Quantum and Optoelectronics Grants 2025: How to Secure Up to 1.5M Non Dilutive Funding for US Israel R&D Partnerships

If you are building serious quantum or optoelectronic technology and you are not looking at BIRD funding, you are leaving money on the table.

This program sits in a very sweet spot: up to 1.5 million USD per project, non‑dilutive, and specifically designed for joint US–Israel industrial R&D. That means real capital to build an actual product, without handing over equity, and with a binational stamp of approval that investors and customers take seriously.

The opportunity is run by the Israel–US Binational Industrial Research and Development Foundation (BIRD Foundation). The current call is focused on quantum and optoelectronics collaborations, with a hard deadline of September 9, 2025. If you are a US or Israeli company in this space, this is not just “nice to have” funding. It can be the difference between having a brilliant slide deck and having a working system in a customer site.

Where most tech grants lean heavily academic, BIRD is unapologetically commercial. They expect a joint R&D project and a credible path to market, not a vague promise of “future applications.” In exchange, they’ll cover up to 50 percent of approved project costs, up to 1.5M USD, and they take no equity. You repay through royalties only if you succeed. If the project does not generate revenue, the grant remains a grant.

The current focus on quantum and optoelectronics is particularly attractive. These are capital‑hungry fields: cryogenic equipment, specialized lasers, vacuum systems, cleanroom process development, highly specialized personnel. A 1–1.5M USD infusion that does not hit your cap table gives you room to hire serious talent, run pilots, and survive the long “pre‑revenue but burning cash” phase.

Let’s break down how this works, who should seriously consider applying, and how to put together a proposal that has a real shot.

BIRD Quantum and Optoelectronics Grants at a Glance

What This Opportunity Actually Offers (Beyond the 1.5M Headline)

The headline number is impressive, but the structure of BIRD funding is what makes it particularly attractive to growth‑stage and scaling startups.

First, the money is non‑dilutive. BIRD is not coming for your cap table, your IP ownership, or a board seat. They participate through conditional grants: they cover up to half your approved R&D costs; if and only if the project leads to revenue, you pay royalties back to the foundation up to a capped amount. If the product never commercializes, you are not stuck with a loan.

Second, BIRD funds industrial R&D, not just academic exploration. You can budget for real‑world needs: engineering salaries, prototyping, custom hardware, testing at customer sites, standards compliance, and even certain go‑to‑market activities that are tightly tied to the R&D effort. Think “turn this joint prototype into something a paying customer can deploy,” not “write another theoretical paper.”

Third, the binational element is a feature, not paperwork theater. BIRD actively helps matchmake between US and Israeli companies. If you are a US quantum startup hunting for a photonics partner in Israel, or an Israeli optoelectronics company seeking a US systems integrator or cloud partner, BIRD staff and their ecosystem (e.g., Colorado–Israel Chamber of Commerce, Elevate Quantum) can introduce you to credible candidates.

Fourth, there is signaling value. Being selected by a binational, government‑backed fund sends a strong message to investors, corporates, and strategic buyers:

• Your tech passed serious technical due diligence.
• Your commercialization plan did not sound like science fiction.
• Two companies in two countries were willing to sign a formal R&D and revenue‑sharing agreement.

For many teams, that stamp of credibility unlocks later VC rounds, corporate pilots, and follow‑on grants.

Finally, there is an underrated benefit: discipline. To win and manage BIRD funding, you need a clear workplan, milestones, and a commercialization agreement. That forces both partners to get aligned on IP ownership, markets, roles, and risks early, which saves painful arguments when the tech actually starts working.

Who Should Apply for BIRD Quantum and Optoelectronics Funding

On paper, eligibility is simple. In practice, there is a very clear “ideal applicant” profile.

At the minimum, you must have:

1. A partnership between at least one US company and one Israeli company.
   This is not a “letter of interest” situation. Reviewers expect a real partnership with a signed agreement that explains who does which R&D tasks, who owns what IP, and how commercialization and revenues will be handled in both markets.

2. A shared R&D effort and commercialization plan.
   Both companies must have meaningful R&D roles. This is not the US company subcontracting the Israeli partner to do all the engineering, or vice versa. Likewise, the commercialization plan should show how each will contribute: perhaps the Israeli partner owns chip‑level innovation while the US partner handles system integration and access to North American customers.

3. A project with significant innovation.
   BIRD is not interested in re‑skinning an off‑the‑shelf module and calling it “AI‑powered quantum something.” Reviewers look for real technical risk and real novelty. The threshold is: if you succeed, will the product genuinely change what is possible in your segment, or is it purely incremental?

So who does that describe?

Think of:

• A US quantum software startup building error‑mitigation algorithms teaming up with an Israeli quantum hardware company to co‑develop a stack optimized for a specific vertical (drug discovery, logistics optimization, secure communications).
• An Israeli optoelectronics firm with advanced detectors collaborating with a US medical device company to turn those into a next‑generation imaging platform, with FDA and Israeli regulatory pathways laid out.
• A US photonics startup combining integrated photonic chips with Israeli cyber or HLS expertise to build secure quantum‑based communication modules for critical infrastructure.

You do not need to be a large enterprise. BIRD funds everything from startups to well‑established companies. What matters far more than size is:

• Do you have a credible technical team for your piece of the work?
• Do you have at least preliminary proof that the technology is viable (early prototype, simulation results, or feasibility data)?
• Can you show actual market pull: letters from potential customers, pilots, offtake interest, or a clear regulatory and business path?

If you are still at the “we have a great idea on a whiteboard” stage, you are probably too early. If you are already selling a mature product and just need standard marketing budget, you are probably too late. The sweet spot is pre‑commercial, but with a believable route to paying users within a few years.

Insider Tips for a Winning BIRD Application

BIRD is competitive. Reviewers see a lot of good science and a lot of clever ideas. Here is what tends to separate the funded projects from the “close, but no” pile.

1. Treat the partnership as the product

The magic of this program is the joint value created between the US and Israeli companies. Do not present two parallel projects stapled together. Build a coherent story:

• Why this specific US company and this specific Israeli company are stronger together than either would be alone.
• How the technical handoff works across the Atlantic: who is responsible for which work packages and why that split makes sense.
• How each side gains long‑term strategic benefit (market access, IP, production, scale).

If your Gantt chart can be cut neatly into “red for Israel, blue for US” with zero interdependence, you need to rethink your design.

2. Make the commercialization plan painfully concrete

“Global market potential” is meaningless if you can’t answer:

• What markets will you enter first, and why those?
• Who are three named customers or customer types you will target?
• What is your regulatory path, if relevant (FDA, FCC, export controls, Israeli standards)?
• What does pricing roughly look like, and what is your business model?

Back this up with letters of intent, pilot MOUs, or even emails from prospective customers saying they are actively interested in testing the joint solution when it is ready.

3. Quantify technical risk and your mitigation strategy

Quantum and optoelectronics are inherently risky. Pretending your plan is perfectly linear makes reviewers suspicious.

Be explicit:

• Which technical milestones are truly “go or no‑go”?
• What will you do if a key approach fails?
  For example, “If we can’t hit the required coherence times with approach A, we will pivot to architecture B, which we have already simulated at smaller scale.”

Showing that you have thought through failure modes increases confidence, it does not hurt you.

4. Budget like a grown‑up

You can ask for up to 1.5M USD, but that does not mean you should blindly aim for the cap.

Build a bottom‑up budget that:

• Ties every major cost to a specific work package and milestone.
• Reflects realistic salary levels for quantum and photonics engineers.
• Includes the unglamorous parts: testing infrastructure, compliance, travel for joint work sessions, legal fees for the partnership agreement.

Then show how those costs are split between the US and Israeli partners, and how your own matching funds or in‑kind contributions fill the rest. Reviewers love seeing that both companies have serious skin in the game.

5. Write for a smart person who is not in your niche

Your reviewers may know quantum, or optoelectronics, or industrial R&D, but not necessarily all three with your exact jargon set.

• Define specialized terms the first time you use them.
• Use diagrams or brief examples: “Think of this as a GPS for photons, routing signals with nanometer precision.”
• Keep the narrative flowing. If a paragraph reads like the methods section of a physics paper, simplify it.

If a non‑specialist colleague cannot follow your “problem–solution–impact” story, a reviewer probably can’t either.

6. Show binational impact, not just binational structure

Do not stop at “this project has one Israeli and one US company, therefore binational.” Spell out:

• Jobs created in both countries.
• Knowledge transfer (staff exchanges, joint workshops, shared infrastructure).
• IP and know‑how that will sit on both sides and continue beyond the grant.

BIRD’s mission is mutual benefit. Make that crystal clear.

A Practical Application Timeline (Working Backward from September 9, 2025)

You cannot throw a BIRD proposal together in August and expect it to win. Here’s a realistic timeline you can adapt.

By early May 2025 – Decide to go for it and align partners
Confirm that both companies want to submit to this specific call. Assign a proposal lead in each company and schedule recurring check‑ins. Start sketching the joint concept: objectives, rough budget, and commercialization angle.

May to June – Design the project and partnership agreement skeleton
Nail down:

• Work packages and who owns what.
• The initial IP and commercialization framework (even if the full agreement will come later).
• Preliminary budget ranges for each side.

In parallel, identify potential pilot customers or strategic partners and request letters of support.

June to mid‑July – Write the technical and commercial narrative
Draft the full project description: technical approach, risk, milestones, and commercialization plan. Circulate it internally and between partners until both sides genuinely agree on the scope and claims.

Mid‑July to mid‑August – Lock the budget and legal pieces
Work with finance and legal teams to:

• Finalize the budget and cost‑sharing structure.
• Draft or refine the binational R&D and commercialization agreement.
• Confirm matching funds and internal approvals.

This is also when you should upload test files to the BIRD submission system to avoid last‑minute login surprises.

Mid‑August to early September – Polish, review, and submit
Do a “red team” review: ask someone who was not involved in writing to read the full package and attack it with questions. Fix gaps, inconsistencies, and unclear sections.

Plan to submit at least 48 hours before September 9. Submission portals, VPNs, and PDF generators love to misbehave at the worst possible moment.

Required Materials and How to Prepare Them

Exact formats can change by call, so always check the official guidelines, but you should expect to prepare:

• Project Narrative
  A comprehensive description of the joint R&D project. Cover the problem you are solving, current limitations, your proposed solution, the technical workplan, risk management, and anticipated results. Aim for clear, non‑academic prose supported by enough technical depth to show credibility.

• Joint Budget and Financial Forms
  Line‑item budgets for both partners, aligned to the same work packages. Clearly distinguish BIRD‑funded costs, partner contributions, and any third‑party subcontracting.

• Partnership and Commercialization Agreement (or at least a detailed term sheet)
  This document is often where proposals stall. Start early. You need to explain ownership of foreground and background IP, revenue sharing, manufacturing responsibility, and territory rights.

• Company Profiles and Key Personnel CVs
  Short, focused bios that emphasize relevant experience: previous deep‑tech projects, commercialization wins, regulatory expertise, or domain‑specific knowledge.

• Letters of Support
  From potential customers, strategic partners, or ecosystem organizations in both countries. These should be specific: what problem they have, why your joint solution matters to them, and what kind of engagement they are prepared to consider.

• Compliance and Regulatory Notes (if applicable)
  For medical, telecom, defense, energy, or critical‑infrastructure applications, include a short section showing you understand the regulatory path and have a strategy to navigate it.

Organize your internal drafting so you are not trying to chase down signatures and legal redlines the week of the deadline. Your future self will thank you.

What Makes a BIRD Application Stand Out

From reviewer conversations and past BIRD projects in related calls, strong proposals tend to share a few traits.

1. A crisp, believable theory of change from lab to market
You clearly explain: “Because we can do X technically, Y becomes possible for customers, which leads to Z revenue model.” The steps are logical, time‑bound, and not based purely on hope.

2. Complementary strengths, not duplicated capability
If both partners are doing essentially the same thing, panelists will wonder why you need both. The best proposals show complementary excellence: one side brings a unique hardware process; the other brings specialized algorithms and customer relationships.

3. Evidence of demand
Metrics win here: existing pilot results, early revenue, memoranda of understanding, or quantifiable pain points from target customers. In deep tech, early traction is gold.

4. Thoughtful binational impact
Proposals that spell out economic and knowledge benefits on both sides are far more persuasive than those that treat “US plus Israel” as a box‑ticking exercise.

5. Professional presentation
Clean formatting, consistent terminology, and coherent numbering and cross‑references all suggest that you’ll run the project with similar professionalism. Sloppy writing and inconsistent budgets raise red flags.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

There are some recurring missteps that quietly kill otherwise promising BIRD proposals.

Vague partnership roles
If your workplan simply says “Partner A and Partner B will jointly develop the algorithm,” reviewers will question coordination and accountability. Be explicit about who is responsible for what and how handoffs are managed.

Hand‑wavy commercialization
“Licensing to global partners” is not a strategy, it is wishful thinking. Tie your commercialization section to concrete actions, realistic timelines, and named go‑to‑market channels.

Ignoring the financial reality of quantum and optoelectronics
If your budget completely ignores the real costs of specialized equipment, cryogenic systems, cleanroom access, or high‑end optical components, you risk looking naïve. On the flip side, if you propose buying a small city’s worth of lab gear for a two‑year project, expect pushback.

Underplaying risk
Panelists know this space is hard. Pretending everything will work exactly as planned suggests you haven’t thought deeply about technical or execution risk.

Late internal review
Too many consortia circulate the “final” draft the day before submission, guaranteeing missed inconsistencies between technical sections, budget tables, and partnership terms. Build in at least one serious internal review cycle.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do we have to be headquartered in Colorado or a specific US state?
No. The promotional webinar highlighted Colorado partners and networks, but the BIRD program itself is national on the US side and national in Israel. Any eligible US and Israeli companies can apply, regardless of state or city.

Can an academic institution participate?
BIRD funding is designed for companies. However, universities and research institutes can often participate as subcontractors or research providers to the corporate partners. The formal applicants, though, need to be companies that can commercialize the results.

Is this suitable for very early‑stage startups?
If you are pre‑incorporation or still at pure concept stage, this program will be a stretch. BIRD likes to see at least some initial validation: a prototype, simulation results, early customer discovery, or core team members with strong records. Early‑stage startups can still play, especially if they partner with a more mature company that brings additional capacity.

What happens if the project is technically successful but takes longer than expected to make money?
BIRD’s repayment mechanism is tied to revenue derived from the funded project. The exact terms are governed by the grant agreement, but in general, there is a grace period and a royalty schedule rather than an immediate demand for funds on project completion.

Can we reuse a previous BIRD application and just “quantum‑wash” it?
You can reuse elements, but reviewers are not fools. This call is specifically focused on quantum and optoelectronics. A generic IoT or SaaS project with the word “quantum” sprinkled in will not be competitive. Align your proposal with the true technical and market focus of this call.

How many projects are typically funded?
The number varies by year and budget, but you should assume competition is stiff. Treat this as a serious, multi‑week effort, not a side project.

Can a company be part of more than one proposal?
Rules can shift, so check the current call text. Historically, BIRD has limited how many active projects a company can hold, and they expect you to show that you can realistically manage what you propose.

How to Apply and Next Steps

Here is how to move from “interesting” to “we are actually submitting.”

1. Study the official call documents.
   Go to the BIRD funding page and read the specific guidelines for the quantum and optoelectronics opportunity. Do not rely only on summaries.
   Official page: https://www.birdf.com/funding-opportunities/

2. Contact BIRD staff early.
   Program staff, including the business development directors mentioned in the webinar (such as Omer Carmel), are there to answer questions and help you gauge fit. A 30‑minute call can save you weeks of barking up the wrong tree.

3. Secure or refine your partner.
   If you already have a US–Israel partner, align on this call and confirm both sides’ commitment. If you don’t, use industry networks, the Colorado–Israel Chamber of Commerce, accelerators, and BIRD’s own matchmaking activities to identify a serious counterpart.

4. Build a shared outline and schedule.
   Create a joint document that maps out sections, owners, and internal deadlines between now and early September. Treat it like any serious product sprint.

5. Draft, review, and polish.
   Start with the one‑page concept: problem, joint solution, markets, and why binational. Get quick feedback from mentors or investors who know deep tech. Then expand into the full narrative, budget, and legal framework.

6. Submit early, not at 23:59.
   Aim to have everything ready at least two days ahead of the deadline. That gives you a cushion for portal quirks, PDF issues, or last‑minute clarifications from BIRD staff.

Ready to dig into the official instructions and start building your binational quantum or optoelectronics project?

Get Started

All official guidelines, funding details, and submission systems for BIRD opportunities are here:

Visit the official BIRD funding page:
https://www.birdf.com/funding-opportunities/

Use that page as your single source of truth for forms, deadlines, and contact details. Then assemble the right partner, the right project, and a clear story of why your joint innovation deserves to be one of the rare quantum and optoelectronics collaborations that BIRD backs this cycle.