Small Business Innovation Research and Small Business Technology Transfer Programs Phase II

Scores listed: 80% (the notice's total wasn't found; check it).

Narrative limit: 20 pages (check the notice for what counts toward it).

1. Phase II Scientific and Technical Feasibility (20%, about 5 pages)
   What reviewers look for (notice p. 37): (20%): a. Project objectives and outcomes are clearly described, adequate, and appropriate. All project components (i.e., research and commercialization) are reflected in one or more project objectives; b. Proposed approach, procedures, or methodologies are innovative, original, clearly described, suitable, and feasible; c. Expected results or outcomes are clearly stated, measurable, and achievable within the allotted timeframe; d. Proposed research fills knowledge gaps that are critical to the development of new innovations to address the stated problem of issue; and e. Proposed research is up to date on the current state of the art (i.e., literature reviews have been completed).
   [[NEEDS: your answer to this criterion, with facts and numbers from your organization]]

2. Commercial Potential (20%, about 5 pages)
   What reviewers look for (notice p. 38): (20%): The commercial potential will be assessed based on how well the following criteria are presented: a. Demonstration of the company’s ability to commercialize the innovation; b. Relevant and current market information for the innovation (stakeholder needs for the innovation, size of the market, potential customers, competition, etc.); c. Strategy for commercializing the innovation, including follow-on commitments from private sector or non-SBIR/STTR funding sources; d. Plans for protection of intellectual property; e. Projected revenue stream and assumptions; and f. Record of commercializing new products and/or services during the last 5 years, especially from prior SBIR and STTR projects. A Commercialization Plan showing that the proposing firm has no prior Phase II awards will not affect the evaluation of an application; the application will be evaluated for commercial potential…
   [[NEEDS: your answer to this criterion, with facts and numbers from your organization]]

3. Importance of the Problem (10%, about 2.5 pages)
   What reviewers look for (notice p. 38): (10%): How well the application justifies the importance of the problem. The degree to which the project satisfies a public interest.
   [[NEEDS: your answer to this criterion, with facts and numbers from your organization]]

4. Investigator and Resource Qualifications (10%, about 2.5 pages)
   What reviewers look for (notice p. 38): (10%): a. Roles of key personnel are clearly defined; b. Key personnel have sufficient scientific and business expertise to complete the proposed project and, where appropriate, partnerships with other disciplines and institutions are established; c. PD and Co-PD biographic information/resumes provide relevant employment history; d. Support personnel, facilities, and instrumentation are sufficient; e. A clear plan is articulated for project management, including time allocated for attainment of objectives and delivery of products, maintenance of partnerships and collaborations, and a strategy to enhance communication, data sharing, and reporting among members of the project team; f. Consultants, subcontractors, or CRADA cooperators that are involved in the project have provided letters verifying their willingness to participate in the project; and g. Personnel on subcontract(s) and…
   [[NEEDS: your answer to this criterion, with facts and numbers from your organization]]

5. Budget (10%, about 2.5 pages)
   What reviewers look for (notice p. 38): (10%): The budget is appropriate for the proposed research plan, and the application provides sufficient budget detail to indicate clearly how the funds in each budget category would be utilized.
   [[NEEDS: your answer to this criterion, with facts and numbers from your organization]]

6. Duplication (10%, about 2.5 pages)
   What reviewers look for (notice p. 38): (10%): a. There is no duplication of any ongoing or previous research by the SBC or by other researchers; and b. Application clearly indicates how the proposed technology would differ significantly from existing innovations. Additional factors that will be considered in the review process are whether an SBIR/STTR application involves a CRADA with a USDA or other Federal laboratory or contains a follow-on funding commitment for Phase III. In the event that two or more applications are of approximately equal merit, the existence of a CRADA with a USDA or other Federal laboratory or a follow-on funding commitment for Phase III will be an important consideration to break the tie. The value of any commitment will depend upon the degree of financial commitment made by non-Federal investors, with the greater value resulting from a signed agreement with reasonable terms for an amount at least…
   [[NEEDS: your answer to this criterion, with facts and numbers from your organization]]