An Assessment of the SBIR Program at the National Science Foundation (2008) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 231-239
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 231... ...
Within this variability, however, the business reviewers are reportedly always convened as a panel.168 The business reviewers include entrepreneurs, business school professors, professional investors, corporate managers and investors, and others with business and financial experience. Reviewers at the Phase IIB review come from within the SBIR program office.
|
From page 232... ...
In some instances, NSF will employ "additional factors" as described earlier. As indicated in Section 8.3.2, these "additional factors" that may enter into consideration during proposal selection include the following: the balance among NSF programs; past commercialization efforts by the firm; excessive concentration of grants in one firm or with one principal investigator; participation by woman-owned and socially and economically disadvantaged small business concerns; distribution of grants across the states; importance to science or society; and critical technology areas.
|
From page 233... ...
Thus, they say they proposed to the NSF SBIR program believing they were eligible and their proposal received favorable reviews, but then they were turned down based on NSF's application of the "excessive concentration" factor. The companies say that if they had known they were considered by NSF to have received too many grants, they would have avoided the costs of applying.169 Inspection of the program data does not reveal if and how the program is using these other factors.
|
From page 234... ...
"Recommended if Funding Permits," and (3) "Do Not Consider for Funding." Based on a recommendation by their advisory committee the NSF SBIR program added a recommendation category in the Phase II review panel process called "Fund with Revision" in addition to "Highly Recommend" and Do not Fund." A typical proposal that receives a recommendation of "Fund with Revision" is one that is generally meritorious but is missing some key information in the technical and/or commercialization plan that if available might result in a "Highly Recommend" classification.
|
From page 235... ...
8.3.6 Resubmission Procedures and Outcomes The NSF SBIR program has a limited resubmission policy which operates at the discretion of OII. It affects Phases I, II, and IIB applications differently.
|
From page 236... ...
Phase II grantees have a single attempt to gain a Phase IIB grant. Once that window passes, grantees are not permitted to reapply.172 As noted by several of the case-study companies, there is no appeals process.
|
From page 237... ...
enhancing abilities to 173 In discussions with the NSF SBIR program managers about the absence of an appeal process, they made a compelling argument that they would be unable to hold to their target selection schedule and also accommodate an appeals process, but they could accommodate resubmission by invitation.
|
From page 238... ...
In 2001, the NSF-SBIR program began the Commercialization Planning Program (CP2) , a commercialization assistance program run by Dawnbreaker, Inc.
|
From page 239... ...
Thereafter, the grantee companies can 176 Both the Phase I commercialization assistance contractors meet with their assigned clients during the Phase I Grantees workshop. Additional information about the company and its training offerings may be found at the company's website: |
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.