Join Email List
Posts
.
They've been meeting for almost a year with good intent: make SBIR more "effective and efficient". They're calling it SBIR 2.0 - borrowing on the Web 2.0 lexicon that heralded the shift from passive viewing of web content to active interaction among all elements of the web community (from content creators to content users) in a collaborative fashion.
Don't be fooled. It's not the same thing. Not even close. They're talking the talk. But not walking the walk.
Collaboration? Among newbie Agency SBIR Directors (the content creators) - maybe. Are SBIR funded companies (the content users) involved? Nope. Were past and retired SBIR Program Directors consulted? Nope. Were SBIR's founders consulted? Nope. (I'm certainly not in the loop -- not that I should be, although I do have ideas that could have merit -- so if some of the "Nopes" are erroneous, I apologize. But I bet the Nopes are pretty accurate.)
The SBIR 2.0 effort is being spearheaded by Sean Greene, the SBA's Associate Administrator for Investment and Special Advisor for Innovation. (Don'tcha just love government titles?) He's a good guy, a true friend to SBIR, and, as I said, well intentioned. But the naivete here is disturbing.
Here's a quick outline of what's included in the SBA's SBIR 2.0 initiative:
Simplification and Streamlining
- Shortening the contract/grant initiation period after award
- Building a web portal to search for available open topics
- Clarify and simplify SBIR Data Rights
Shared Best Practices
- Expanding bridge financing programs (between Phases)
- Expanding SBIR to facilitate tech transfer (ala NIST)
- Issuing joint agency solicitations
Better Performance Management
- Implement common performance metrics across agencies
- Share performance data publicly
Ambitious for sure! It would be marvelous to get all of that to work. But, folks, it ain't gonna happen quickly. Some aspects may not happen at all. The challenges are daunting. Some of the issues have been debated for years without consensus!
Every one of the agencies can improve the efficiency of project initiation after award. All it takes is money allocated to pay for administration. They haven't got any for this. Current SBIR law doesn't allow use of SBIR apportioned funds for admin. Unfortunately, last I knew, SBIR reauthorization which may fix that provision, hasn't happened yet.
And, at least for DOD, the SBIR Program Managers have NO CLOUT WHATEVER with component contracting authorities, who completely control the contract initiation process. I've seen contracting delays of as much as two YEARS! And, if they did have some clout, the current Army default of Phase I payments every two or three months (instead of monthly) wouldn't be the practice. Can you spell "cash flow"?
A "one-stop-shop" portal with a topic search feature? Gee, don't we already have one? It's called The SBIR Gateway. Not a penny of government money funds it, by the way. The "official" SBIR website (SBIR.gov) certainly could use some work - and a topic search engine - but why waste taxpayer money re-creating something that already works? Or is it simply a control issue?
Getting agencies to work together for improved SBIR efficiency? Don't make me laugh. The agencies are too different and too bureaucratically rigid to make any "one style fits all" approach work. Just the difference in competition compliance requirements between contracting and granting agencies alone makes the whole effort quite unlikely.
Clarifying SBIR Data Rights? PLEASE DO! But this involves getting lawyers to agree. Good luck with that. Ron Cooper, another good guy from the SBA, is at the point for this. If you have ideas, he'd like to hear them.
They're trying a working-together experiment - a five-agency (NIH, DARPA, DHS, NSF, and USDA) joint solicitation on Robotics. Just announced. Here's the info: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-10-279.html. Warning: Take two aspirin before reading, and call me in the morning. Heaven help us, the NIH SBIR application system will be used to collect all five agencies' Robotics proposals!
The NIH's system? Yikes! Y'all know what I think about it: It Sucks! For those of you who are used to doing DOD SBIR proposals, be prepared for EXTREME frustration! I've even put out an SBIR Coach's Newsletter issue about what to expect.
Regarding expanding bridge and commercialization funding, Kristina Johnson, the person at DOE who got their first of its kind Phase III funding initiatives in place, is apparently and suddenly leaving the agency. And the NIST "SBIR TT" program cited as the example for innovative SBIR tech transfer just lost it's creator, Cara Asmail, who's moved on to another NIST post. We have a leadership gap.
The turnover issue also extends to agency SBIR Program Director/Manager roles, as many newcomers are sitting in those chairs this year. I wonder how many of them have actually read the SBIR Policy Directive? Probably about as many as our legislators who actually read the bills they vote for.
Finally, common performance metrics? Oh, please! The agencies don't currently have ANY meaningful SBIR performance metrics. At the Beyond Phase II Conference last week, we were shown some (I thought suspicious) statistics on alleged SBIR performance, but there's no consensus on what constitutes SBIR success and no data gathering that has integrity or accuracy. I'm sure the SBIR funded companies have quite a different view of "success metrics" than do the agencies. Who provides the data? Who collects it? Who is to analyze it? What's to be done with the results? All still undefined.
I'm not usually pessimistic, but it's hard to have optimism about SBIR 2.0. Just being well intentioned doesn't cut the mustard. Maybe I'm jaded. Maybe I'm tired of being told to "trust" and "have hope" for "change" we can count on.
Change huh? This Administration's idea of "change" makes me shudder. (And make no mistake about it, the SBA is an arm of this Administration.) Will "simplification" mean adoption of the NIH's horribly complex SBIR collection and evaluation system? Will "best practices" for laying SBIR eggs (and making them into omelets) be defined by the eggs rather than the chickens? Will "performance metrics" have anything to do with creating jobs and producing innovative technology by giving small businesses access to Federal R&D opportunities?
Until SBIR is reauthorized, much of this is moot. Any efficiency changes will be limited and intra-agency. And, Lord knows, intra-agency efficiency changes are sorely needed! Effectiveness changes? Who knows what that even means?
I do applaud what Sean Greene and the Agency SBIR Program Directors (with a special nod to Chris Rinaldi at DOD) are trying to do with SBIR 2.0. They're sincere and trying hard to do what's best for SBIR. I just entreat them to do it smart and not ignore the user community and what's been tried in the past. Involve Roland Tibbetts, Ann Eskesen, and Jere Glover in the dialog and listen to what they have to say. Involve small business and their advocacy arm, the SBTC, too. Make SBIR 2.0 truly collaborative.
If you're going to talk the talk, please walk the walk.
.
Showing posts with label NIST. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NIST. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Monday, September 6, 2010
SBIR Reauthorization? Hit the Reset Button.
.
It ain't gonna happen this year folks. The 111th Congress will be remembered for many things. Reauthorizing SBIR won't be among them.
But, don't worry, they won't let it die. No one wants to be accused of killing a small business program. So it'll be extended as is, with yet another Continuing Resolution, and the 112th will have to start over. With a clean slate. All unresolved legislation is trashed, ya' know.
Hit the Reset Button. It'll be a brand new game.
If the polls are even close to being accurate, there will be a lot of new faces in both the House and Senate. Many of these new legislators are likely to have never even heard of SBIR. So we must start over again with educating, persuading, persisting.
And we'll have new Congressional leadership, both at the top and on Committees. In the case of the House Small Business Committee, that's a good thing. Nydia needs a vacation. She works so hard on behalf of her constituents and supporters' pet projects. Too bad SBIR has never been one of them.
Those of you from Missouri -- get ready to "show me" some style. If the Republicans gain control of the House, Sam Graves is likely to be the new SBC Chair. At least his district of north Kansas City and St. Joseph may actually have some SBIR funded companies in it! Make sure he knows how you feel.
It's also a brand new game at many of the SBIR Agencies. The three biggest in terms of SBIR budgets, DOD, NIH and DOE, all have new leadership at the Program Director level.
Defense, the Big Gorilla with over $1 Billion of SBIR and STTR projects annually, has had Chris Rinaldi at the DOD SBIR helm for just a few months. He's still getting his feet wet. And he's got a bunch of new faces at the twelve DOD component desks as well, as DOD's had a bunch of recent SBIR office retirements including Connie Jacobs (DARPA) and Steve Guilfoos (AF). New game here for sure.
Energy still hasn't officially settled on the replacement for Larry James and has Vince Dattoria serving as Acting SBIR Program Director. No telling what's going to evolve there. But, DOE has done more than any other agency to use their Stimulus Funds for small business R&D projects, so there's hope.
But the biggest new game is at the NIH, where Jo Anne Goodnight recently announced that she is retiring from government service this month. No announcement yet as to who will be replacing her as NIH SBIR Program Director, but Kay Etzler is certainly qualified and capable of handling that job! Heck, she did it most of last year when Jo Anne was on temporary assignment to the Senate. I haven't asked her if she's even put her hat in the ring, but if they don't give Kay the job, watch out. That could very likely portend a significant shift in NIH SBIR policy.
Jo Anne will really be missed, especially by me. She and I haven't always agreed on SBIR policy implementation, but she's been a respected friend. SBIR Conferences just won't be the same without her. Her "SBIR 101" presentations are classic and legendary. She and Joe Hennebury from DOT (also recently retired) were mainstays as the primary cheerleaders for the Program. Now who's going to pick up that slack?
Another SBIR office that's lost a star is NIST. Clara Asmail, in my opinion the most creative thinker among the SBIR Directors, has moved to another NIST post. Hopefully what she started at NIST (see my column on this: Clever Clara...) won't be allowed to fade away.
So, it's pretty much a brand new game. On all fronts. Hit the Reset Button.
I predict this eighth SBIR CR will likely be for seven months, taking us to April 30th of 2011.
We'll have a few months of nothing doing while Congress re-boots and the 112th gets started. New SBIR Reauthorization bills will be introduced by the House and Senate Small Business Committees. Probably similar to the current ones, but hopefully a bit closer together in concept.
Here we go again. Monitor www.SBIRreauthorization.com for updates.
Meanwhile, there are three important events coming up this fall that The SBIR Coach will be participating in as a sponsor or speaker:
.
It ain't gonna happen this year folks. The 111th Congress will be remembered for many things. Reauthorizing SBIR won't be among them.
But, don't worry, they won't let it die. No one wants to be accused of killing a small business program. So it'll be extended as is, with yet another Continuing Resolution, and the 112th will have to start over. With a clean slate. All unresolved legislation is trashed, ya' know.
Hit the Reset Button. It'll be a brand new game.
If the polls are even close to being accurate, there will be a lot of new faces in both the House and Senate. Many of these new legislators are likely to have never even heard of SBIR. So we must start over again with educating, persuading, persisting.
And we'll have new Congressional leadership, both at the top and on Committees. In the case of the House Small Business Committee, that's a good thing. Nydia needs a vacation. She works so hard on behalf of her constituents and supporters' pet projects. Too bad SBIR has never been one of them.
Those of you from Missouri -- get ready to "show me" some style. If the Republicans gain control of the House, Sam Graves is likely to be the new SBC Chair. At least his district of north Kansas City and St. Joseph may actually have some SBIR funded companies in it! Make sure he knows how you feel.
It's also a brand new game at many of the SBIR Agencies. The three biggest in terms of SBIR budgets, DOD, NIH and DOE, all have new leadership at the Program Director level.
Defense, the Big Gorilla with over $1 Billion of SBIR and STTR projects annually, has had Chris Rinaldi at the DOD SBIR helm for just a few months. He's still getting his feet wet. And he's got a bunch of new faces at the twelve DOD component desks as well, as DOD's had a bunch of recent SBIR office retirements including Connie Jacobs (DARPA) and Steve Guilfoos (AF). New game here for sure.
Energy still hasn't officially settled on the replacement for Larry James and has Vince Dattoria serving as Acting SBIR Program Director. No telling what's going to evolve there. But, DOE has done more than any other agency to use their Stimulus Funds for small business R&D projects, so there's hope.
But the biggest new game is at the NIH, where Jo Anne Goodnight recently announced that she is retiring from government service this month. No announcement yet as to who will be replacing her as NIH SBIR Program Director, but Kay Etzler is certainly qualified and capable of handling that job! Heck, she did it most of last year when Jo Anne was on temporary assignment to the Senate. I haven't asked her if she's even put her hat in the ring, but if they don't give Kay the job, watch out. That could very likely portend a significant shift in NIH SBIR policy.
Jo Anne will really be missed, especially by me. She and I haven't always agreed on SBIR policy implementation, but she's been a respected friend. SBIR Conferences just won't be the same without her. Her "SBIR 101" presentations are classic and legendary. She and Joe Hennebury from DOT (also recently retired) were mainstays as the primary cheerleaders for the Program. Now who's going to pick up that slack?
Another SBIR office that's lost a star is NIST. Clara Asmail, in my opinion the most creative thinker among the SBIR Directors, has moved to another NIST post. Hopefully what she started at NIST (see my column on this: Clever Clara...) won't be allowed to fade away.
So, it's pretty much a brand new game. On all fronts. Hit the Reset Button.
I predict this eighth SBIR CR will likely be for seven months, taking us to April 30th of 2011.
We'll have a few months of nothing doing while Congress re-boots and the 112th gets started. New SBIR Reauthorization bills will be introduced by the House and Senate Small Business Committees. Probably similar to the current ones, but hopefully a bit closer together in concept.
Here we go again. Monitor www.SBIRreauthorization.com for updates.
Meanwhile, there are three important events coming up this fall that The SBIR Coach will be participating in as a sponsor or speaker:
- The DOD's Beyond Phase II SBIR Conference in San Antonio (Sep 13-17),
- The National Association of Seed and Venture Funds (NASVF) Annual Conference in Baltimore (Oct 13-15), and
- The Fall 2010 SBIR National Conference in Oklahoma City (Nov 8-10).
.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Clever Clara Seeks to Close Research Gaps at NIST with SBIR TT
.
You've all heard the cliched proclamation: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you!" Rarely is it actually the truth. I have just encountered one case where, apparently, it is!
Her name is Clara Asmail. She's the SBIR Program Manager at the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST). She's charming, engaging, and absolutely brilliant. A multiple degreed physicist with an entrepreneurial bent. She'll talk technical with the best of you, while being a very helpful and competent administrator. A rare combination.
I attended Clara's presentation at the National SBIR Conference this week on what she's been doing to close research gaps that have prevented NIST funded technologies from achieving commercialization. She calls the program, initiated in 2008, SBIR TT (for Tech Transfer). The NIST SBIR website has a FACT SHEET to explain this innovative approach to fostering innovation.
Essentially, if you can show how you'll close the gap in some NIST research, Clara will give you a FREE non-exclusive research license to use the NIST technology in your project. On top of that, she'll fund your project with NIST SBIR money! Just as with any other SBIR project, rights to the results of the project are yours. And you get access to NIST personnel, facilities, and knowledge regarding the invention. What a deal!
Ann Eskesen was at the presentation too, and she called Clara's approach "The cleverest thing she's seen in thirty years!" Quite a statement from the lady who's seen it all, SBIR-wise!
NIST has just opened their FY2010 solicitation. See a quick list of the new NIST Regular (R) and Tech-Transfer (TT) opportunities HERE. Proposals are due by January 22nd.
We've heard rumors that there is some progress being made on SBIR Reauthorization, with the Senate offering a new compromise bill to the House. There's actually some hope that we'll get this resolved by the end of the year. I'm standing by my predictions for how it will all shake out. If you missed my prognostications, see them HERE. When we have details, I'll let you know.
And finally, we're saddened by the deplorable tragedy at our Texas' Fort Hood yesterday. The stress this incident has added to our brave soldiers and their families is immeasurable. Please join me in contributing to a phone-card initiative for helping Fort Hood soldiers communicate with their worried families.
A special website "Operation Call Home" has been established by an Austin radio station to accept donations for phone-cards. Here's the link: http://www.590klbj.com/community/OperationCallHome.aspx. Thanks for your support.
.
You've all heard the cliched proclamation: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help you!" Rarely is it actually the truth. I have just encountered one case where, apparently, it is!
Her name is Clara Asmail. She's the SBIR Program Manager at the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST). She's charming, engaging, and absolutely brilliant. A multiple degreed physicist with an entrepreneurial bent. She'll talk technical with the best of you, while being a very helpful and competent administrator. A rare combination.
I attended Clara's presentation at the National SBIR Conference this week on what she's been doing to close research gaps that have prevented NIST funded technologies from achieving commercialization. She calls the program, initiated in 2008, SBIR TT (for Tech Transfer). The NIST SBIR website has a FACT SHEET to explain this innovative approach to fostering innovation.
Essentially, if you can show how you'll close the gap in some NIST research, Clara will give you a FREE non-exclusive research license to use the NIST technology in your project. On top of that, she'll fund your project with NIST SBIR money! Just as with any other SBIR project, rights to the results of the project are yours. And you get access to NIST personnel, facilities, and knowledge regarding the invention. What a deal!
Ann Eskesen was at the presentation too, and she called Clara's approach "The cleverest thing she's seen in thirty years!" Quite a statement from the lady who's seen it all, SBIR-wise!
NIST has just opened their FY2010 solicitation. See a quick list of the new NIST Regular (R) and Tech-Transfer (TT) opportunities HERE. Proposals are due by January 22nd.
We've heard rumors that there is some progress being made on SBIR Reauthorization, with the Senate offering a new compromise bill to the House. There's actually some hope that we'll get this resolved by the end of the year. I'm standing by my predictions for how it will all shake out. If you missed my prognostications, see them HERE. When we have details, I'll let you know.
And finally, we're saddened by the deplorable tragedy at our Texas' Fort Hood yesterday. The stress this incident has added to our brave soldiers and their families is immeasurable. Please join me in contributing to a phone-card initiative for helping Fort Hood soldiers communicate with their worried families.
A special website "Operation Call Home" has been established by an Austin radio station to accept donations for phone-cards. Here's the link: http://www.590klbj.com/community/OperationCallHome.aspx. Thanks for your support.
.
Friday, September 18, 2009
The Seed Investment Landscape - Interpreting a Picasso
.
It's like Picasso painting landscapes. All the pieces are out there but the picture is confusing. Making sense of it is very much up to individual interpretation. So where should an entrepreneur look for finding seed investment? The answer may lie in understanding what investors are looking for.
The NASVF conference this week presented a wide array of options and opinions on seed and early stage funding. Representatives of federal, regional, state, and both public and private sector economic development and investment organizations participated on panels. Most felt that their approaches would be successful, but the only things they truly agreed upon was that such investment was both necessary to our future economic growth and harder to get in this economy.
One of the more interesting panels was on "Hot Markets and Sizzling Sectors". Each of the three panelists said something I felt profound.
Tom Pickens (Astrotech Corp) said that he firmly believed that it takes a team of at least four people to make an entrepreneurial company succeed. It stems from a Psychology Today article he read years ago. Take any four people and let them take an IQ test pooling their answers, and they'd rate at the genius level. Think about that a while.
Richard Helfrich (Alameda Advisors) said that scientific discipline collaboration is the key. We need to combine chemistry, physics, biology, mathematics, and engineering disciplines to evolve new ideas for applications. This may mean that our academic departments may actually have to talk to one another! Fits with the "team of four" premise too.
Bill Reichert (Garage Technology Ventures) cautioned against pre-determining likelihood of success based on the type of technology. His premise: The most important technologies are the ones we can't categorize yet! Cast a broad net and keep your mind open to novelty. And don't be constrained by your biases.
And then, reinforcing all of this was a conversation I had recently with Laurence Briggs, CEO of the InvestIN Forum, a Dallas area private investor network, which has joined with other Angel groups around the country and internationally in a syndicated manner. This effectively forms a "Band of Angels" over 420 strong, looking to make deals.
And make deals they do. At about the rate of one a month currently. They'll put in up to $7 million for the right deal. Angel investing isn't what it used to be!
I asked Laurence what they look for. He said that no particular technology is preferred. What they look for is a proved-out concept for a product or solution addressing a significant market with scalability, and a good coachable team appropriate for their stage of development. Proved-out product. Significant market. Scalability. Appropriate team. Coachable. (Hmmm.... sure sounds just like what the NASVF panel said was important.)
A featured speaker at the NASVF conference was Rick Wade, the Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff at the US Department of Commerce. He made the point of saying that the DOC was reinventing itself, and, that short of actually being renamed, wanted to become known as the "Department of Innovation".
I couldn't resist. When the session was opened to questions from the floor, I asked him what the Commerce Department would do to support SBIR if the provision in the current House bill (HR2965) that would put NIST in charge of formulating SBIR policy becomes law. He replied that he had recently participated in a discussion in the White House on that very subject, and "the Department of Commerce would do everything it could to see that SBIR is appropriately supported". (I'm in Missouri as I write this, so I'll just say "Oh yeah? Show me!") In a private conversation later that morning, he asked me to provide him with some briefing materials, and I promised to do so.
So, let's sit back and gaze at this Picasso-like picture. SBIR companies should listen to this guidance, and think beyond the grant to the business that they'd like to evolve. Create a masterpiece by paying attention to what works in today's economy.
.
It's like Picasso painting landscapes. All the pieces are out there but the picture is confusing. Making sense of it is very much up to individual interpretation. So where should an entrepreneur look for finding seed investment? The answer may lie in understanding what investors are looking for.
The NASVF conference this week presented a wide array of options and opinions on seed and early stage funding. Representatives of federal, regional, state, and both public and private sector economic development and investment organizations participated on panels. Most felt that their approaches would be successful, but the only things they truly agreed upon was that such investment was both necessary to our future economic growth and harder to get in this economy.
One of the more interesting panels was on "Hot Markets and Sizzling Sectors". Each of the three panelists said something I felt profound.
Tom Pickens (Astrotech Corp) said that he firmly believed that it takes a team of at least four people to make an entrepreneurial company succeed. It stems from a Psychology Today article he read years ago. Take any four people and let them take an IQ test pooling their answers, and they'd rate at the genius level. Think about that a while.
Richard Helfrich (Alameda Advisors) said that scientific discipline collaboration is the key. We need to combine chemistry, physics, biology, mathematics, and engineering disciplines to evolve new ideas for applications. This may mean that our academic departments may actually have to talk to one another! Fits with the "team of four" premise too.
Bill Reichert (Garage Technology Ventures) cautioned against pre-determining likelihood of success based on the type of technology. His premise: The most important technologies are the ones we can't categorize yet! Cast a broad net and keep your mind open to novelty. And don't be constrained by your biases.
And then, reinforcing all of this was a conversation I had recently with Laurence Briggs, CEO of the InvestIN Forum, a Dallas area private investor network, which has joined with other Angel groups around the country and internationally in a syndicated manner. This effectively forms a "Band of Angels" over 420 strong, looking to make deals.
And make deals they do. At about the rate of one a month currently. They'll put in up to $7 million for the right deal. Angel investing isn't what it used to be!
I asked Laurence what they look for. He said that no particular technology is preferred. What they look for is a proved-out concept for a product or solution addressing a significant market with scalability, and a good coachable team appropriate for their stage of development. Proved-out product. Significant market. Scalability. Appropriate team. Coachable. (Hmmm.... sure sounds just like what the NASVF panel said was important.)
A featured speaker at the NASVF conference was Rick Wade, the Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff at the US Department of Commerce. He made the point of saying that the DOC was reinventing itself, and, that short of actually being renamed, wanted to become known as the "Department of Innovation".
I couldn't resist. When the session was opened to questions from the floor, I asked him what the Commerce Department would do to support SBIR if the provision in the current House bill (HR2965) that would put NIST in charge of formulating SBIR policy becomes law. He replied that he had recently participated in a discussion in the White House on that very subject, and "the Department of Commerce would do everything it could to see that SBIR is appropriately supported". (I'm in Missouri as I write this, so I'll just say "Oh yeah? Show me!") In a private conversation later that morning, he asked me to provide him with some briefing materials, and I promised to do so.
So, let's sit back and gaze at this Picasso-like picture. SBIR companies should listen to this guidance, and think beyond the grant to the business that they'd like to evolve. Create a masterpiece by paying attention to what works in today's economy.
.
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
More SBIR Tidbits: Upcoming Deadlines, Boeing interest, SITIS, and other stuff
Everyone's taking a deep breath after last week's flurry of activity to get the NSF and NIH SBIR proposals submitted on time. I hope that everyone was able to jump through the FastLane and Grants.gov/eRA Commons hoops without hassle, although I've only rarely heard of anyone getting through the NIH submission process without having to do a corrected submission -- it's always something!
The NIH did put on a webinar with representatives from the NIH SBIR Office, Grants.gov, and the eRA Commons on-line to ostensibly allow applicants with questions to get them answered. They did a good job. I listened in and did learn some things. Evidently hundreds of questions were submitted via the on-line mechanism, but unfortunately only a very small number of them were able to be answered in the time allotted. It's clear that the NIH proposal submission system has evolved to be so complex that many find it too formidable to deal with. That's a shame. It shouldn't have to be so tough! Anyhow, the PowerPoint presentations the webinar speakers made are available for download from the NIH SBIR web page. Click HERE for a quick link to them.
Now we're into the post-Thanksgiving pre-Christmas push to get DOD, NIST, NOAA,and DHS SBIR proposals written for submission by mid-January, although my experience in dealing with proposal writers says that most will procrastinate until just before the deadline anyhow....Sigh..... DHS proposals are due Jan 5th, DOD and NOAA on Jan 14th, and NIST on Jan 22nd. NIST and NOAA require paper copies delivered by specific deadlines, while DHS and DOD have proprietary submission portal websites. All four of these agencies issue contracts or purchase orders for the work, not grants, so none of them use Grants.gov (hooray!). You should, however, have a DUNS Number and be registered in the CCR. [Remember, the SBIR Coach provides support for start-to-finish Proposal Preparation Coaching or just for Proposal Draft Reviews. Contact me if you'd like to discuss.]
Boeing has released its interest list for SBIR participation and support for the DOD 2009.1 topics. Write me if you'd like a copy. Kudos to Boeing's Rich Hendel for being the most proactive big-company SBIR supporter in the country! According to the information that Rich presented at the SBIR National Conference last month in Hartford, it's paying dividends for Boeing. Are the rest of you big-dogs paying attention?
The DOD officially opened their SBIR submission website for the 2009.1 round on December 8th, so no more communication with Topic Authors (aka TPOCs) is permitted, other than through SITIS, the official on-line system for asking questions and getting answers on the topics. My December SBIR Coach's Newsletter discusses how to use the SITIS system effectively. Write me for a copy of this one, and subscribe to future issues by clicking the "Join" button in the margin on the left of this Blog post.
Not much is happening on the SBIR re-authorization front. The current economic turmoil has everything else on hold. But, we'll turn on the heat as soon as the new Congress convenes.
.
The NIH did put on a webinar with representatives from the NIH SBIR Office, Grants.gov, and the eRA Commons on-line to ostensibly allow applicants with questions to get them answered. They did a good job. I listened in and did learn some things. Evidently hundreds of questions were submitted via the on-line mechanism, but unfortunately only a very small number of them were able to be answered in the time allotted. It's clear that the NIH proposal submission system has evolved to be so complex that many find it too formidable to deal with. That's a shame. It shouldn't have to be so tough! Anyhow, the PowerPoint presentations the webinar speakers made are available for download from the NIH SBIR web page. Click HERE for a quick link to them.
Now we're into the post-Thanksgiving pre-Christmas push to get DOD, NIST, NOAA,and DHS SBIR proposals written for submission by mid-January, although my experience in dealing with proposal writers says that most will procrastinate until just before the deadline anyhow....Sigh..... DHS proposals are due Jan 5th, DOD and NOAA on Jan 14th, and NIST on Jan 22nd. NIST and NOAA require paper copies delivered by specific deadlines, while DHS and DOD have proprietary submission portal websites. All four of these agencies issue contracts or purchase orders for the work, not grants, so none of them use Grants.gov (hooray!). You should, however, have a DUNS Number and be registered in the CCR. [Remember, the SBIR Coach provides support for start-to-finish Proposal Preparation Coaching or just for Proposal Draft Reviews. Contact me if you'd like to discuss.]
Boeing has released its interest list for SBIR participation and support for the DOD 2009.1 topics. Write me if you'd like a copy. Kudos to Boeing's Rich Hendel for being the most proactive big-company SBIR supporter in the country! According to the information that Rich presented at the SBIR National Conference last month in Hartford, it's paying dividends for Boeing. Are the rest of you big-dogs paying attention?
The DOD officially opened their SBIR submission website for the 2009.1 round on December 8th, so no more communication with Topic Authors (aka TPOCs) is permitted, other than through SITIS, the official on-line system for asking questions and getting answers on the topics. My December SBIR Coach's Newsletter discusses how to use the SITIS system effectively. Write me for a copy of this one, and subscribe to future issues by clicking the "Join" button in the margin on the left of this Blog post.
Not much is happening on the SBIR re-authorization front. The current economic turmoil has everything else on hold. But, we'll turn on the heat as soon as the new Congress convenes.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)