The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Pages 54-90

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 54... ... The growing importance of the SBIR program within the defense acquisition system is reflected in the increasing interest of primes, who are seeking opportunities to be involved with SBIR projects – a key step toward acquisition.15 b. NIH:16 NIH and other public health agencies increasingly see SBIR as an important element in the agency's translational strategy – designed to move technologies form the lab into the marketplace.17 The NIH awards cases examined focused on public health and biomedical science and technology. Read the entire page →
From page 55... ... 1. Substantial Benefits: The NRC Phase II Recipient Survey shows that the SBIR program has provided substantial benefits for participating small businesses at all agencies, in a number of different ways. Read the entire page →
From page 56... ... See also Table 4-11 and Figures 4.21, 30 4.22 and 4.23 for data on new entrants at NSF, NIH and DOD UNEDITED PROOFS Read the entire page →
From page 57... ... A Key Program Objective: One of the four Congressional objectives for the SBIR program is to enhance opportunities for women- and minority-owned businesses. SBIR's competitive awards provide a source of capital for small innovative firms with pre-prototype technologies -- the phase where funding is most difficult to obtain. Read the entire page →
From page 58... ... With the exception of the bump-up in 2002 and 2003, there is no upward trend. In other words, while woman-owned businesses do participate in the NSF SBIR program, that participation does not seem to be increasing over time. Read the entire page →
From page 59... ... Linking Universities to the Public and Private Markets: The SBIR program supports the transfer of research into the marketplace, as well as the general expansion of scientific and technical knowledge, through a wide variety of mechanisms. With regard to SBIR's role in linking universities to the market, about a third of all NRC Phase II Recipient Survey respondents indicated that there had been involvement by university faculty, graduate students, and/or a university itself in developed technologies. Read the entire page →
From page 60... ... At DoD, the program is driven by the need to put the results of research into products and systems to support war-fighters; at NIH, the focus of the SBIR program is to conduct research that contributes to improvements in public health, almost always through eventual take-up by entities outside NIH.44 2. Differing Mechanisms: These distinctly different goals are reflected in the mechanisms used by the agency to implement the SBIR program.45 For example, 42 See also National Research Council, An Assessment of the Small Business Innovation Research Program at the National Science Foundation, op cit., p.4 43 For a discussion of indirect path effects, see National Research Council, The Advanced Technology Program: Assessing Outcomes, Charles W Read the entire page →
From page 61... ... It is precisely the relatively wide range of options available to the agencies and their SBIR program managers that helps to account for the effectiveness of the program. The need for flexibility is grounded in the very wide differences in objectives, structure, and culture across the agency SBIR programs as well as in the uncertainties of early stage project finance.47 3. Read the entire page →
From page 62... ... As the list below shows, some SBIR program managers have increasingly utilized the flexibility inherent in the structure of such a widely dispersed program to introduce a range of initiatives covering almost all aspects of SBIR program management. Read the entire page →
From page 63... ... 7. SBA and SBIR: The SBA has oversight responsibility for the eleven SBIR programs underway across the federal government. Read the entire page →
From page 64... ... 50 There may be substantially more venture funding than the NRC research has, as yet, revealed. The GAO report on venture funding within the NIH and DoD SBIR programs used a somewhat different methodology to identify firms with VC funding. Read the entire page →
From page 65... ... The biomedical context of this finding on venture capital funding reflects the recent attention to this issue in 54 the NIH SBIR program. 55 See the testimony by Jonathan Cohen, founder and CEO of 20/20 GeneSystems, at the House Science Committee Hearing on "Small Business Innovation Research: What is the Optimal Role of Venture Capital," July 28, 2005. Read the entire page →
From page 66... ... , and some are also not excluded by the ruling because they are still less than 50 percent VC owned. Yet it is important to recognize that these companies may be disproportionately among the companies most likely to succeed – such as previous highly successful SBIR companies that were simultaneously recipients of VC funding.56 What is not known is how many companies are excluding themselves from the SBIR program as a result of the ruling. Read the entire page →
From page 67... ... Key variables will include the presence and amount of SBIR support, the receipt of venture capital funding or other outside funding, and output measures including those related to commercialization and knowledge generation. Read the entire page →
From page 68... ... The SBIR program is currently not sufficiently evidence-based. Some aspects of the SBIR program have been subject to internal and external evaluation.60 Nonetheless, insufficient data collection, analytic capability, and reporting requirements, together with the decentralized character of the program, mean that there is limited ability to make connections between program outcomes and program management and practices. Read the entire page →
From page 69... ... The SBIR program involves a significant amount of public funding, some $1.851 billion in FY2005. The necessary resources to manage the program and evaluate outcomes should be provided.62 2. Read the entire page →
From page 70... ... These include: i. The role of venture capital funding in the SBIR program. Read the entire page →
From page 71... ... For the most part, over the last 25 years, the Departments, Institutes, and Agencies responsible for the SBIR program have not proved willing or able to make additional management funds available. Without direction from Congress, they are unlikely to do so. Read the entire page →
From page 72... ... As part of a new and expanded annual report, agencies should closely monitor and report on cycle times for each element of the SBIR program: topic development and publication, solicitation, application review, contracting, Phase II application and selection, and Phase III contracting. Agencies should also specifically report on initiatives to shorten decision cycles. Read the entire page →
From page 73... ... from these companies for all their previous SBIR awards, including those at other agencies. It also captures information on firm size and growth since entering the SBIR program, as well as the percent UNEDITED PROOFS Read the entire page →
From page 74... ... DoD-Navy: Technology Assistance Program. The Navy has developed the most comprehensive suite of support mechanisms for companies entering Phase III, and has also developed new tools for tracking Phase III outcomes. Read the entire page →
From page 75... ... E Agencies should take steps to increase the participation and success rates of woman- and minority-owned firms in the SBIR program. Read the entire page →
From page 76... ... Discussions with NIH SBIR program managers. 6/13/06 71 72 Phase I awards may have particular importance in meeting non-commercial objectives of the program, for example helping academics to transition technologies out of the lab into startup companies. Read the entire page →
From page 77... ... The Fast Track Program, whose principal objective is to reduce the funding gap between Phase I and Phase II of the SBIR award process, began as an experiment at the Department of Defense. It was subsequently evaluated by the NRC, which found that the Fast Track Program increases the effectiveness of the SBIR program at DoD by encouraging the commercialization of new technologies. Read the entire page →
From page 78... ... Agencies should equally ensure that program modifications are designed, monitored, and evaluated, so that positive and negative results can be effectively evaluated. Where feasible and appropriate, the agencies should conduct scientifically-rigorous experiments to evaluate their most promising SBIR approaches – experiments in which SBIR program applicants, awardees, and/or research topics are randomly assigned to the new approach or to a control group that participates in the agency's usual SBIR process.75 I Read the entire page →
From page 79... ... Several agencies, NIH, NSF, and NASA, have successfully made their own judgments as to the most appropriate UNEDITED PROOFS Read the entire page →
From page 80... ... b. The NRC data suggest that firms that repeatedly win SBIR awards but fail to commercialize are not a significant problem at any of the granting agencies.81 award sizes to meet their agency needs and continue to draw adequate "deal flows." Agencies with smaller SBIR programs, not reviewed here, have adopted much smaller award sizes. Read the entire page →
From page 81... ... 82 DoD commercialization data indicate that overall, firms with the largest numbers of awards commercialize more than firms with few awards. See Radiation Monitoring Devices case study in National Research Council, An Assessment of the Small Business Innovation Research Program at the National Institutes of Health, Charles W Read the entire page →
From page 82... ... Should the Congress wish to provide additional funds for the program in support of these objectives, with the programmatic changes recommended above, those funds could be employed effectively by the nation's SBIR program. Creare Inc. Read the entire page →
From page 83... ... 140 95 H 1991 Tumors $132,500,000 $1,600,000 A New Portable XRF HHS/NI System for Lead Paint H 1993 Analysis $91,343,990 $4,339,000 Portable Nuclear Cardiac NASA 1985 Ejection Fraction Monitor $26,600,000 $4,500,000 Emboli Monitor to Reduce HHS/NI Surgical Neurological H 1992 Deficits $25,500,000 $470,000 HHS/NI Sensitive Probe for Intra H 1986 Operative Bone Scanning $19,700,000 $1,000,000 Advanced Avalanche Photodiode for Positron DOE 1984 Emission Tomography $588,000 $21,870,000 UNEDITED PROOFS Read the entire page →
From page 84... ... . We begin by providing an overview of the SBIR program, which today totals about $2B annually, divided between Phase I and Phase II. Read the entire page →
From page 85... ... , agencies appear to be making a shift in emphasis toward away from Phase I and toward Phase II. The growth and then decline in the number of Phase I awards are not directly reflected in the amounts spent by the agencies on Phase I: UNEDITED PROOFS Read the entire page →
From page 86... ... And this is in fact the case: UNEDITED PROOFS Read the entire page →
From page 87... ... 3.3 SBIR Phase II awards The number of Phase II awards made since 1992 does not fluctuate as dramatically, as shown in Figure 3-4 below: UNEDITED PROOFS Read the entire page →
From page 89... ... However, the data for 2000 and 2001 are heavily influenced by what appear to be inaccurate data for NIH: UNEDITED PROOFS Read the entire page →
From page 90... ... The UNEDITED PROOFS Read the entire page →

From page 54...

... The growing importance of the SBIR program within the defense acquisition system is reflected in the increasing interest of primes, who are seeking opportunities to be involved with SBIR projects – a key step toward acquisition.15 b. NIH:16 NIH and other public health agencies increasingly see SBIR as an important element in the agency's translational strategy – designed to move technologies form the lab into the marketplace.17 The NIH awards cases examined focused on public health and biomedical science and technology.