National Institutes of Health · Department of Health and Human Services
SBIR/STTR Commercialization Readiness Pilot (CRP) Program (Parent SB1 Clinical Trial Optional)
Key facts
- Deadline
- Due Apr 5, 2029 · 911 days left
- Award size
- Not stated: see the official notice
- Match ?
- Not required · Work out your budget and match
- Who can apply
- School district, Private college or university, City or town government, Tribal government, Nonprofit without 501(c)(3), Small business, Tribal organization, County government, Public college or university, Special district (utility, fire, etc.), Larger business, State government, Nonprofit with 501(c)(3), and others named in the official notice
- Where
- Anywhere in the U.S., including Tennessee
Before you apply: federal grants require an active SAM.gov registration (Unique Entity ID) and a Grants.gov account. Registration is free but can take weeks, so start now, not when the deadline is close. Get-ready checklist
How this fits you
- Available in Hamilton County (nationwide program)
- No match required
- Past Tennessee awards on file: 2303
Tell us who you are to see whether you're eligible.
Official notice: https://simpler.grants.gov/opportunity/ed6db6b2-d74e-4838-9223-ce72f4895688 · Printed from grantme.click/grants/e09b0c04-e278-43a0-aa0f-b5d2c40aca64
View on Grants.gov Add deadline to my calendar
More from National Institutes of Health
- Systematic Characterization of Genomic Variation to Assess Effects of Individual Variants on Genome Function and Phenotype (UM1 Clinical Trials Not Allowed) · The funder's estimated date (Jul 15, 2025) has passed. Check the official notice Estimate, not confirmed by the funder
- IGVF Data and Coordinating Center (U24 Clinical trials Not Allowed) · The funder's estimated date (Jul 15, 2025) has passed. Check the official notice Estimate, not confirmed by the funder
- Forecast to Renew the Notice of Funding Opportunity Announcement for the Multiple Chronic Disease Research Centers · The funder's estimated date (Jul 25, 2025) has passed. Check the official notice Estimate, not confirmed by the funder
- Genomic Variant Interactions With Other Variants Or The Environment (UM1 Clinical Trials Not Allowed) · The funder's estimated date (Aug 22, 2025) has passed. Check the official notice Estimate, not confirmed by the funder
- Forecast to Publish a Funding Opportunity Announcement for the Consortium on the Neurobiology of Adolescent Drinking in Adulthood (NADIA) Research Resource (Collaborative U24 - Clinical Trials not allowed) · The funder's estimated date (Sep 30, 2025) has passed. Check the official notice Estimate, not confirmed by the funder
- Forecast to Publish a Funding Opportunity Announcement for the Consortium on the Neurobiology of Adolescent Drinking in Adulthood (NADIA) Administrative Resource (Collaborative U24 - Clinical Trials not allowed) · The funder's estimated date (Sep 30, 2025) has passed. Check the official notice Estimate, not confirmed by the funder
About this grant
The Commercialization Readiness Pilot (CRP) program helps small business concerns (SBCs) move NIH-funded SBIR or STTR projects from late-stage development to commercialization. The CRP supports later-stage research and development (R&D) and/or technical assistance that Phase II and Phase IIB Strategic Breakthrough awards do not typically support. This includes:Independent replication or confirmation of key studiesIND- or IDE-enabling studiesClinical studiesManufacturing scale-up and related quality activitiesRegulatory and other specialized technical supportSBCs may subcontract (outsource) a significant amount of the work in a CRP to meet the project goals.
Who can apply, from the official notice
Only United States small business concerns (SBCs), as defined by the Small Business Administration (SBA)(sbir.gov/apply) are eligible to submit applications for this opportunity.Refer to Section III. Eligibility Information in the NOFO for additional information on eligibility.Foreign Organizations/International Collaborations:Non-domestic (non-U.S.) Entities (Foreign Organizations) are not eligible to apply.Non-domestic (non-U.S.) components of U.S. Organizations are not eligible to apply.Unfunded international collaborations or unfunded foreign components, as defined in the NIH Grants Policy Statement, may be allowed.
Your schedule, working back from the deadline
- Oct7
Check that your SAM.gov registration is active (or start it now)
Grants.gov: allow up to 10 business days for SAM registration, weeks or months if information isn't verified. It must be renewed every year. Grants.gov - Mar15
Ask partners for letters of support or commitment
Suggested: partners need about three weeks to write and sign letters. - Mar29
Finish a complete draft for a final review
Suggested: leave about a week for someone else to read the draft. - Apr3
Submit
Grants.gov: submit at least 24–48 hours before the deadline: uploads fail, systems slow down, errors need fixing. Grants.gov blog - Apr5
Deadline
From the funder.
Save this grant to put these dates in My grants and your private calendar.
Writing the need statement? Hamilton County facts with citations.
See how others wrote it
The agency posted this example. Read them for structure and level of detail. Don't copy their words: funders treat copied text as plagiarism, and requirements change from year to year, so follow the current notice.
- NIH research, career, fellowship and small-business grants (R01, R03, R15, R21, R21/R33, R41-R44, K01, K08, K23, F31, G11, U01)
Funded applications with reviewer comments
46 full funded applications and 49 reviewer summary statements (PDF), plus sample forms and letters · Link checked Oct 7, 2026
Who in Tennessee has won this program
612 awards to Tennessee groups in 8 counties since 1975 · 0 in Hamilton County. Largest shown:
| Past winner | Where | Amount | Fiscal year |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | $118.6M | 2017 |
| St Jude Children's Research Hospital Inc | Memphis, Shelby County | $81.5M | 1993 |
| Meharry Medical College | Nashville, Davidson County | $66.3M spent that year | 2025 |
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | $63.8M spent that year | 2025 |
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | $44.1M spent that year | 2025 |
| St Jude Children's Research Hospital Inc | Memphis, Shelby County | $43.7M | 2019 |
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | $43M | 2020 |
| St Jude Children's Research Hospital Inc | Memphis, Shelby County | $41.4M | 1999 |
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | $39.5M spent that year | 2025 |
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | $38.1M | 2024 |
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | $37.5M | 2021 |
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | $34.7M spent that year | 2025 |
Source: USAspending.gov, Federal Audit Clearinghouse. Past awards show who this program funds. They don't guarantee future awards.
Tennessee groups that got this money through a state agency or another organization
This federal money also reaches local groups as pass-through grants. In Tennessee, Tennessee Department of Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services and Tennessee Department of Education pass it on: watch those agencies for applications, not the federal agency. 1691 pass-through grants on file · 0 in Hamilton County. Largest shown:
| Past winner | Where | Through | Amount | Fiscal year |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | Trustees of Boston University | $4.6M | 2023 |
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | University of Vermont & State Agricultural College | $4.4M | 2023 |
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | Research Triangle Institute | $3.6M spent that year | 2025 |
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | Regents of the University of Michigan | $3.4M | 2025 |
| Meharry Medical College | Nashville, Davidson County | Vanderbilt University Medical Center | $2.8M | 2023 |
| St Jude Children's Research Hospital Inc | Memphis, Shelby County | University of Southern California | $2.8M | 2023 |
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | Washington University, the | $2.8M | 2025 |
| Vanderbilt University | Nashville, Davidson County | Vanderbilt University Medical Center | $2.5M | 2023 |
| Vanderbilt University | Nashville, Davidson County | Vanderbilt University Medical Center | $2.3M | 2023 |
| St Jude Children's Research Hospital Inc | Memphis, Shelby County | Weill Medical College of Cornell University | $2.1M | 2026 |
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | Washington University | $2.1M spent that year | 2025 |
| Vanderbilt University Medical Center | Nashville, Davidson County | The Johns Hopkins University | $2M | 2026 |
Source: USAspending.gov pass-through reports (the first recipient reports each one of $30,000 or more).
About the federal program
Environmental Health, also called “National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences”
Program number 93.113 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to stated program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific and...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Oral Diseases and Disorders Research, also called “Dental, Oral and Craniofacial Research.”
Program number 93.121 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Cooperative agreement (a grant with close agency involvement), project grant
How applications are judged
The primary criteria for evaluating grant applications include assessment of: (1) the scientific merit, significance and overall impact of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the competency of the proposed investigator(s) to successfully pursue the project; (3) the innovation and novelty of the concepts, approaches, or methodologies; (4) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (5) the adequacy of the available proposed facilities and resources; (6) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (7) the relevance and importance to the posted institute program objectives. Also evaluated, where applicable, but not scored are: (1) protections for human subjects; (2) inclusion of women, minorities, and children; (3) vertebrate animal welfare; and (4) adequate protection of research personnel and/or the environment, biosafety, biocontainment and the security of select agents; (5) resource sharing plans; (6) authentication of key biological and/or chemical resources, (7) budget and period of support. In addition, the following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: the potential of the proposed research for commercial application. Phase II grant applications will reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific and technical merit of...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
NIEHS Superfund Hazardous Substances_Basic Research and Education, also called “NIEHS Superfund Research Program”
Program number 93.143 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to program mandates and the stated program objectives. For renewal applications, additional criteria include the progress made in the prior grant period. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Human Genome Research, also called “National Human Genome Research Institute”
Program number 93.172 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
In each year's official notice: read this year's.
Match
None required (federal program listing).
Examples of funded projects
Fiscal year 2025: Examples of research supported by NHGRI in FY 2025 include characterization of genes, sequencing, databases, and projects on the following list: https://reporter.nih.gov/search/KP6XtPborUWv7kYNeFlJSA/projects?shared=true
Fiscal year 2026: Current projects supported by NHGRI include basic genomic science; functional and clinical variation; genomic medicine; technology development; computational genomics and data science; training programs; conferences; databases; determining the ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSI) of biomedical and behavioral research; as well as projects on the following list:
https://reporter.nih.gov/search/PbojAWqEZ0aySDrGRZXHTg/projects?shared=true
About the federal program
Research Related to Deafness and Communication Disorders
Program number 93.173 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating applications include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the environment and available resources for the proposed project; (5) the necessity of budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives; (7) innovation; (8) risk to human subjects, including inclusion of minorities, inclusion across the lifespan, and animal protection. The following additional criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR grant applications: (1) The technological innovation of the proposed research; (2) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application.
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
National Center on Sleep Disorders Research
Program number 93.233 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the importance of the problem the proposed research will address; (3) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (4) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (5) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (6) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (7) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; (8) the adequacy of plans to include both genders and minorities and their subgroups as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects will be evaluated; and (9) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Mental Health Research Grants
Program number 93.242 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Cooperative agreement (a grant with close agency involvement), project grant, training
How applications are judged
The following consideration will be used in determining projects to be funded: (1) Technical merit of the proposed project as determined by peer review; (2) Availability of funds; and (3) Relevance to program priorities.
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Alcohol Research Programs
Program number 93.273 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The following considerations will be used in determining projects to be funded: (1) Scientific and technical merit of the proposal; (2) program balance; and (3) relevance to NIAAA priorities and public health issues. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human of animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific and technical merit of the proposed approach for achieving the Phase II objectives; (3) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (4) the technological innovation, originality, or societal importance of the proposed research; (5) the potential of the proposed research for commercial...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Discovery and Applied Research for Technological Innovations to Improve Human Health
Program number 93.286 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) Significance: Does this study address an important problem? If the aims of the application are achieved, how will scientific knowledge be advanced? What will be the effect of these studies on the concepts or methods that drive this field? (2) Approach: Are the conceptual framework, design, methods, and analyses adequately developed, well-integrated, and appropriate to the aims of the project? Does the applicant acknowledge potential problem areas and consider alternative tactics? (3) Innovation: Does the project employ novel concepts, approaches or method? Are the aims original and innovative? Does the project challenge existing paradigms or develop new methodologies or technologies? (4) Investigator: Is the investigator appropriately trained and well suited to carry out this work? Is the work proposed appropriate to the experience level of the principal investigator and other researchers (if any)? (5) Environment: Does the scientific environment in which the work will be done contribute to the probability of success? Do the proposed experiments take advantage of unique features of the scientific environment or employ useful collaborative arrangements? Is there evidence of institutional support? (6) the appropriateness of the proposed budget and duration in relation to the proposed research; (7) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives; (8) the adequacy of plans to include both...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Minority Health and Health Disparities Research
Program number 93.307 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating all new grant and renewal grant applications include assessments of the scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; and the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project and the relevance and importance to the announced program objectives. SBIR and STTR grants: For Phase I grant applications, the criteria used are the soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; the technological innovation of the proposed research; the potential of the proposed suitability of the facilities and research environment; and where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for safeguarding human or animal subjects and/or protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. For Phase II grant applications, the criteria used are the degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; the scientific and technical merit of the proposed approach for achieving the Phase II objectives; the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff and consultants; the technological...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
NIH Office of Research on Women's Health, also called “(NIH/ORWH)”
Program number 93.313 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
In each year's official notice: read this year's.
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, also called “NCATS”
Program number 93.350 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Cooperative agreement (a grant with close agency involvement)
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives and (7) the availability of funds.
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Research Infrastructure Programs, also called “Comparative Medicine, Instrumentation, Research Infrastructure”
Program number 93.351 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The major elements in evaluating proposals for scientific instruments include assessments of (1) the need for the instruments; (2) technical expertise in the requested technology; (3) advancements of research projects when the novel technology is available; (4) administration of the usage of the instrument and (5) institutional support for the long term maintenance and the usage of the instrument.
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Cancer Cause and Prevention Research
Program number 93.393 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Cooperative agreement (a grant with close agency involvement), project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; 2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Cancer Detection and Diagnosis Research
Program number 93.394 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Cooperative agreement (a grant with close agency involvement), project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; 2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Cancer Treatment Research
Program number 93.395 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Cooperative agreement (a grant with close agency involvement), project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating applications include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Cardiovascular Diseases Research
Program number 93.837 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) the scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) the soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the importance of the problem the proposed research will address; (3) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (4) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (5) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (6) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (7) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (8) the adequacy of plans to include both genders and minorities and their subgroups as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects will be evaluated; and (9) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Lung Diseases Research
Program number 93.838 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the importance of the problem the proposed research will address; (3) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (4) the scientific, technical, or technological innovation of the proposed research; (5) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (6) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (7) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; (8) the adequacy of plans to include both genders and minorities and their subgroups as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects will be evaluated; and (9) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a)...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Blood Diseases and Resources Research, also called “Division of Blood Diseases and Resources (DBDR)”
Program number 93.839 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the importance of the problem the proposed research will address; (3) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (4) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (5) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (6) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (7) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; (8) the adequacy of plans to include both genders and minorities and their subgroups as appropriate for the scientific goals of the research. Plans for the recruitment and retention of subjects will be evaluated; and (9) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Translation and Implementation Science Research for Heart, Lung, Blood Diseases, and Sleep Disorders
Program number 93.840 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2)the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the importance of the problem the proposed research will address; (3) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (4) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (5) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (6) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (7) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (8) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Research, also called “NIAMS”
Program number 93.846 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Diabetes, Digestive, and Kidney Diseases Extramural Research
Program number 93.847 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Extramural Research Programs in the Neurosciences and Neurological Disorders
Program number 93.853 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) the scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) the soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) the degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Allergy and Infectious Diseases Research, also called “National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases”
Program number 93.855 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: (1) The scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; (2) the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; (3) the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; (4) the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; (5) the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and (6) the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Biomedical Research and Research Training
Program number 93.859 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
All accepted applications are reviewed for scientific and technical merit by an appropriate initial review group and by a national advisory council.
The goal of NIGMS funding policies is to maximize the scientific impact of investments in investigator-initiated biomedical research to drive fundamental scientific discoveries that advance understanding of human health and disease. To address this goal, the Institute strives to support a broad portfolio of research grants of high scientific and technical merit, as determined by peer review, in its mission areas.
However, in deciding to fund any application, NIGMS staff also considers other factors, including (consistent with applicable law):
the breadth of the Institute�s research portfolio; approaches, and investigators;
the total amount of funding available to the investigator;
the priority of the research area for the Institute�s mission;
Early-stage investigator status;
At-risk investigator status?;?
and whether the PI would have more than one NIGMS funded R01 (including multi-PI R01s).
Because these factors are considered, NIGMS does not have a �payline� or strict cutoff in scores that it will fund.
It is important to understand that even applications with outstanding scores might not be funded if the investigator already has substantial other support.
Because NIGMS prioritizes funding for meritorious investigators who otherwise would not have support over providing additional grants to already well-funded...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Child Health and Human Development Extramural Research, also called “Child Health and Human Development”
Program number 93.865 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of the significance of the proposed research; approach; innovation; investigators; and environment. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research environment; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific and technical merit of the proposed approach for achieving the Phase II objectives; (3) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (4) the technological innovation originality, or societal importance of the proposed research; (5) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (6) the reasonableness of the budget...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
Examples of funded projects
Fiscal year 2025: The following is a tiny sample of fiscal year 2025 NICHD funded grants within the discretionary award class type. 1) Understanding the role of early life social determinants and sex-specific pubertal pathways in the development of adolescent chronic pain. 2) Improving In Vitro Fertilization Success through Multiplexed Optical Metabolic Imaging. 3) Genetic Studies of Large Palindromes. 4) A Safe, Fast, and Cost-Effective System for Tissue Removal in Laparoscopic Hysterectomy and Other Minimally Invasive Surgery.
The following is a tiny sample of fiscal year 2025 NICHD funded grants within the cooperative agreement award class type. 1) Study of Treatment and Reproductive outcomes. 2) Pediatric HIV/AIDS Cohort Study (PHACS): Research on Immune Aging, Sexual and Reproductive Health, and Perinatal Acquisition: Elucidating Relationships in HIV (RISE). 3) Pelvic Floor Disorders Network Data Coordinating Center. 4) NICHD Maternal-Fetal Medicine Units (MFMU) Network: Data Coordinating Center.
Fiscal year 2026: The following is a tiny sample of fiscal year 2026 NICHD funded grants within the discretionary award class type. 1) Placental Proteins and Prematurity. 2) In...
About the federal program
Aging Research, also called “(Aging)”
Program number 93.866 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The major elements in evaluating proposals include assessments of: the scientific merit and general significance of the proposed study and its objectives; the technical adequacy of the experimental design and approach; the competency of the proposed investigator or group to successfully pursue the project; the adequacy of the available and proposed facilities and resources; the necessity of the budget components requested in relation to the proposed project; and the relevance and importance to announced program objectives. The following criteria will be used in considering the scientific and technical merit of SBIR/STTR Phase I grant applications: (1) The soundness and technical merit of the proposed approach; (2) the qualifications of the proposed principal investigator, supporting staff, and consultants; (3) the technological innovation of the proposed research; (4) the potential of the proposed research for commercial application; (5) the appropriateness of the budget requested; (6) the adequacy and suitability of the facilities and research; and (7) where applicable, the adequacy of assurances detailing the proposed means for (a) safeguarding human or animal subjects, and/or (b) protecting against or minimizing any adverse effect on the environment. Phase II grant applications will be reviewed based upon the following criteria: (1) The degree to which the Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated; (2) the scientific and technical merit of the proposed...
Match
None required (federal program listing).
About the federal program
Vision Research, also called “NEI”
Program number 93.867 (the federal Assistance Listing number) · U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health · Project grant
How applications are judged
The following consideration will be used in determining projects to be funded: (1) Technical merit of the proposed project; (2) Availability of funds; and (3) Relevance to program priorities.
Match
None required (federal program listing).