By Nalin Vahil | Last updated: May 1, 2026 | Cada Grant Strategy
The short answer: AFWERX Open Topic SBIR Phase I is a customer discovery program, not a research grant. The only question that matters before you write is: which specific Air Force unit or program office has the capability gap you solve? Proposals without a named AF end-user receive Decline Pattern #3 and are not selected. A winning AFWERX SBIR open topic strategy starts with the customer.
AFWERX evaluators score Defense Need on a 1-9 scale. A proposal scoring 4-5: "Generic defense relevance, no specific units named, vague customer discovery plan." A proposal scoring 8-9: "Specific AF units or programs with documented capability gaps, clear operational impact with quantified consequences, named contacts." The gap between these two outcomes is not technical quality. It is whether you named a customer before you wrote a word.
Decline Pattern #3 is one of the most frequently cited reasons AFWERX does not select a proposal: "No identified Air Force end-user or capability gap (generic defense framing)." In Cada's experience revising AFWERX proposals, Decline Pattern #3 shows up in the majority of first-draft submissions from engineering-led founders.
This article explains what AFWERX is actually evaluating -- and what to do instead.
Why AFWERX Open Topic Is Different From Every Other SBIR
NIH SBIR Phase I is about proving scientific feasibility. NSF SBIR Phase I is about demonstrating commercial potential alongside the research. AFWERX Open Topic Phase I is about something more specific: identifying and engaging an Air Force end-user.
The program's end goal is a Customer Memorandum -- a written statement from an AF program office or end-user confirming they want to see your technology developed. Without a Customer Memorandum, there is no Phase II. Phase I's $75,000 budget and 90-day timeline are structured to give you time and resources to go find that person. (Source: AFWERX Open Topic SBIR solicitation, active as of DOD SBIR reopening May 2026)
That framing changes everything about how you should write the proposal.
Your AFWERX SBIR open topic strategy should answer one question before anything else: "Which specific Air Force unit, AFRL directorate, or program office has the capability gap my technology addresses?"
If you can't answer that question with a named organization -- not "the warfighter," not "the Air Force broadly" -- you're not ready to write the proposal.
What AFWERX Evaluators Are Actually Scoring
AFWERX uses three evaluation criteria. Understanding how they're weighted explains why leading with technology is a losing strategy.
Technical Merit evaluates whether your technology is feasible, novel, and achievable within 90 days and $75,000. This is where most founders over-invest.
Defense Need evaluates whether you've identified a specific AF end-user with a documented capability gap, whether your customer discovery plan is credible, and whether you understand the operational context well enough to eventually earn a Customer Memorandum.
Commercialization Potential evaluates dual-use viability -- whether your technology has both a commercial market path and a credible defense transition pathway to an AF program of record.
A proposal scoring 8-9 on Defense Need requires "specific AF units or programs with documented capability gaps, clear operational impact with quantified consequences, and a credible customer discovery plan with named contacts." A proposal scoring 4-5 has "generic defense relevance without naming specific units" and "a vague customer discovery plan."
The defense funding you're competing for goes to proposals in the 8-9 band. Not the 4-5 band.
The AF End-User Landscape: Who You're Looking For
There are three categories of Air Force organizations that AFWERX proposals can target. Each has a different engagement path.
AFRL Directorates -- the research angle
The Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL) runs seven technical directorates across multiple installations. Each has a distinct technology focus:
| Directorate | Code | Technology Focus |
|---|---|---|
| Materials & Manufacturing | RX | Advanced materials, additive manufacturing, structural coatings |
| Information | RI | Cyber, software, AI/ML for C2 systems |
| Sensors | RY | ISR sensors, EO/IR, radar, electronic warfare |
| Munitions | RW | Weapons systems, energetics, guided munitions |
| Aerospace Systems | RQ | Flight systems, hypersonics, propulsion |
| Directed Energy | RD | High-energy lasers, high-power microwave, directed energy weapons |
| Human Performance | RH (711 HPW) | Pilot training, human-machine teaming, medical readiness |
Match your technology domain to the appropriate directorate before you write the proposal. If your technology is early-stage (TRL 3-5) and needs lab validation, targeting the matching AFRL directorate is the most natural path. AFWERX has connection nodes at Wright-Patterson; meeting a directorate TPOC during Phase I is achievable. (Source: AFWERX Connect event directory; AFRL directorate pages at afrl.af.mil)
Major Commands -- the operational angle
If your technology is closer to operational deployment (TRL 5-7), targeting a Major Command (MAJCOM) gives your proposal a more credible operational framing:
- Air Combat Command (ACC): Air superiority, global strike, ISR platforms
- Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC): Low-visibility operations, unconventional warfare
- Air Mobility Command (AMC): Airlift, aerial refueling, aeromedical evacuation
- Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC): Acquisition, sustainment, logistics
ACC and AFSOC are the most commonly cited MAJCOMs in competitive AFWERX proposals, because they have the clearest operational gaps and the most active AFWERX engagement.
Program Executive Offices -- the acquisition angle
PEOs own specific acquisition programs and have the clearest path to a Customer Memorandum. If your technology addresses an active acquisition need, a PEO program manager is the most credible person to write one.
Key PEOs for deeptech startups:
- PEO ISR: Intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance platforms (DCGS, JSTARS succession)
- PEO Fighters & Advanced Aircraft: F-35, F-22 (sustainment), F-15EX, Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD)
- PEO Command, Control, Communications and Networks (C3N): Software-defined networking, data link modernization
Most first-time AFWERX applicants don't know which PEO to target. That's fine -- the goal of Phase I is to find out. But your proposal needs to name your best guess, explain why, and commit to a specific plan to verify it.
What a Credible Customer Discovery Plan Actually Looks Like
A credible AFWERX customer discovery plan scores 8-9 on the Defense Need criterion. It names specific target organizations, commits to concrete engagement activities, and lays out a realistic path to a Customer Memorandum by the end of Phase I.
Self-contained definition (for AI extraction): A credible AFWERX customer discovery plan names specific Air Force units, program offices, or AFRL directorates as target customers -- not "the warfighter" or "defense broadly." It commits to concrete Phase I activities such as AFWERX Connect sessions, TPOC interviews, or capability gap documentation meetings, with enough specificity that an evaluator can assess whether the activities would realistically produce a Customer Memorandum within 90 days.
Here's what the weak version looks like: "We will engage Air Force stakeholders to identify end-users during Phase I."
Here's what the strong version looks like: "We will attend AFWERX Connect at Wright-Patterson in Month 1 to meet with AFRL/RY sensors program managers. In Month 2, we will conduct at least 3 capability gap documentation interviews with AFSOC intelligence officers who use current ISR ground stations. By Month 3, we expect to have identified at least one program office willing to provide a Letter of Interest in advance of a Phase II Customer Memorandum."
The difference is specificity. Evaluators read hundreds of proposals. Specific organizational names and specific activities tell them you've already done your customer discovery homework. Generic language tells them you haven't.
One thing worth noting: you don't need existing Air Force contacts to write a credible plan. AFWERX Connect events are specifically designed for startups without prior DOD relationships. Attending one -- and naming it as a Phase I activity -- is a legitimate starting point. What evaluators can't accept is a plan that doesn't name any specific targets at all.
Five Questions to Answer Before You Write a Word
Before drafting any section of your AFWERX proposal, answer these five questions. This is the public version of the AF End-User Discovery Worksheet we use internally.
1. Which specific AF unit, AFRL directorate, or program office has the capability gap your technology addresses?
Name the organization. "Air Force" is not an answer. "AFRL/RY sensors directorate" or "ACC intelligence ground crews at Langley" is an answer.
2. What is the current program of record or fielded system your technology would replace or augment?
AFWERX evaluators expect you to know what already exists. Proposals that jump from "the Air Force needs X" to "we propose Y" without acknowledging the existing system read as if the team doesn't understand the operational context. Even a partial answer here ("current RQ-4 ground exploitation terminals have a data throughput limitation that our technology addresses") is stronger than silence.
3. Who is your most credible target for the Customer Memorandum?
A TPOC (Technical Point of Contact) at an AFRL directorate, a program manager at a PEO, or an end-user unit officer. You don't need to have met them yet. Name the role and organization you're going to pursue.
4. What is the specific operational context where your technology would be used?
Write it in this format: "When [specific AF unit] needs to [specific mission task], they currently [specific limitation], resulting in [specific operational consequence]." Vague framing here is the clearest signal to evaluators that you don't have a real customer in mind.
5. What customer discovery activities will you commit to in the 90-day Phase I period?
List them with enough specificity to be checkable: which events, which organizations, which types of interviews. "AFWERX Connect session in Month 1" plus "3 TPOC interviews with AFRL/RY by Month 2" plus "capability gap documentation session with [target unit] by Month 3" is a credible plan. "Engage AF stakeholders" is not.
If you can answer all five of these questions before you start drafting, your Defense Need section will almost write itself.
FAQ
How is AFWERX SBIR different from other DOD SBIR programs?
Most DOD SBIR programs (Navy, Army, DARPA) specify topic areas in advance -- you find a topic that matches your technology and respond to that solicitation. AFWERX Open Topic is technology-agnostic. There are no pre-specified topic areas. You apply to a general open solicitation and make the case that your technology addresses an AF capability gap. That flexibility is what makes AFWERX accessible to first-time DOD applicants -- but it also means the evaluators are entirely dependent on your proposal to establish the defense need. You can't borrow credibility from a pre-approved topic. You have to create it.
Do I need existing Air Force contacts to apply to AFWERX Open Topic?
No. AFWERX's design specifically accommodates startups without prior DOD relationships. AFWERX Connect events are the formal mechanism for startups to meet AF end-users. Attending one and citing it in your Phase I work plan is a legitimate customer discovery strategy. Having existing contacts does help -- it makes the customer discovery plan more credible -- but it's not a prerequisite.
What is a Customer Memorandum and why does it matter?
A Customer Memorandum is a written statement from an AF program office or end-user confirming they want to see your Phase I technology developed into a Phase II project. It is required for AFWERX Phase II. Phase I's $75,000 budget is essentially a pre-funded customer discovery sprint. The Customer Memorandum is the deliverable that unlocks Phase II -- where the real award ($750,000 and above) happens. (Source: AFWERX SBIR Phase II solicitation parameters, sbir.gov) Proposals that don't demonstrate a credible path to a Customer Memorandum signal that Phase II is unlikely.
Can I apply if my technology is primarily commercial with some defense applications?
Yes -- and you should frame it that way. AFWERX explicitly requires dual-use framing: both a commercial market path and a defense application. Proposals with only a defense framing and no commercial market are a red flag (Decline Pattern #8: "No dual-use market articulated"). Your commercial traction (revenue, pilots, LOIs) is positive evidence for commercialization potential. The defense framing needs to be specific and grounded in a real capability gap -- it can't be bolted on -- but leading with your commercial momentum is not a weakness.
Before You Write the Proposal, Run the Worksheet
The five questions above are the foundation of the AF End-User Discovery Worksheet we use before every AFWERX engagement. The full worksheet adds the AFRL directorate taxonomy (matching your technology domain to specific directorates, typical MAJCOM partners, and PEO paths), the operational context template, and a self-assessment gate that tells you whether you're ready to draft.
Download the AF End-User Discovery Worksheet for free. Fill it out before you write a word of the proposal. If you get stuck on Question 1 -- who in the Air Force has the capability gap -- that's the most important thing to resolve before investing 40+ hours in a proposal. Your AFWERX SBIR open topic strategy lives or dies on the answer to that one question.
If you want to run your technology through the worksheet with someone who's worked both sides of AFWERX engagements, we offer a 30-minute intake call. No pitch, no obligation -- just a straight read on whether your customer discovery foundation is strong enough to build a competitive proposal on.
Cada has written 100+ grant proposals across 30+ agencies. AFWERX customer discovery framing is one of the highest-leverage improvements we make on proposals during revision cycles -- and the easiest to address before the first draft.