1,000+ Opportunities
Find the right grant
Search federal, foundation, and corporate grants with AI — or browse by agency, topic, and state.
This listing may be outdated. Verify details at the official source before applying.
Find similar grantsProgram opens May 27, 2026 and closes June 24, 2026. Published May 6, 2026. Part of DoW SBIR 2026 BAA Release 2.
Automated Process for Codesign of Radiation Hardening and Security is sponsored by DARPA. Seeks to develop next-generation microelectronics design and integration approaches that result in resilience to ionizing radiation and enhanced security.
Get alerted about grants like this
Save a search for “DARPA” or related topics and get emailed when new opportunities appear.
Search similar grants →Extracted from the official opportunity page/RFP to help you evaluate fit faster.
Automated Process for Codesign of Radiation Hardening and Security: SBIR | DARPA Department of War organization.
Automated Process For Codesign of Radiation Hardening and Security: SBIR Automated Process for Codesign of Radiation Hardening and Security: SBIR OUSD (R&E) critical technology area(s) : Microelectronics, Space Technology, Trusted AI and Autonomy Objective: To develop next generation microelectronics design and integration approaches that simultaneously result in resilience to ionizing radiation and enhanced security.
Description: To achieve mission objectives, many national security systems require microelectronics with some level of radiation resilience or hardness. Being embedded in national security systems, microelectronics often have security or trust requirements as well. However, radiation hardness and security are usually developed independently and in isolation from each other.
This call for proposals is to co-develop approaches to simultaneously achieve both radiation resilience and security. Radiation resilience can be achieved by design techniques like standard cell optimizations, architectural innovations, or novel concepts of operation. Security can be achieved through approaches like obfuscation, redaction, and encryption.
In each case, the technical approach is often a bespoke solution that requires customization to achieve the desired outcome which results in long and costly development cycles. Therefore, technologies that employ automation to shorten development cycles are required. Automation can take many forms, from generators that define circuit topologies to emulators that predict performance before the design is fabricated.
For this activity, microelectronics can comprise monolithic integrated circuits or heterogeneously integrated systems. Proposals that develop technologies to obfuscate both function and resilience to radiation are encouraged, as are proposals that include embedded sensors for environmental, state of health, and tamper monitoring.
Phase I is a 6-month feasibility study to determine the technical practicality and producibility of the offeror’s approach. This includes an assessment of its technical readiness and potential applicability to defense, critical infrastructure, and commercial markets. Experimental demonstrations may also be included to help support the proposed concept.
This study will provide a quantitative analysis of the approach highlighting how progress will be measured.
Deliverables for Phase I include quarterly financial reports; initial technical report; interim technical report; draft and final technical report outlining the proposed technology and how the new technology compares to the two independent operations: radiation hardening and security; proposed set of metrics which allow for co-design decisions to be made accurately; proof-of-concept analysis and/or simulations; preliminary design; fabrication process; risk assessment and mitigation strategy; detailed Phase II work outline; a process automation strategy; and commercialization plan outlining target markets, strategy, and potential Department of War (DoW) insertion opportunities.
There will also be a kickoff meeting, quarterly meetings, and a closeout meeting. Phase I fixed payable milestones for this program should include: Month 1: Initial Technical Report providing an assessment of project goals, progress, status, as well as any issues and concerns. Phase I Kickoff Meeting Month 3: Interim Technical Report providing an assessment of project goals, progress, status, as well as any issues and concerns.
Month 5: Draft Final Technical Report addressing all the characteristics listed in the Description section and any other factors identified as relevant by the performer.
The Draft Final Technical Report should additionally include a risk assessment and mitigation strategy; proof-of-concept analysis; and a commercialization plan on applicability to defense, critical infrastructure, and commercial markets Month 6: Final Technical Report addressing all the characteristics listed in the Description section and any other factors identified as relevant by the performer.
The Final Technical Report should additionally include a risk assessment and mitigation strategy; proof-of-concept analysis; and a commercialization plan on applicability to defense, critical infrastructure, and commercial markets. Presentation of results at a Phase I closeout meeting. The objective of Phase II is to develop a representative prototype design that aligns with government performance objectives.
The specific metrics and objectives for this phase will be determined by the technology proposed during Phase I. Phase II includes a 12-month base period followed by two 12-month options. Each 12-month period will be dedicated to incrementally optimizing the prototype.
During this period, prototype devices will be manufactured and tested to validate their performance against the program metrics. Throughout the prototype design phase, performers are expected to collaborate closely with the government to assess whether the delivered technology is on track to meet objectives that enhance radiation resilience and security.
Deliverables for Phase II include quarterly technical and financial reports; draft and final technical report listing the measured performance of the prototype against the metrics; an updated process automation strategy; and an updated commercialization plan with target markets, strategy, and potential DoW insertion opportunities. There will also be a kickoff meeting, quarterly meetings, and a closeout meeting.
Phase II Base fixed payable milestones for this program should include: Month 1: Technical Report providing an assessment of project goals, progress, status, as well as issues and concerns. Phase II Kickoff Meeting. Month 4: Technical Report providing an assessment of project goals, progress, status, as well as any issues and concerns.
Month 7: Draft Final Technical Report listing the measured performance against the characteristics listed in the Description section and an updated commercialization plan on applicability to defense, critical infrastructure, and commercial markets. This report should detail how Phase II Option I period will enable the fabrication of a protype at the end of Phase II Option II.
Month 10: Final Technical Report listing the measured performance against the characteristics listed in the Description section and an updated commercialization plan on applicability to defense, critical infrastructure, and commercial markets. This report should detail how Phase II Option I period will enable the fabrication of a protype at the end of Phase II Option II. Presentation of results at a Phase II Base closeout meeting.
Phase II Option I fixed payable milestones for this program should include: Month 13: Technical Report providing an assessment of project goals, progress, status, as well as any issues and concerns. Month 16: Technical Report providing an assessment of project goals, progress, status, as well as any issues and concerns.
Month 19: Draft Final Technical Report listing the measured performance against the characteristics listed in the Description section and an updated commercialization plan on applicability to defense, critical infrastructure, and commercial markets.
This report should detail the preliminary fabrication plan in Phase II Option II Month 22: Final Technical Report listing the measured performance against the characteristics listed in the Description section and an updated commercialization plan on applicability to defense, critical infrastructure, and commercial markets.
This report should detail the preliminary fabrication plan in Phase II Option II Presentation of results at a Phase II Option I closeout meeting. Phase II Option II fixed payable milestones for this program should include: Month 25: Technical Report providing an assessment of project goals, progress, status, as well as any issues and concerns.
Month 28: Technical Report providing an assessment of project goals, progress, status, as well as any issues and concerns. Month 31: Technical Report providing an assessment of project goals, progress, status, as well as any issues and concerns. Month 34: Technical Report providing an assessment of project goals, progress, status, as well as any issues and concerns.
Demonstration to Government team. Month 35: Draft Final Technical Report listing the measured performance against the characteristics listed in the Description section and an updated commercialization plan on applicability to defense, critical infrastructure, and commercial markets.
Month 36: Final Technical Report listing the measured performance against the characteristics listed in the Description section and an updated commercialization plan on applicability to defense, critical infrastructure, and commercial markets. The report should detail the results of the final fabrication of the prototype. Presentation of results at a Phase II Option II closeout meeting.
Phase III dual use applications Phase III refers to work that derives from, extends, or completes an effort made under prior SBIR funding agreements, but is funded by sources other than the SBIR program. During Phase III, the small business should focus on commercializing the hardware.
They must obtain funding from either the private sector, a non-SBIR federal source, or both, to develop the prototype into a viable commercial product for sale in military or private sector markets. Potential dual use applications include advanced co-design processes for military and commercial microelectronics that are integrated into satellites. https://www.
synopsys. com/implementation-and-signoff/signoff/siliconsmart. html Radiation Hardening, Security, Automation, Co-design, Single Event Effects, Trust and Assurance For additional information and to submit your full proposal package, visit the DSIP Portal .
DoW SBIR 2026 BAA | Release 2
Based on current listing details, eligibility includes: Open to all interested parties. Applicants should confirm final requirements in the official notice before submission.
Current published award information indicates Not specified Always verify allowable costs, matching requirements, and funding caps directly in the sponsor documentation.
The current target date is June 24, 2026. Build your timeline backwards from this date to cover registrations, approvals, attachments, and final submission checks.
Federal grant success rates typically range from 10-30%, varying by agency and program. Build a strong proposal with clear objectives, measurable outcomes, and a well-justified budget to improve your chances.
Requirements vary by sponsor, but typically include a project narrative, budget justification, organizational capability statement, and key personnel CVs. Check the official notice for the complete list of required attachments.
Yes — AI tools like Granted can help research funders, draft proposal sections, and check compliance. However, always review and customize AI-generated content to reflect your organization's unique strengths and the specific requirements of the solicitation.
Review timelines vary by funder. Federal agencies typically take 3-6 months from submission to award notification. Foundation grants may be faster, often 1-3 months. Check the program's timeline in the official solicitation for specific dates.
Many federal programs offer multi-year funding or allow competitive renewals. Check the official solicitation for continuation and renewal policies. Non-competing continuation applications are common for multi-year awards.
Past winners and funding trends for this program
The OCRP Outcomes Consortium Development Award supports a multi-institutional research effort conducted by leading ovarian cancer researchers and consumer advocates that specifically focuses on identifying and understanding predictors of disease outcomes in ovarian cancer patients. This effort will be executed through a two-stage approach using two separate award mechanisms: this FY12 Outcomes Consortium Development Award, which will enable the consortium to lay the groundwork for the research project, including proof of concept, and the FY14 Outcomes Consortium Award, which will support the execution of the full research project. Funding Opportunity Number: W81XWH-12-OCRP-OCDA. Assistance Listing: 12.420. Funding Instrument: CA,G. Category: ST. Award Amount: $1.3M total program funding.
Defense Health Agency (DHA) Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program is sponsored by Defense Health Agency (DHA). The DHA SBIR program provides funding and support for small businesses to develop innovative healthcare technologies and solutions that benefit the military. It focuses on biomedical and health-focused technologies that enhance medical readiness, clinical care delivery, force health protection, operational medicine, and military healthcare modernization. Topics are aligned with real-world needs such as trauma care, telemedicine, infectious disease diagnostics, and wearable monitoring tools.
Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Program 25.1 Solicitation is sponsored by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate (S&T). The DHS SBIR Program invites U.S. small businesses to submit research proposals addressing technology needs in fentanyl source profiling, data analysis tools, digital injection attack prevention, and wired interconnection cables or adapters.
On June 1, 2026, DARPA and the National Science Foundation announced AI Forge — a jointly governed forum that will fund, guide, and manage university-led research on AI interpretability, AI control, and adversarial robustness. The RFI on sam.gov closes June 22. The forum itself will be administered by a new nonprofit launching in summer 2026. The structure is what matters: this is not a one-off solicitation, it is a multi-year venue for university-government-industry research that operates outside the normal merit-review timelines of either agency. What university research teams should be doing in the seventeen-day window between the announcement and the RFI deadline — and what the forum model means for federal AI funding through FY 2028.
Read articleDARPA DSO pre-released four FY26 SBIR XL topics on June 3 — Rydberg sensor manufacturing, cognitive sleep wearables, expeditionary closed-cycle power, and host-pathogen interactome prediction. Proposals open June 24 and close July 22. Here is the strategy.
Read articleNSF 26-507 establishes a new $8.5M K-12 AI education research-to-prototype pipeline with 50 Planning grants ($50K, 2 months) feeding 20 Development grants ($300K, 1 year). The mandatory team composition — K-12 educators, technologists, researchers, and parents/guardians — is a structural break from how NSF has historically funded education research.
Read article