SBIR at NASA (2016) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
2 Program Management
2 Program Management
Pages 31-53
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 31... ...
, are handled within the Field Centers and Mission Directorates. The NASA organization chart showing the SBIR program is provided in Figure 2-1.
|
From page 32... ...
COMPANY ELIGIBILITY As described in the Small Business Administration (SBA) Policy Directive that governs program administration, an applicant to the SBIR program must be a for-profit business located in the United States and must be more than 50 percent directly owned and controlled by one or more individuals who are citizens or permanent resident aliens of the United States, by other business concerns each of which is more than 50 percent directly owned and controlled by individuals who are citizens or permanent resident aliens of the United States, or any combination of these.
|
From page 33... ...
Topic Selection As a part of a 2007 reorganization of NASA, the SBIR program became the responsibility of the four NASA Mission Directorates. The program office is now located within the Space Technology Mission Directorate, 7 and 4 Rich Leshner, Discussion, January 17, 2014.
|
From page 34... ...
Decisions on which subtopics to approve are usually made by committees of senior technical staff within the Mission Directorates, although each Mission Directorate can make these decisions its own way. At this point in the process, the staff of each Mission Directorate can 8 Unique among SBIR agencies, topics within NASA are developed through quite separate processes for the SBIR and STTR programs.
|
From page 35... ...
identify subtopics of particular importance to its Mission Directorate, where successful technologies would be prime candidates for take-up ("infusion") by the Mission Directorates.
|
From page 36... ...
The arms-length approach adopted by NASA is likely to generate significant information gaps and difficulties for small companies. Given that questions are in fact permitted for select solicitations, the general prohibition outlined above is merely a matter of convenience for NASA; it saves technical 11 As part of the research for this assessment, Academies' staff held discussions with NASA SBIR program and Mission Directorate staff at several NASA Centers, including Ames, Glenn, Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)
|
From page 37... ...
According to agency staff, this ranking is based more on agency mission needs, expressed as alignment with Mission Directorate objectives, than on the technical scores generated during initial review or the broader commercial potential of the project. As one staff 13 The role and potential of the EHB is further discussed in Chapter 3 (Initiatives)
|
From page 38... ...
Once the topic manager review is complete, the Mission Directorate convenes a board of all of its SBIR/STTR topic managers, which develops a final prioritized list of proposals. SBIR/STTR funds are distributed to the proposals that are identified as top priorities by the Mission Directorate boards of topic managers.
|
From page 39... ...
Funding Gaps Funding gaps can develop between Phase I and Phase II of an SBIR award, creating challenges for small firms that are less likely to have other funding sources to sustain projects until Phase II funding arrives. Unlike other agencies, NASA does not offer bridge funding between Phase I and Phase II.
|
From page 40... ...
TABLE 2-3 NASA SBIR: Effects of Funding Gap on Surveyed Project, Reported by 2011 Survey Respondents Effect of Phase I-Phase II Funding Gap Percentage of Respondents Stopped work on this project during funding gap 66 Continued work at reduced pace during funding gap 26 Continued work at pace equal to or greater than Phase I 3 pace during funding gap Company ceased all operations during funding gap 1 Other (please specify) 3 Total 100 NOTE: N=146 Respondents.
|
From page 41... ...
WORKING WITH THE CONTRACTING OFFICER TECHNICAL REPRESENTATIVE Case studies of SBIR companies suggest that a critical factor affecting the success of SBIR projects is the relationship between the awardee and the TABLE 2-4 NASA SBIR: Adequacy of Phase II Funding Reported by 2011 Survey Respondents SBIR project funding was… Percentage of Respondents More than enough 0 About the right amount 55 Not enough 45 Total 100 NOTE: N=179 Respondents. SOURCE: 2011 Survey, Question 42.
|
From page 42... ...
TABLE 2-6 NASA SBIR: Frequency of Contact with COTRs, Reported by 2011 Survey Respondents COTR Engagement Percent of Respondents Weekly 8 Monthly 47 Quarterly 38 Annually 7 Total 100 NOTE: N=178 Respondents. SOURCE: 2011 Survey, Question 47.
|
From page 43... ...
. In addition, the 2011 Survey asked SBIR companies about specific help received with connections to Phase III funding opportunities -- Phase III emphasizing commercialization without the provision of additional SBIR funding.
|
From page 44... ...
The 2011 Survey also asked about the effectiveness of COTR help in acquiring Phase III funding, that is, non-SBIR funding received after the completion of SBIR Phase II. Case studies of SBIR companies suggest that COTRs have widely varied capabilities in this important area, with some focusing on the project's scientific and technical aspects and others providing connections to the acquisition programs that will use the research results.
|
From page 45... ...
20 TECHNOLOGY INFUSION MANAGERS Although NASA has recently launched new initiatives that seek to connect SBIR companies with NASA opportunities, it does not provide TABLE 2-11 NASA SBIR: Effectiveness of COTR in Connecting Awardee to Sources of Phase III Funding, as Reported by 2011 Survey Respondents COTR Effectiveness in Connecting Awardee to Phase III Funding Percentage of Respondents Very helpful 17 Somewhat helpful 27 Not very helpful 29 Not at all helpful 29 Total 100 NOTE: N=151 Respondents. SOURCE: 2011 Survey, Question 52.
|
From page 46... ...
to make connections between SBIR companies and the acquisition programs within the Mission Directorates. TIMs are in place at all of the NASA Centers.
|
From page 47... ...
28 Moran noted, however, that, in general, SBIR firms do not participate in the larger cooperative projects at NASA Glenn. DATA, TRACKING, AND ANALYSIS The NASA SBIR program exists primarily to serve NASA mission needs.
|
From page 48... ...
database correctly, then it should be possible to track Phase III awards through the contracting system. However, the NASA SBIR office does not have procedures in place to ensure that contracts are entered, or that the entries are correct.
|
From page 49... ...
These offer the potential for natural experiments as TIMs and Field Centers adopt different strategies to meet their objectives. Discussions with Field Center staff revealed that there is considerable communication among the TIMs at different Field Centers and that best practices are shared laterally among Field Centers but did not reveal similar communication between the Field Centers and the NASA SBIR office.
|
From page 50... ...
Finally, the TIM devised specific SBIR infusion goals and objectives, which are aligned with Mission Directorate technology priorities. The TIM markets SBIR technologies and companies to potential NASA customers through periodic web-based "Innovation Updates" on SBIR projects.
|
From page 51... ...
A range of pathways are employed to connect Mission Directorates, engineering staff, and SBIR companies. For example, TIMs participate in Mission Directorate activities at the Field Center and in Mission Support Division activities for the Mission Directorates.
|
From page 52... ...
; unlike NASA's other nine field centers, which are staffed by government civil servants, JPL staff -- including SBIR project technical monitors -- consists almost entirely of Caltech researchers and engineers. The JPL SBIR infusion strategy differentiates between near-term practices and longer-term customer (NASA program)
|
From page 53... ...
Failure to register is a violation of FAR 52.227-11 and can result in loss of IP protections. This tension between SBIR regulations and federal contracting could lead to circumstances in which companies decline to seek patent protection and NASA subsequently steps in to patent an invention, potentially over-riding the data protection provisions of the SBIR legislation.
|
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.