An Assessment of the SBIR Program at the National Science Foundation (2008) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 205-230
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 205... ...
Manufacturing systems UNEDITED PROOFS
|
From page 206... ...
Compact, cost-effective, environmentally-friendly and long-lived power supplies (e.g., for widely-disbursed wireless sensor networks) - Biomimetic - Energy-scavenging systems - Photovoltaic systems - Acoustic-voltaic systems - Other systems that provide energy densities exceeding 1000 Wh/kg 5.
|
From page 207... ...
Field-deployable front-end sample preparation systems to extend the reach of laboratory-based analytic equipment 8.1.2 Sources for Topic Ideas According to NSF SBIR program management: …topics are rooted in the agency's vision and strategic goals. In particular, SBIR and STTR are uniquely positioned to emphasize NSF vision of innovation.
|
From page 208... ...
Rather, the sources for topic and subtopic ideas were said to come from NSF's program managers as they interact with industry and others at conferences and workshops, or through an approach devised by a program manager and approved by the SBIR director. An example of the latter, an NSF SBIR program manager promoted revision of the manufacturing topic.
|
From page 209... ...
NSF SBIR program management provided the following statement regarding topic modification after announcement of a solicitation: NSF SBIR/STTR topics are not modified or changed once the solicitation is announced and published on the NSF SBIR website. The published solicitation includes submission instructions and proposal submission deadlines.
|
From page 210... ...
(NSF SBIR Response to NRC Questions, January 2004) Presumably, the apparent discrepancy between what this inquiry found and the NSF management statement lies in the distinction between topics and subtopics.
|
From page 211... ...
At the same time, NSF's SBIR program information in the past stated that the applicant must propose within the announced topic areas or the proposal is rejected, and currently states that the proposal may not be considered if it is not responsive to the program announcement/solicitation.136 While none of the companies interviewed in the case studies complained that NSF over-specified topics, they did comment that the NSF SBIR's broad definition of topic areas is unique compared with other agency programs. However, firms did comment on the length of time they had to wait until their topic areas come up for solicitation.
|
From page 212... ...
138 Based on an interview with Cheryl Albus, Program Managers, January 7, 2004. 139 NRC Program Manager Survey, completed by Dr.
|
From page 213... ...
The hierarchy for the fit of sub-topic starts at the top with BT [Biotechnology] , followed by EL UNEDITED PROOFS
|
From page 214... ...
The NSF SBIR FY 2006 Phase I solicitation lists four topics: Advanced Materials (AM) , Information Technology (IT)
|
From page 215... ...
Sometimes topics/subtopics are narrowed or eliminated to reduce the number of applications.143 It was not determined when this narrowing or elimination of topics/subtopics occurs or what is its effect on applicants -- both issues of possible concern. In conclusion, the NSF SBIR program headquarters decides the topics areas for the program and the subtopics for a given competition with the assistance of program-managers and, sometimes, other program-manager devised sources, such as convened panels.144 The topics are fixed once the solicitation is issued, but subtopics appear to evolve in response to on-going developments.
|
From page 216... ...
operates an agency-wide SBIR/STTR online alert service.147 Privately operated sites also provide SBIR information. The SBIR Resource CenterTM operates one such privately operated site that purports to provide up-to-date information covering 10 SBIR/STTR agencies in one place.148 Another site claims to be "the most comprehensive and easy to use SBIR information site." 149 8.2.1 Agency Outreach Objectives A review of NSF-supported web sites targeted at potential applicants suggests that NSF has the objective of reaching areas that have submitted large numbers of applications as well as those 145 See http://www.sbirworld.com.
|
From page 217... ...
Similarly, a 2005 search of the same NSF-sponsored web site showed multiple workshops aimed at prospective applicants in diverse parts of the country. It included an "SBIR Grant Writing Workshop" to be held at Florida State University and an "SBIR/STTR Phase I Proposal Preparation Workshop" to be held at the Moore School of Business, part of the University of South Carolina.
|
From page 218... ...
NSF SBIR Outreach Activities and Their Relative Importance Type of Outreach Activity Importance as a Share of NSF's Overall Outreach Program (%) SBIR National Conferences 50 State Conferences 15 NSF National Agency SBIR Meeting 10 Other Agency Conferences and Outreach Meetings 10 The SWIFT Bus Tour 10 Academic Conferences 5 Total 100 Source: NRC Program Mangers Survey.
|
From page 219... ...
Partnering to provide outreach services Partners of NSF to Provide Outreach Services Business organizations State and other non-federal government agencies Academic units Private firms Source: NRC Program Mangers Survey. Assistance programs that help companies prepare their SBIR proposals are offered by universities, state agencies, regional associations, and mentor companies.
|
From page 220... ...
It should also be noted that NSF SBIR program managers provide one-on-one counseling to individual potential applicants. Metrics for this activity are given in Section 8.2.3.
|
From page 221... ...
By the start of 2005, Phase IIB had attracted applications from 36 states. 8.3 GRANT SELECTION 8.3.1 Description of Selection Processes for Phase I, Phase II, and Phase IIB Grants At its Phase I and Phase II stages, the NSF SBIR program uses a peer review process to identify proposals for potential selection.
|
From page 222... ...
The two formal merit review criteria used for both Phase I and II proposals, including Phase IIB proposals, are the following:157 (1) What is the intellectual merit of the proposed activity?
|
From page 224... ...
Prior to listing the two main criteria listed above, the NSF website states, "Other factors that may enter into consideration include the following: the balance among NSF programs; past commercialization efforts by the firm where previous grants exist; excessive concentration of grants in one firm or with one principal investigator; participation by women-owned and socially and economically disadvantaged small business concerns; distribution of grants across the States; importance to science or society; and critical technology areas." After listing the two merit criteria, NSF lists another set of "additional factors" to be addressed in proposals and taken into consideration by reviewers: • Integration of Research and Education • Integrating Diversity into NSF Programs, Projects, and Activities
|
From page 226... ...
- The Financing: Has the Company properly estimated the amount of funding needed in Phase III? Does the company have a high probability of securing this funding?
|
From page 227... ...
recommended that more consideration be given to commercial potential in evaluating Phase I proposals and that the review panels for Phase I proposals have more well qualified representatives from the business sector. At the Phase II level, selection criteria since 1992 have focused on commercial potential and commercialization planning, in addition to the research proposed.
|
From page 228... ...
According to a company participant who had gone through the selection process for a supersized Phase IIB grants, the focus of the oral presentation was on the business case of the company and its financing.158 NSF management also reportedly would like to increase its due diligence by funding program manager staff visits to companies, particularly those who are applying for the supersized Phase IIB funding. The review process concludes with a debriefing of unsuccessful applicants and notification of winners.
|
From page 229... ...
According to discussions with several program managers, it is the program managers' responsibility to find reviewers for their topic areas.160 Reportedly, they give more attention to the designation by applicants of "who should not review their proposal" than the designation of "who should review it."161 The program managers devise various "schemes for building their reviewer pools," in addition to obtaining suggestions from applicants. One example that was given as a way program managers build reviewer pools is to send out letters to deans of major university departments asking them to recommend to their new faculty members that they participate as reviewers in the SBIR program.162 According to program officials, "there are no restrictions prohibiting submitters in a current solicitation, or past or future applicants to serve as NSF reviewers."163 A case against the practice 159 NRC Program Manager Survey, op cit.
|
From page 230... ...
NSF SBIR Response to NRC Questions, January 2004. 166 NRC Program Manager Survey, op cit., and NSF response to NRC Questions, January 2004.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.