|
||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy. Appendix C
|
||||||||||||||||
 |
 |
Page 101 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 101
Revisiting the Department of Defense SBIR Fast Track Initiative
Appendix C
Phase II Survey for Fast Track StudySummary of Responses
Phase II Survey 2006
RESULTS AND RELATED NOTES APPEAR IN BOLD. UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED, ANSWERS ARE ARRAYED AS THE PERCENTAGE OF THAT SAMPLE GROUP (FT/PIIE/CONTROL) RESPONDING THAT ANSWER.
Introduction: This survey is a continuation of a major study commissioned by the U.S. Congress to review operations of SBIR programs at federal agencies. This assessment, by the National Research Council, seeks to determine the impact of Department of Defense SBIR program initiatives, and to investigate ways in which the programs could be improved.
Your participation in this survey will assist us greatly in recommending changes to SBIR administration within DoD The survey should take about 15 to 40 minutes of your time. If you have further questions either about the survey or about the assessment more broadly, please contact Dr. Charles Wessner, Study Director, National Research Council (cwessner@nas.edu).
PROPOSAL TITLE:
AGENCY:
TOPIC NUMBER:
PHASE II CONTRACT NUMBER:
OCR for page 102
Revisiting the Department of Defense SBIR Fast Track Initiative
Part I: Current Status of the Project
What is the current status of the project funded by the referenced SBIR award? Select the one best answer.
a.
9/8/4
Project has not yet completed Phase II. Skip to Question 13.
b.
17/6/13
Efforts at this company have been discontinued. No sales or additional funding resulted from this project. Go to Question 2.
c.
6/10/14
Efforts at this company have been discontinued. The project did result in sales, licensing of technology, or additional funding. Go to Question 2.
d.
34/28/38
Project is continuing post Phase II technology development. Skip to Question 3.
e.
9/16/13
Commercialization is underway. Skip to Question 3
f.
23/33/18
Products/Processes/ Services are in use by target population/customer/consumers. Skip to Question 3
Did the reasons for discontinuing this project include any of the following? (PLEASE SELECT YES OR NO FOR EACH REASON AND NOTE THE ONE PRIMARY REASON.) This question answered only by those who answered b or c to first question.
Yes
No
Primary Reason
a. Technical failure or difficulties.
20/8/17
80/92/83
13/0/14
b. Market demand too small.
73/54/66
27/46/34
0/15/31
c. Level of technical risk too high.
20/23/14
80/77/86
0/0/3
d. Not enough funding.
60/54/59
40/46/41
20/23/3
e. Company shifted priorities.
47/46/17
53/54/83
27/0/3
f. Principal investigator left.
13/31/10
87/69/90
7/23/3
g. Project goal was achieved (e.g., prototype delivered for DoD use).
47/62/69
53/38/31
13/15/21
h. Licensed to another company.
0/8/3
100/92/97
0/0/3
i. Product, process, or service not competitive.
20/31/17
80/69/83
0/8/0
j. Inadequate sales force capability.
20/15/24
80/85/76
0/0/10
k. Other (please specify):
27/23/17
73/77/83
20/15/7
The next question to be answered depends on the answer to Question 1. If c, go to Question 3. If b, skip to Question 13.
OCR for page 103
Revisiting the Department of Defense SBIR Fast Track Initiative
Part II: Commercialization Activities and Planning
The next four questions concern actual sales to date resulting from the technology developed during this project. Sales includes all sales of a product, process, or service, to federal or private sector customers resulting from the technology developed during this Phase II project. A sale also includes licensing, the sale of technology or rights etc.
Has your company and/or licensee had any actual sales of products, processes, services or other sales incorporating the technology developed during this project? (Select all that apply.)
a.
24/30/28
No sales to date, but sales are expected. Skip to Question 8.
b.
21/14/23
No sales to date nor are sales expected. Skip to Question 13.
c.
47/53/32
Sales of product(s).
d.
12/11/8
Sales of process(es).
e.
28/44/15
Sales of services(s).
f.
10/15/5
Other sales (e.g., rights to technology, licensing, etc.).
For your company and/or your licensee(s), when did the first sale occur, and what is the approximate amount of total sales resulting from the technology developed during this project? If multiple SBIR awards contributed to the ultimate commercial outcome, report only the share of total sales appropriate to this SBIR project. (Enter the requested information for your company in the first column and, if applicable and if known, for your licensee(s) in the second column. Enter approximate dollars. If none, enter 0 [zero]).
a.
Year when first sale occurred.
Your Company
Licensee(s)
FT
38% before 2001
PIIE
32% before 2001
Control
30% before 2001
b.
Total Sales Dollars of Product (s) Process(es) or Service(s) to date.
b1.) $____________
b2.) $________
Average Company Sales From Product Process Service
Average Licensee Sales From Product Process Service
FT
$661,672
$12,500
PHII +
$1,162,962
$170,554
Control
$777,593
$12,523
OCR for page 104
Revisiting the Department of Defense SBIR Fast Track Initiative
c.
Other Total Sales Dollars (e.g., Rights to technology, Sale of spin-off company, etc.) to date.
c1.) $________
c2.) $_________
Average Other Company Sales
Average Other Licensee Sales
FT
$53,593
$312,586
PHII +
$149,710
$3,450
Control
$77,570
$9,346
To date, approximately what percent of total sales from the technology developed during this project came from the following customers? (If none enter 0 (zero). Round percentages. Answers should add to about 100%.)
a.
21/31/20
Domestic private sector.
b.
36/46/27
Department of Defense (DoD).
c.
33/19/10
Prime contractors for DoD.
d.
1/0/1
NASA.
e.
0/0/1
Other federal agencies (Pull down).
f.
0/0/4
State or local governments.
g.
8/4/32
Export Markets.
h.
0/0/0
Other (Specify). _____________
The following questions identify the product, process, or service resulting from the project supported by the referenced SBIR award, including its use in a fielded federal system or a federal acquisition program.
Is a Federal System or Acquisition Program using the technology from this Phase II? If yes, please provide the name of the Federal system or acquisition program that is using the technology.
a.
86/76/89
No
b.
14/24/11
Yes ____ Thirty-five programs or systems were identified.
Omitted.
Did a commercial product result from this Phase II project?
30/35/26
Yes. If yes please complete a, b, and c as appropriate.
70/65/74
No.
Trade or Commercial name. Sixty-nine Trade or Commercial names were identified .
Generic name. Fifty-two Generic names were identified.
Model number (if applicable). Nine model numbers were identified.
OCR for page 105
Revisiting the Department of Defense SBIR Fast Track Initiative
If you have had no sales to date resulting from the technology developed during this project, what year do you expect the first sales for your company or its licensee? Cmt to programmer: Only firms that had no sales but answered that they expect sales get this question.
For your company and/or your licensee, what is the approximate amount of total sales expected between now and the end of 2007 resulting from the technology developed during this project? (If none, enter 0 (zero).)
Total sales dollars of product(s), process(es) or services(s) expected between now and the end of 2007. Answers are total expected for that sample group divided by total responses from that group.
FT
$498,969
PIIE
$1,645,329
Control
$622,664
Other Total Sales Dollars (e.g., rights to technology, sale of spin-off company, etc.) expected between now and the end of 2007. Answers are total expected for that sample group divided by total responses from that group.
FT
$29,844
PIIE
$58,129
Control
$286,545
Basis of expected sales estimate. Select all that apply.
a.
2/5/1
Market research
b.
28/43/39
Ongoing negotiations
c.
67/57/67
Projection from current sales
d.
24/28/22
Consultant estimate
e.
17/28/20
Past experience
f.
0/0/0
Educated guess
g.
20/26/18
Existing contracts
OCR for page 106
Revisiting the Department of Defense SBIR Fast Track Initiative
How did you (or do you expect to) commercialize your SBIR award? Select all that apply.
a.
1/4/ 1
No commercial product, process, or service was/is planned.
b.
28/43/35
As software.
c.
67/57/67
As hardware (final product, component, or intermediate hardware product).
d.
24/28/22
As process technology.
e.
17/28/20
As new or improved service capability.
f.
0/0/0
As a drug.
g.
0/0/0
As a biologic.
h.
20/26/18
As a research tool.
i.
3/4/3
As educational materials.
j.
0/0/0
Other, please explain. ______________________________
Omitted.
OCR for page 107
Revisiting the Department of Defense SBIR Fast Track Initiative
Part III: Other Outcomes
As a result of the technology developed during this project, which of the following describes your company’s activities with other companies and investors? (Select all that apply.).
Activities
U.S. Companies/Investors
Foreign Companies/Investors
Finalized Agreements
Ongoing Negotiations
Finalized Agreements
Ongoing Negotiations
a
Licensing Agreement(s)
19/17/12
24/18/22
8/3/2
5/3/6
b
Sale of company
3/3/0
11/5/1
3/0/0
0/0/0
c
Partial sale of company
5/3/1
8/0/4
3/0/0
0/0/1
d
Sale of technology rights
5/7/2
16/11/14
3/3/0
5/0/1
e
Company merger
8/3/0
8/3/1
3/0/0
3/0/0
f
Joint venture agreement
11/0/0
12/14/13
0/3/1
0/3/1
g
Marketing/distribution agreement(s)
13/13/7
21/5/8
7/7/8
5/0/2
h
Manufacturing agreement(s)
3/3/2
13/0/12
0/3/2
3/0/6
i
R&D agreement(s)
3/10/16
24/5/19
3/3/6
8/0/5
j
Customer alliance(s)
16/21/14
19/10/22
0/0/6
5/0/5
k
Other Specify____
8/8/4
3/8/2
3/0/0
0/0/0
In your opinion, in the absence of this SBIR award, would your company have undertaken this project? (Select one.)
a.
6/1/4
Definitely yes. Go to Question 14.
b.
11/10/12
Probably yes. Go to Question 14.
c.
17/14/15
Uncertain. Skip to Question 16.
d.
33/39/34
Probably not. Skip to Question 16.
e.
33/36/36
Definitely not. Skip to Question 16.
If you had undertaken this project in the absence of SBIR, this project would have been:
a.
18/11/0
Broader in scope.
b.
18/33/41
Similar in scope.
c.
64/56/59
Narrower in scope.
OCR for page 108
Revisiting the Department of Defense SBIR Fast Track Initiative
In the absence of SBIR funding: (Please provide your best estimate of the impact.)
The start of this project would have been delayed about 13/5/6_months. (FT/PIIE/Control) answers are average number of months reported.
The expected duration/time to completion would have been:
1.
80/67/58
Longer.
2.
0/0/15
The same.
3.
0/0/0
Shorter.
20/33/26
No response.
In achieving similar goals and milestones, the project would be:
1.
0/0/0
Ahead.
2.
0/0/16
The same place.
3.
78/83/58
Behind.
20/33/26
No response.
Employee information. (Enter number of employees. You may enter fractions of full time effort [e.g., 1.2 employees ]. Please include both part time and full time employees, and consultants, in your calculation.) Responses are the average number of employees reported by FT/PIIE/Control.
Number of employees (if known) when Phase II proposal was submitted.
27/47/35
Current number of employees.
55/103/58
Number of current employees who were hired as a result of the technology developed during this Phase II project.
2.7/2.6/2.0
Number of current employees who were retained after Phase II as a result of the technology developed during this Phase II project.
2.5/2.2/2.2
The Principal Investigator for this Phase II Award was a: (Check all that apply.)
a.
2/5/7
Woman.
b.
9/4/11
Minority.
c.
89/93/83
Neither a woman nor a minority.
OCR for page 109
Revisiting the Department of Defense SBIR Fast Track Initiative
Please give the number of patents, copyrights, trademarks and/or scientific publications for the technology developed as a result of this project. (Enter numbers. If none, enter 0 [zero].). Responses are the totals report by each group FT/PIIE/Control
Number Applied For/Submitted
Number Received/Published
47/57/58
Patents
24/23/45
3/21/10
Copyrights
3/21/6
12/21/23
Trademarks
11/18/`7
92/107/181
Scientific Publications
89/103/175
Part IV: Other SBIR Funding
How many SBIR awards (from any federal agency) did your company receive prior to the Phase I that led to this Phase II? Reponses are the average number of awards reported by FT/PIIE/Control.
Number of previous Phase I awards. 3.8/31.4/13.3
Number of previous Phase II awards. 1.7/2.7/5.6
How many SBIR awards has your company received that are related to the project/technology supported by this Phase II award ? Reponses are the average number of awards reported by FT/PIIE/Control.
Number of related Phase I awards. 2.2/2.5/2.5
Number of related Phase II awards. 1.2/1.4/1.5
Part V: Funding and Other Assistance
Prior to this SBIR Phase II award, did your company receive funds for research or development of the technology in this project from any of the following sources?
a.
23/18/26
Prior SBIR (Excluding the Phase I that proceeded this Phase II).
b.
14/17/17
Prior non-SBIR federal R&D.
c.
5/7/1
Venture capital.
d.
16/12/7
Other private company.
e.
22/10/5
Private investor.
f.
36/34/32
Internal company investment (including borrowed money).
g.
6/5/0
State or local government.
h.
0/1/1
College or university.
i.
0/4/5
Other (Specify). _________
OCR for page 110
Revisiting the Department of Defense SBIR Fast Track Initiative
Commercialization of the results of an SBIR project normally requires additional developmental funding. Questions 22 and 23 address additional funding. Additional developmental funds include non-SBIR funds from federal or private sector sources, or from your own company, used for further development and/or commercialization of the technology developed during this Phase II project.
Have you received or invested any additional developmental funding in this project subsequent to Phase II?
a.
73/82/60
Yes. Continue.
b.
27/18/40
No. Skip to Question 24.
To date, what has been the total additional developmental funding for the technology developed during this project? If none, enter 0 (zero). Responses are average reported funding for FT/PIIE/Control.
Source
Developmental Funding
a.
Non-SBIR federal funds.
$296,217 / $682,171 / $324,795
b.
Private Investment.
(1) U.S. venture capital.
$52,344 / $39,867 / $4,673
(2) Foreign investment.
$48,242 / $3,012 / $10,280
(3) Other Private equity.
$232,746 / $155,506 / $5,417
(4) Other domestic private company.
$118,949 / $58,988 / $64,785
c.
Other sources.
(1) State or local governments.
$18,164 / $15,663 / $3,178
(2) College or Universities.
$391 / $1,488 / $12,617
d.
Not previously reported.
(1) Your own company (Including money you have borrowed).
$112,166 / $72,316 / $129,178
(2) Personal funds.
$15,188 / $6,193 / $14,009
Did this award identify matching funds or other types of cost sharing (as an eligibility or competitive criterion) in the Phase II? Check all that apply. Responses are percent of all respondents.
a.
24
Yes. This was a DoD Fast Track.
b.
5
Although not a DoD Fast Track nor Phase II Enhancement/Plus, matching funds/co-investment/cost sharing were identified in the original Phase II.
c.
30
Yes. This was a Phase II Enhancement/Plus.
d.
41
No matching funds / co-investment/cost sharing were identified in the Phase II. If d, skip to Question 31.
OCR for page 111
Revisiting the Department of Defense SBIR Fast Track Initiative
List all sources of matching or co-investment funding included in the proposal. Check all that apply.
a.
17/24/50
Our firm provided funding (includes borrowed funds).
b.
31/69/0
A federal agency provided non-SBIR funds.
c.
33/23/58
Another firm provided funding.
d.
29/6/8
An angel investor or other private investment source provided funding.
e.
7/1/0
Venture capital provided funding.
f.
5/5/0
Other (Identify).
How long in months did it take to obtain and finalize agreement(s) for third party funding/in kind support? Answer all that apply. Responses are average number of months identified by FT and PIIE
The next two questions answered only by Fast Track awards (Q 24a.)
What impact did the use of Fast Track for this effort, rather than the standard Phase II proposal, have on the following: (Please answer all.)
The initial product reached the market 53% faster, 0 slower, 47% at about the same time as it would have had standard (non Fast Track) Phase II procedures been used.
Sales of the product to date are 38% greater, 0 smaller, 62% about the same as they would be had standard (non Fast Track) Phase II procedures been used.
Investment to date is 52% greater, 1% smaller, 47% about the same as it would be had standard (non Fast Track) Phase II procedures been used.
Potential sales resulting from this SBIR are 45% greater, 0 smaller, 55% about the same as they would be had standard (non Fast Track) Phase II procedures been used.
Fast Track 59% improved or 41% did not improve transition into a DoD procurement.
In retrospect knowing the outcome, are you satisfied with your decision to use Fast Track on this Phase II?
a.
90%
Yes. Fast Track was better than a standard Phase II proposal because (Explain briefly)____________________________.
b.
10%
No. We should have used the standard Phase II proposal rather than Fast Track because (Explain briefly) __________.
OCR for page 112
Revisiting the Department of Defense SBIR Fast Track Initiative
The next two questions answered only by Phase II Enhancement/Plus awards (Q 24c.)
What impact did the use of Phase II Enhancement/Plus for this effort, compared to a standard Phase II have on time to market, sales to date, investment to date, and sales potential? Please answer all.
The initial product reached the market 58% faster, 6% slower, 36% at about the same time as it would have in the absence of Phase II Enhancement/Plus.
Sales of the product to date are 50% greater, 2% smaller, 48% about the same as they would be in the absence of Phase II Enhancement/Plus.
Investment to date is 47% greater, 6% smaller, 47% about the same as it would be in the absence of Phase II Enhancement/Plus.
Potential sales resulting from this SBIR are 69%greater, 1% smaller, 30% about the same as they would be in the absence of Phase II Enhancement/Plus.
Phase II Enhancement/Plus 69% improved or 31% did not improve transition into a DoD procurement.
In retrospect, knowing the outcome, are you satisfied with your decision to use Phase II Enhancement/Plus on this Phase II?
a.
95%
Yes. Phase II Enhancement/Plus was an improvement over the standard Phase II process because (Explain briefly) _______.
b.
5%
No. We should not have bothered with Phase II Enhancement/Plus because (Explain briefly) _____________.
Did you experience a funding gap between the end of Phase I and the start of Phase II?
______ Yes. The gap was months. Continue
Had Gap (percent)
Average Gap of Projects Reporting Gap (months)
Average Gap—All Projects (months)
FT
34
4.3
1.5
PIIE
65
4.9
3.2
Control
69
8.8
6.1
______ No. Skip to Question 34.
OCR for page 113
Revisiting the Department of Defense SBIR Fast Track Initiative
Project history. Please fill in for all dates that have occurred. Almost half of the respondents left the dates blank. The percent responding by sample group were FT 33%, PIIE 64%, and Control 68%. Eighteen percent of the respondents claimed to have submitted their Phase II proposals the same day as they completed Phase I. 33% submitted prior to completion of Phase I. Proposals reported to be submitted prior to the end of Phase I ranged from an average of 68 days early for the Control group to 94 days early for Fast Track. Half of the proposals were reported to have been submitted after Phase I was complete. This self imposed funding gap ranged from 197 days for PIIE proposals to 232 days for the Control group.
If you experienced funding gap between Phase I and Phase II for this award, select all answers that apply:
a.
19/42/40
Stopped work on this project during funding gap.
b.
13/20/25
Continued work at reduced pace during funding gap.
c.
3/2/1
Continued work at pace equal to or greater than Phase I pace during funding gap.
d.
5/4/7
Received bridge funding between Phase I and II.
e.
0/1/2
Company ceased all operations during funding gap.
66/35/31
No reported funding gap
Responses for each group are slightly over 100% since more than one answer could apply.
Omitted.
In executing this award, was there any involvement by universities (faculty, graduate students, facilities, and/or university developed technologies)?
36/20/29
Yes.
64/80/71
No.
What relationships existed between your firm’s efforts on this Phase II project and any university(ies) or college(s). (Select all that apply.)
a.
3/0/0
The Principal Investigator (PI) for this Phase II project was at the time of the project a faculty member.
OCR for page 114
Revisiting the Department of Defense SBIR Fast Track Initiative
b.
5/1/0
The Principal Investigator (PI) for this Phase II project was at the time of the project an adjunct faculty member.
c.
22/13/17
Faculty member(s) or adjunct faculty member (s) worked on this Phase II project in a role other than PI, e.g., consultant.
d.
16/10/13
Graduate students worked on this Phase II project.
e.
16/10/14
University/college facilities and/or equipment were used on this Phase II project.
f.
2/1/2
The technology for this project was licensed from a university or college.
g.
6/4/5
The technology for this project was originally developed at a university or college by one of the participants in this Phase II project.
h.
14/10/17
A university or college was a subcontractor on this Phase II project.
In remarks enter the name of the university or college that is referred to in any blocks that are checked above. If more than one institution is referred to, briefly indicate the name and role of each.
Remarks: Respondents named the University of Central Florida three times. Six universities—Colorado, Maryland, Minnesota, Purdue, UCLA and Wayne State—were named twice, and twenty others were named by a single respondent.