions and Community Colleges. Institution type may be considered as a programmatic factor in selection. Institutions may participate as proposing organizations, sub-awardees, or unfunded partners.

How Are Proposals Structured and Formatted?

This year's PSEF uses a single-step submission process with one deadline, replacing the two-step process used in PSEF22 and PSEF24. The anonymized Science/Technical/Management section is capped at 13 pages total, made up of Technical Capabilities (up to 12 pages), Anticipated Userbase (up to 1 page), and an optional Facility-Relevant Training Opportunities section (up to 2 pages). Proposals requesting equipment or instrumentation over 50,000 dollars must include a descope plan showing how the facility would operate without that equipment if it is not funded. An anonymized Open Science and Data Management Plan of up to 2 pages and an anonymized Table of Work Effort are also required, followed by references with no page limit.

What Goes in the Non-Anonymized Expertise and Resources Document?

A separate Expertise and Resources document includes a Facility Management Plan of up to 2 pages covering user access priority, access procedures, costs, and safety practices; a non-anonymized Table of Personnel and Work Effort; Biographical Sketches and Current and Pending Support in SciENcv format for all PIs and Co-Is spending 10 percent or more time on the project; facilities and equipment descriptions; and, if applicable, a High-End Computing request.

Is Research Security Training Required?

Yes. Any PI or Co-I dedicating 10 percent or more time to a proposed award must certify completion of research security training, satisfied by either the four NSF Research Security Training modules or the SECURE Center's condensed equivalent, effective August 5, 2026.

How Are Proposals Evaluated?

NASA evaluates PSEF proposals on three criteria: scientific and technical merit of the proposed facility, including the Open Science and Data Management Plan, appropriateness of equipment and staff, facility uniqueness, and expected volume of use; relevance to Planetary Science Division research priorities; and cost reasonableness, covering both proposed work effort and other direct costs such as supplies, equipment, travel, and anticipated tariff costs. The Facility Management Plan is also assessed for whether it ensures adequate community access and sound user request procedures. Cost sharing is not required or scored but may be a tiebreaker between proposals of otherwise equal merit.

What Is the Funding Amount and Timeline?

NASA expects to fund approximately 2 to 8 new awards from an annual budget of about 5 million dollars. There is no explicit cap on individual award size. Awards run up to 4 years, with funding expected to begin about 9 months after the proposal due date.

How Do I Submit a Proposal?

Proposals are submitted electronically through NSPIRES at nspires.nasaprs.com. No hard copies are accepted. Applicants who need to submit through Grants.gov must request access at least 30 days before the due date from the point of contact below, copying sara@nasa.gov. The Grants.gov funding opportunity number is NNH25ZDA001N-PSEF.

Key Dates

Proposal due date: November 10, 2026 No Step-1 or Notice of Intent required this year Anticipated funding start: approximately 9 months after the proposal due date

Program Contact

Michael Lienhard Email: HQ-PSEF@mail.nasa.gov

How Can BW&CO Help With a PSEF Proposal?

BW&CO Consulting helps research teams position competitive facility proposals for ROSES, including dual-anonymous peer review compliance, facility scope and userbase justification, cost reasonableness narrative, and NSPIRES submission logistics, so applicants can meet the November 10, 2026 deadline with a complete, evaluation-ready package.

Contact BW&CO Consulting to discuss NASA ROSES C.4 Planetary Science Enabling Facilities eligibility and proposal strategy.

NASA ROSES A.14: Atmosphere Research Program

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

Quick Answer:

NASA's Atmosphere program element (A.14) is a new addition to ROSES-2025, amended July 20, 2026, that funds data analysis and modeling of NASA-supported airborne campaign data to advance understanding of atmospheric composition, air quality, and weather dynamics. Proposals must use NASA airborne campaign data as a required foundation, with satellite and ground-based data allowed only as a complement, not a substitute. A mandatory Notice of Intent is due August 20, 2026, and full proposals are due October 20, 2026. Proposals not preceded by an on-time NOI will be declined without review.

Program Background

In late 2025, NASA's Earth System Science Research Program replaced its prior six Focus Areas with six new Earth science research spheres: Atmosphere, Biosphere, Cryosphere, Geosphere, Hydrosphere, and Enabling Capabilities. NASA now plans to issue an annual ROSES funding opportunity for each sphere, with specific themes changing year to year. The Atmosphere sphere absorbed several prior programs, including the Upper Atmosphere Research Program, Tropospheric Composition Program, Radiation Science Program, Atmospheric Composition Modeling and Analysis Program, and elements of the former Weather and Atmospheric Dynamics Focus Area.

What Science Questions Does This Program Address?

The Atmosphere program funds research that improves process-level understanding of phenomena not yet sufficiently observed or modeled, organized around four questions: how atmospheric composition is changing, how composition and solar radiation influence the Earth system, how composition and Earth system changes affect air quality, and how dynamic and thermodynamic structures tied to weather events evolve across spatial and temporal scales. Relevant science includes stratospheric ozone recovery and UV radiation impacts, tropospheric ozone and trace gas evolution, aerosol and cloud lifecycle effects on the radiation budget, and atmospheric dynamics tied to air quality.

What Data Must Proposals Use?

Use of NASA-supported sub-orbital (airborne) campaign data is mandatory. Proposals relying primarily on space-based remote sensing without airborne campaign data will be deemed unresponsive and returned without review. Preference goes to proposals that also pair airborne data with satellite remote sensing, ground-based observations, or modeling, and to proposals that draw on multiple field campaigns together. Illustrative airborne campaigns include ACCLIP, ACTIVATE, AEROMMA/STAQS, APMAC, ARCSIX, ASIA-AQ, ATom, CAMP2Ex, CPEX-AW, CPEX-CV, DCOTTS, IMPACTS, MAGEQ, MOOSE, PACE-PAX, SCOAPE, TRACER-AQ, and WHy2MSIE/APEX. Proposals tied to future campaigns such as NURTURE or EVS-4, or focused primarily on algorithm and model development without campaign data, are not solicited and will be returned without review.

What Are the Five Sub-Elements?

Proposers must select one primary sub-element for review panel assignment: Aerosols, Clouds, and Radiative Forcing; Tropospheric Composition and Dynamics; Upper Tropospheric and Stratospheric Composition and Dynamics; Atmospheric Physics, which is narrowed specifically to studies using NASA remote sensing assets targeting the planetary boundary layer; and Cross-Cutting Research, for proposals spanning multiple Atmosphere sub-elements or reaching into other Earth science spheres, provided atmospheric science remains the main focus.

Who Is Eligible?

The program follows standard ROSES eligibility. NASA center researchers already funded through the Internal Scientist Funding Model for matching work should not submit a proposal for that same activity, though they may participate as unfunded collaborators with program scientist approval. Federal agencies other than NASA cannot receive funding through this element but may participate as unfunded collaborators. Non-U.S. organizations may participate on a no-exchange-of-funds basis, with their portion of work funded through other sources.

What Are the Proposal Format Requirements?

The Science/Technical/Management section is limited to 10 pages. The anonymized technical proposal includes the S/T/M section, an anonymized Table of Work Effort, and references, all prepared for dual-anonymous peer review with numerical in-text reference callouts. A separate, non-anonymized Expertise and Resources document contains personnel details, biographical sketches and Current and Pending Support in SciENcv format, letters of support, facilities and equipment descriptions, and the Open Science and Data Management Plan, capped at two pages. A separately uploaded, unredacted Total Budget file is also required, along with an optional High-End Computing request.

What Is Dual-Anonymous Peer Review?

All proposals go through NASA's dual-anonymous peer review process, meaning proposers do not know reviewer identities and reviewers do not know proposer identities during evaluation. Proposals that violate anonymization or formatting rules may have material redacted or be returned without review; violations discovered later can result in a proposal being declined after review.

Is Research Security Training Required?

Effective August 5, 2026, any PI or Co-I dedicating 10 percent or more time to a proposed award must certify completion of research security training, satisfied by either the four NSF Research Security Training modules or the SECURE Center's condensed equivalent.

How Are Proposals Evaluated?

NASA divides the expected annual budget across the five sub-element panels before review begins, so proposals in different sub-elements do not compete against each other for the same funds. Each proposal is independently scored by three reviewers before the panel meeting, and proposals scoring below a general adjectival rating of Good may be triaged and not discussed in the full panel session, though written summaries are still prepared.

What Is the Funding Amount and Timeline?

NASA expects to fund approximately 30 to 50 new awards from an annual budget of about 8 million dollars, split across the five sub-elements after proposals are submitted. Awards run up to 3 years, with an anticipated investigation start about 6 months after the proposal due date.

How Do I Submit a Proposal?

Proposals are submitted electronically through NSPIRES at nspires.nasaprs.com. No hard copies are accepted. Applicants who need to submit through Grants.gov must request access at least 30 days before the due date from the points of contact listed in the solicitation, copying sara@nasa.gov. The Grants.gov funding opportunity number is NNH25ZDA001N-ATMOS.

Key Dates

Mandatory Notice of Intent: August 20, 2026 Proposal due date: October 20, 2026 Anticipated investigation start: approximately 6 months after the proposal due date

Program Contacts

Ken Jucks, Sphere Lead, kenneth.w.jucks@nasa.gov Emma Knowland, k.e.knowland@nasa.gov Will McCarty, will.mccarty@nasa.gov Ed Nowottnick, edward.p.nowottnick@nasa.gov John Sullivan, john.t.sullivan@nasa.gov

How Can BW&CO Help With an Atmosphere Proposal?

BW&CO Consulting helps research teams position competitive ROSES proposals, including anonymization compliance for dual-anonymous peer review, sub-element selection strategy, technical narrative development, and NSPIRES submission logistics, so applicants can meet the August 20, 2026 NOI deadline and October 20, 2026 proposal deadline with a complete, evaluation-ready package.

Contact BW&CO Consulting to discuss NASA ROSES A.14 Atmosphere eligibility and proposal strategy.

NASA SBIR/STTR Civilian Commercialization Readiness Pilot Program (CCRPP), Program Year 2026

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

Executive Summary:

The NASA Civilian Commercialization Readiness Pilot Program (CCRPP) is a post-Phase II opportunity that matches private or non-SBIR government investment with additional SBIR/STTR program funds to accelerate a technology's transition to commercial or mission use. Eligible small businesses must have a completed, ongoing, or sequential NASA SBIR/STTR Phase II award and must secure an external investor willing to co-fund the maturation effort. NASA matches investor funds dollar-for-dollar, up to $2.5 million in SBIR/STTR funds against $2.5 million in outside investment, for a total award of up to $5 million.

Applications close August 19, 2026 at 5:00 PM ET.

This is a matching-funds pilot program requiring a secured external investor, a Letter of Commitment, and a 30-page technical application submitted through ProSAMS.

How much funding would I receive?

NASA matches SBIR/STTR program funds between $500,000 and $2.5 million per award, matched 1:1 by external investment, for a combined award of up to $5 million.

Eligibility Pathways (must meet one):

A completed NASA SBIR/STTR Phase II award (issued from NASA solicitations in approximately the last 10 years) with the Phase II period of performance complete by August 19, 2026

NASA SBIR/STTR Phase II-E options resulting from Phase I awards starting in Program Year 2014 or later, regardless of when their period of performance ends

An ongoing or completed NASA SBIR/STTR Phase II Sequential award

Investor Requirement:

Must secure one or more investors external to the SBIR/STTR program (a company, VC firm, individual investor, or non-SBIR government program)

Owners, family members, and affiliates of the small business do not qualify as external investors

A signed Letter of Commitment from each investor is required at application, with matching funds transferred within 45 calendar days of selection notification

Other Key Requirements:

Small business must have 500 or fewer employees, combined with affiliates

Businesses majority-owned by multiple VC firms, hedge funds, or private equity firms are not eligible

Principal Investigator must be primarily employed by the small business; co-PIs are not allowed

NAICS code must be 541713 or 541715 at time of award

Active SAM.gov registration required at submission and award

Are there any additional benefits I would receive? Yes, non-dilutive and strategic benefits include:

Equity-free matching funds to accelerate commercialization beyond Phase II

Access to NASA's Technology Available (TAV) patent and software portfolio for use in the project

Optional participation in the NSF I-Corps™ program, with up to $30,000 in additional support

External validation of commercial potential through a qualified third-party investor

What is the timeline to apply and when would I receive funding? Application deadline: August 19, 2026 at 5:00 PM ET, submitted via ProSAMS

Anticipated period of performance: 24 months (may not exceed 30 months)

Investor funds must be transferred within 45 calendar days of selection notification; NASA does not accept investments obligated more than 60 days (non-government) or 90 days (federal/state government) prior to selection notification

No formal timeline for award and disbursement is specified in the solicitation beyond the negotiation process following selection

Where does this funding come from?

NASA SBIR/STTR Program, matched with funds from an external, non-SBIR/STTR investor

Applications processed by the NASA SBIR/STTR Program Management Office (NASA Ames) with contracting through the NASA Shared Services Center (NSSC)

Who is eligible to apply?

U.S.-based small business concerns with a qualifying NASA Phase II history, as described above

Must register with the SBA Company Registry and SAM.gov, and submit via ProSAMS at https://prosams.nasa.gov/

What companies and projects are likely to win?

Applications are evaluated across four factors:

Scientific/Technical Merit and Feasibility — originality and feasibility of the proposed R&D, plus a review of prior Phase II results and objectives met

Experience, Qualifications, and Facilities — technical capability of the PI, key personnel, and any subcontractors, plus adequacy of instrumentation and facilities

Effectiveness of the Proposed Work Plan — comprehensiveness of the maturation strategy, schedule, resource allocation, and path beyond CCRPP toward NASA mission infusion

Commercial Potential and Feasibility — market segmentation, competitive landscape, commercialization plan, IP protection strategy, and prior commercialization track record

Are there any restrictions I should know about?

CCRPP funds may only be used to build on the firm's Phase II work; duplicative or unrelated effort is not eligible

Firms may not have already received a CCRPP or equivalent award (e.g., Commercialization Readiness Program) for the same Phase II technology

Subcontracting, including consultants, may not exceed 50 percent of the research effort

Technical application is capped at 30 pages, 1-inch margins, 10-point type minimum

How long will it take me to prepare an application?

The application requires a 30-page technical application (Customer Objectives, Additional Commercialization Information, and Implementation Approach), a detailed budget covering both SBIR/STTR and investor funds, a Briefing Chart, and a signed Letter of Commitment from each investor. Firms without an already-committed investor should expect the investor search and commitment process to be the longest lead item.

How can BW&CO help?

BW&CO can support:

Identifying and vetting appropriate external investors and structuring compliant Letters of Commitment

Translating your Phase II results into a Commercialization Plan aligned to the four-factor evaluation rubric

Building a credible budget and maturation schedule that satisfies NASA's matching-fund timing rules

Positioning past performance and IP strategy for NASA evaluators

Review solicitation here.