Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

4 SBIR and STTR Awards at NIH
Pages 104-139

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 104...
... . • SBIR and STTR Phase II awards (excluding Fast Track)
From page 105...
... SBIR Phase I grants remain the primary gateway into the program. Until FY2014, only Phase I winners could apply for Phase II funding.
From page 106...
... The number of new Phase II SBIR grants also declined over the study period, from a high of 355 in FY2006 to 229 in FY2014, with a low of 183 in FY2013. This trend is a matter of some concern, because Phase II grants have historically provided the core of the program and are the source of most commercial innova
From page 107...
... Out-year funding -- which NIH calls noncompeting awards -- grew proportionally, from about $500,000 per award on an annual basis to about $700,000. Phase IIB Grants NIH has initiated a special funding program within the SBIR program to help companies address the formidable financial hurdles involved in meeting the clinical trials requirements imposed by the U.S.
From page 108...
... The program aims to provide a more rapid transition for projects where the company can present convincing evidence of feasibility, including in many cases preliminary data. The number of Fast Track awards grew steadily and substantially over the study period, and in FY2014 there were more than 70 Fast Track awards, constituting almost 25 percent of all Phase II awards (computed with Fast Track awards included in the denominator)
From page 109...
... However, statistical analysis indicates a strong correlation between the number of applications per 100,000 population and the number of scientists and engineers employed in the state per 1,000 population (Pearson correlation = 0.67)
From page 110...
... Success rates vary from a high of 32 percent to a low of less than 10 percent for four states. Unlike application rates, success rates are not well correlated with the share of scientists and engineers in the workforce (Pearson correlation = 0.28)
From page 111...
... A 10year period seems sufficient for trend analysis, particularly given the important changes to the program during that period. This annex covers Phase I and Phase II awards, and awards through SBIR and STTR separately.
From page 112...
... SBIR Fast Track SBIR Phase II Grants (6%) Grants (48%)
From page 113...
... SOURCE: NIH Division of Statistical Analysis and Reporting, Table 126. 7,000 6,000 5,000 Number of Applications 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Fiscal Year FIGURE 4-5  Number of SBIR Phase I applications, FY2005-2014.
From page 114...
... Until FY2014, only Phase I winners could apply for Phase II funding. Figures 4-7 and 4-8 show the number of SBIR Phase I awards and the total amount of funding by year.
From page 115...
... SOURCE: NIH Division of Statistical Analysis and Reporting, Table 126.
From page 116...
... SOURCE: NIH Division of Statistical Analysis and Reporting, Table 126. The decline in the number of new Phase I grants during the study period is reflected in the growth of the average award size, which has been more than $200,000 since FY2010, averaging about $230,000 during FY2010-2014 (see Figure 4-9)
From page 117...
... SOURCE: NIH Division of Statistical Analysis and Reporting, Table 126.
From page 118...
... and because it offers tighter control of the project itself, where payments are linked to milestones not just time and materials.1 SBIR Phase II To a considerable degree, the distribution of SBIR Phase II awards is driven by the distribution of Phase I awards. Until FY2015, all Phase II awards went to projects that had already received a Phase I award (except for Fast Track awards, see Fast Track section below)
From page 119...
... SBIR Phase II Applications and Success Rates This section covers both grants and contracts because they are not disaggregated in the NIH dataset. As with Phase I, there was a decline across the study period in Phase II applications, mitigated by the apparent response to the financial crash in 2009-2010.
From page 120...
... This represents a decline of almost 50 percent, and even smoothing the data suggests that the number of awards has declined by about one-third during the period. Given that overall funding for the program increased by about 12 percent during the study period in nominal terms, the decline in fund ing for new Phase II grants has several possible explanations, including a shift of program funds to the out years of grants, a shift of funds to contracts, and an increase in funding for STTR.
From page 121...
... 800 700 600 Average Grant Size (Thousands of Dollars) 500 400 300 200 100 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Fiscal Year FIGURE 4-16  Average size of first year of competing Phase II SBIR grant, FY2005-2014.
From page 122...
... SBIR Phase II Grants -- Non-competing Awards The aggregate data provided by NIH includes all noncompeting awards, including Phase IIB awards, which are discussed separately below. The data show that, similar to competing awards, the number of noncompeting awards has been declining (see Figure 4-17)
From page 123...
... SOURCE: NIH Division of Statistical Analysis and Reporting, Table 126. 80 70 60 50 Number of Contracts 40 30 20 10 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Fiscal Year FIGURE 4-19  Number of Phase II SBIR contracts, FY2005-2014.
From page 124...
... Figure 4-21 shows that after the pilot phase in FY2003 and FY2004, the number of Phase IIB SBIR awards settled at about 20 per year. Funding for the program has varied, peaking in FY2006 at almost $80 million, or about 14 percent of total program funding (see Figure 4-22)
From page 125...
... Figure 4-24 shows that Fast Track awards are now almost 25 percent of the collective population of Fast Track and Phase II SBIR awards. This growth also means that what was an experimental or pilot program is now well embedded in the NIH SBIR/STTR programs.
From page 126...
... 90 80 70 Funding (Millions of Dollars) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Fiscal Year FIGURE 4-22  Funding for Phase IIB awards, FY2003-2014.
From page 127...
... 30 25 20 Percent of Awards 15 10 5 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Fiscal Year FIGURE 4-24 Fast Track awards as a percentage of Fast Track plus Phase II SBIR awards, FY2005-2014. SOURCE: NIH Division of Statistical Analysis and Reporting, Table 126.
From page 128...
... SOURCE: NIH Division of Statistical Analysis and Reporting, Table 215.
From page 129...
... SOURCE: NIH Division of Statistical Analysis and Reporting, Table 215. 180 160 140 120 Number of Awards 100 80 60 40 20 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Fiscal Year FIGURE 4-27  Number of new STTR Phase I awards, FY2005-2014.
From page 130...
... . Moreover, unlike SBIR -- where Phase II awards account for about 70 percent of overall program funding -- STTR funding is now divided equally between Phase I and Phase II.
From page 131...
... SOURCE: NIH Division of Statistical Analysis and Reporting, Table 126. 50 45 40 35 30 Number of Awards 25 20 15 10 5 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Fiscal Year FIGURE 4-30  Number of new Phase II awards, FY2005-2014.
From page 132...
... Overall, the top 20 companies accounted for 7.7 per cent of SBIR/STTR Phase I awards and 8.1 percent of funding. The distribution of Phase II awards and funding is similarly spread out (Table 4-4)
From page 133...
... prolific Phase II companies, Radiation Monitoring and Praxis, each received 24 awards during the 10-year period. The top 20 awardees (plus one tie)
From page 134...
... In addition, the success rates of different states varied widely. However, reviewing the number of awards alone is of little analytic use: that number is largely driven by state population, so initial analysis must consider applications normalized for population.
From page 135...
... Statistical analysis using the Pearson test generates a result of 0.67, which indicates strong correlation between the number of applications (normalized) and the presence of PhD scientists and engineers.
From page 136...
... 136 SBIR/STTR AT THE NATIONAL INSTITUTES OF HEALTH TABLE 4-5  NIH SBIR Phase I Applications and Awards, by State, FY2005-2014 Number of Number of Success Rate Applications per State Applications Awards (Percent) 100,000 Population AL 539 96 17.8 112.8 AK 12 2 16.7 16.9 AR 608 130 21.4 95.1 AZ 348 81 23.3 119.3 CA 10,907 2,143 19.6 292.8 CO 1,435 293 20.4 285.3 CT 787 164 20.8 220.2 DE 195 37 19.0 324.1 DC 145 28 19.3 161.5 FL 1,224 193 15.8 65.1 GA 890 182 20.4 91.9 HI 103 12 11.7 75.7 ID 40 7 17.5 25.5 IL 965 204 21.1 75.2 IN 744 145 19.5 114.7 IO 303 58 19.1 99.5 KS 196 43 21.9 68.7 KY 652 136 20.9 150.3 LA 223 29 13.0 49.2 ME 121 20 16.5 91.1 MD 3,280 595 18.1 568.1 MA 5,601 1,301 23.2 855.4 MI 1,287 295 22.9 130.2 MN 1,145 263 23.0 215.9 MS 80 6 7.5 27.0 MO 635 121 19.1 106.0 MT 194 37 19.1 196.1 NE 181 32 17.7 99.1 NV 130 14 10.8 48.1 NH 392 85 21.7 297.8 NJ 1,521 246 16.2 173.0 NM 422 85 20.1 204.9 NY 2,834 594 21.0 146.2
From page 137...
... Success rates for applica
From page 138...
... The average for all states was slightly greater than 20 percent across the study period. Perhaps surprisingly, success rates across all states are not particularly well correlated with science and engineering PhDs in the workforce (see Figure 4-34)
From page 139...
... Less science and engineering resources likely leads in part to the second direct factor -- fewer applications. The 10 lowest award states generated an average of 48.1 applications per 100,000 population over the study period.


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.