Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:


Pages 10-18

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 10...
... of the National Academies conduct a "comprehensive study of how the SBIR program has stimulated technological innovation and used small businesses to meet Federal research and development needs," and make recommendations on improvements to the program.2 Mandated as a part of SBIR's renewal in 2000, the NRC study has assessed the SBIR program as administered at the five federal agencies that together make up 96% of SBIR program expenditures. The agencies are, in decreasing order of program size: the Department of Defense (DOD)
From page 11...
... In practice, agencies have developed different approaches to facilitate SBIR grantees' transition to commercial viability; not least among them are additional SBIR awards. Previous NRC research has shown that firms have different objectives in applying to the program.
From page 12...
... 102-564) , which reauthorized the SBIR program until September 30, 2000, doubled the set-aside rate to 2.5%.7 This increase in the percentage of R&D funds allocated to the program was accompanied by a stronger emphasis on encouraging the commercialization of SBIR-funded technologies.8 Legislative language explicitly highlighted commercial potential as a criterion for awarding SBIR awards.
From page 13...
... This methodology was then reviewed and approved by an independent National Academies panel of experts.11 Information about the program was also gathered through interviews with SBIR program administrators and during two major conferences where SBIR officials were invited to describe program operations, challenges, and accomplishments.12 These conferences highlighted the important differences in each agency's SBIR program's goals, practices, and evaluations. The conferences also explored the challenges of assessing such a diverse range of program objectives and practices using common metrics.
From page 14...
... True innovation, Bordogna noted, can spur the search for new knowledge and create the context in which the next generation of research identifies new frontiers. This non-linearity, illustrated in Figure 1-2, makes it difficult to rate the efficiency of SBIR program.
From page 15...
... SBIR awards have proved in developing a particular technology or product. In some cases, the Phase I award can meet the agency's need – completing the research with no further action required.
From page 16...
... As a point of comparison, Gail Cassell, Vice President for Scientific Affairs at Eli Lilly, has noted that only one in ten innovative products in the biotechnology industry will turn out to be a commercial success.16 Similarly, venture capital funds often achieve considerable commercial success on only two or three out of twenty or more investments.17 In setting metrics for SBIR projects, therefore, it is important to have a realistic expectation of the success rate for competitive awards to small firms investing in promising but unproven technologies. Similarly, it is important to have some understanding of what can be reasonably expected -- that is, what constitutes "success" for an SBIR award, and some understanding of the constraints and opportunities successful SBIR awardees face in bringing new products to market.
From page 17...
... Appendix B and C provide the template and results of the NRC surveys of SBIR Phase I and Phase II projects. Appendix D presents illustrative case studies of firms participating in the NIH SBIR program.
From page 18...
... B The NIH SBIR program is focused on commercialization and has seen meaningful achievement.


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.