Evaluation Criteria

The evaluation in the ECHIS Challenge is conducted in stages. Not only the originality of an idea is decisive, but also its technical suitability, feasibility, and performance in later practical tests.

Both the Brief Concepts from Stage 1 and the Solution Concepts from the finalists will first be checked for compliance with formal and substantive minimum requirements.

The Brief Concept must address at least the following aspects:

Technical Solution Approach
Innovation Content and Disruptiveness
Operational Relevance
Feasibility
Project Team Presentation

For details, please refer to Section 5, Table 1 of the Tender Specifications (Document 01).

The Solution Concept must contain at least the following components:

Prototype (Hardware/Software)
Accompanying Documentation and Materials:
Technical Documentation
Presentation Materials

Additional material that clarifies the functionality of the prototype is optional.

For the specific requirements for the prototype and documentation, please refer to Section 5, Table 2 of the Tender Specifications (Document 01).

After the respective review of the formal and substantive minimum requirements, the concepts will be evaluated in a second stage according to qualitative evaluation criteria.

The following qualitative evaluation criteria will be used for the assessment of the Brief and Solution Concepts:

1. Degree of Innovation & Disruptiveness (Weighting: 40%)

The innovativeness of an idea is characterized by the expected research progress and a significant methodological innovation compared to current GNSS spoofing methods, as well as current methods for detecting, classifying, and locating GNSS spoofing. Particular emphasis is placed on evaluating the future viability of the technology within a time horizon of 10 to 15 years, with adaptability to future geopolitical threat scenarios and the ability to assert itself against adversarial EW capabilities being paramount. An essential element here is the disruptive potential, defined by the transformative potential compared to established technologies, to fundamentally revolutionize existing operational patterns.

2. Operational Benefit (Weighting: 30%)

The benefit for Germany’s external security is defined by the advantage for the Federal Republic of Germany’s capacity to act, both in terms of resilience and vigilance against NAVWAR and in terms of its own capability to effectively conduct NAVWAR. The submitted idea must describe an enabling capability that contributes to international stability and threat prevention within the framework of German security interests, with the needs of the Cyber and Information Domain Command (KdoCIR) as the primary stakeholder. In particular, it will be assessed to what extent the research results can be transferred into concrete applications for the stakeholders.

3. Technical Concept & Feasibility (Weighting: 20%)

The implementability of the idea is assessed based on a scientifically and technically sound and plausible presentation of the chosen approach. The submitted time and resource planning will be reviewed for the setting of meaningful milestones to evaluate the probability of success in creating a functional demonstrator with a TRL of 4-6 within the planned work phase.

4. Team Expertise & Resources (Weighting: 10%)

This criterion assesses proof of the professional qualifications of competitors in the relevant disciplines, as well as the availability of the necessary personnel and material capacities to successfully complete the project within the defined framework.

The formal review is carried out by the Contracting Authority. The technical evaluation of the Brief and Solution Concepts is carried out by the responsible expert jury. The Solution Concepts are also evaluated by a selection committee based on the test results.

Challenge Organizer & Partners