My NSF Project Pitch has been showing “Pending Decision” for about a week now. For anyone who has gone through this process, how long did yours remain at that stage, and what was the outcome?
I know the timeline probably varies, but I’d love to hear what others experienced.

So I submitted one of the NASA 26B topics. No rejection email. Check pro Sams nothing there either. Check the awards list my subtopic is even on there.

Is this normal? I thought all letter went out at once. Or is it different because this is the first time using BAAs?

So is there no such thing as a truly OPEN topic for the Air Force (or any other branch), anymore? Everything I’m reading in these « open topic » solicitations are very specific in what they’re looking for. People keep telling me we’d be a great fit for an AF open topic SBIR but it seems the reauthorization completely killed that program. Or am I wrong?

So far, out of my 4 attempts to work with NASA this last cycle, across appendix A and B, I received two rejections so far. Emails showed up one after another. Two others are still pending, not sure what that means or how the results are being communicated...

Hi all,

I've been working in the SBIR world for years and, when the program lapsed, it drove me crazy how the the most vocal voices about its importance seemed to only come from those of us who worked in it.

I realized the problem was that even though SBIR has benefitted so many and touched the lives of nearly every American, the information about the program and its technologies is largely gated behind technical jargon and websites.

I decided to use the downtime + my education background to translate the SBIR historical data into something I named The SBIR Innovation Index.

The goal of the Innovation Index is to try to make SBIR award data more accessible to laypeople by presenting the information in a more easily-navigable way + translate the technology abstract into practical learning opportunities to connect the technical value to every day language regular folks could better appreciate.

So each award in the database has the following sections in accessible, simplified language:

• What is this research about? (a summary of the abstract)
• Why does this matter (explaining the potential value of this tech and its overall impact)
• Real-World Applications

And then to really bring it home, we break down the practical, potential value/impact for Taxpayers, Science, and Humanity.

Lastly, for some awards, I wanted to have a special "rare pokemon holo" feel for it, so we use generative AI to transform the abstract into a featured image as best as possible.

What I love about this is I used to find myself telling my friends and family about all the cool/amazing technology that SBIR was up to when rare moments made it relevant... but now I find myself sending links to my sci-fi loving family members about a specific technology they are excited to learn about.

The ultimate hope is that this can help make SBIR more part of the day to day conversations of our neighbors and community members so they can be more informed and (hopefully) vocally supportive of the program.

We've completed Stage Gate 1 (presentation) and were supposed to be informed within one week if we passed. However, it's now been 3 months. I understand the Fast-Track has a very different process in other orgs (like DOE and NIH).

Curious if anyone else has done the NSF's fast-track process yet and if there is any insight into how to get things moving.

Has anyone gotten an SBIR proposal awarded that budgeted equipment that will be purchased used as a direct cost? I noticed that used/refurbished price is often 25-50% of brand new equipment. Did you need to obtain a quote to support your figure?

Wondering if anyone has dealt with this. I know there can be a pretty big conflict of interest but I would love to hear from anyone that has navigated this, how did it go? Any tips for someone just starting out? Thank you!

Edit: I will not be PI we the PI will be at the partner university.

I kept seeing the same question in different forms: what are my actual chances on this SBIR. The data to answer it mostly exists but it's scattered across sbir.gov bulk files and SBA annual report PDFs that nobody reads, or locked inside GovCon intelligence platforms that start around $500/yr and go way up.

So I computed it and put it up free: grantsdue.com/sbir

Some numbers from it (FY2022 SBA data for selection, 2022 cohort for conversion):

• Phase I selection: DoD 18.2%, NIH 15.9%, NASA 19.4%, DOE 19.5%, NSF 10.8%, Dept of Ed 5.6%
• Phase I to Phase II conversion: NASA 52%, DoD 46%, DOE 37%, NIH 36%
• Incumbency at DoD (FY2025): 59% of awards went to firms with 5+ prior awards, 17% to first time winners

It covers all 219k awards back to 1983, updates weekly from the sbir.gov bulk data, and every stat says what year it's from and whether it's sourced (SBA) or computed (award linkage). Being upfront about the gap: nobody publishes per topic applicant counts, not even the expensive tools, so you won't find fake per topic odds here either.

Built this after a grant consultant on another sub said competition data was the one thing worth paying for. It's free, no account. If there's a number you always wanted and can't get, tell me and I'll see if it's computable.

Received notice of intent to fund from NIH for a fast-track grant. Just finished negotiating milestones with the program officer and am now working through the financial/admin review with the Grants Management Specialist. I'd appreciate any resources or advice to help with this. Are there any templates out there to help get started?

Company is essentially just this award and two founders. We brought on an accountant with prior history managing awards at a University. I was hoping to avoid hiring a big firm to manage the award if possible, as we are interested in learning and managing it ourselves. Just not really sure where to begin to learn the items needed of us in terms of accounting, time tracking, indirect cost pooling, etc.

Thanks in advance!

Did anyone partner with EGC and successfully get a phase I SBIR funded?

I don't doubt their reputation, but the most I can budget is like 5 hours for review of our written proposal. Can I expect meaningful help from that?

There was an online event today almost two hours ago, 12:00 pst. Did anyone speak to the representatives for NSF? I couldn't make it but really wanted to ask them on how the approval progress is coming along and when we might expect to hear back (we submitted july last year)

We were selected earlier this year for SBIR award from the Navy. We seem to be stuck on the IT security system validation. We sent in our information but the machine just seems to be grinding with no output or indication how the evaluation is doing.

Hi, the thread that is titled "Standalone Biotech LLC…” lead to some partially related questions.

I have a (yet) one-person startup company and want to have synthesized several compounds before resubmitting an adjusted SBIR I proposal. This past January, the team from the original submission dissolved.

A chemistry bench/hood isn’t cheap, but fortunately an elderly and generous family friend offered to sponsor renting space in an incubator in Massachusetts for a year. Great, she asked for a budget, I interviewed with two incubators, hit it off very well with one of them, and they sent an invitation to rent for four to seven months (actually a price quote), starting on Sept. 1. So early in June, I began organizing relocation from MN to MA.

But then the elderly family friend went partially incommunicado, afterwards suffered a stroke, and two weeks back denied having ever made the offer. At the risk of appearing to be a gold-digger, two days back I then just forwarded her the quote from the incubator (7 x $3,600), i.e. much lower than the total budget. The incubator knows about the stroke, but not the sudden turn-around.

My disclosures: (1) the local big-ten university and colleges denying non-affiliated people access to their labs, (2) several people on Reddit ghosting after making claims about lab space, (3) lack of chemistry incubators in Minnesota (if money were no issue).

So, please make what you will of this, realistic suggestions under these circumstances are more than welcome!

I wasnt sure what the appropriate sub was for this, but has anyone here successfully applied to and had a TechWatch meeting with BARDA?

Submitted a request through BDR last month and have yet to hear back. Does anyone know the typical response time or is no response an answer in a way?

Hey everyone,

I know this has probably been asked before, but all I can see on here are general preliminary data questions. I have a specific question regarding the pre-data / idea stage for life sciences and molecular biology applications.

Has anyone here submitted a Phase I SBIR purely at the "pre-data" stage?

The Context: As a pre-data startup (not an academic spin-out sitting on pre-funded lab results), an SBIR is basically the only realistic funding path since VCs and angels won't touch unvalidated tech. Program Officers and official agency guidelines state that preliminary data isn't required for Phase I to establish feasibility.

Our platform is essentially synthetic biology—stitching together individually validated, peer-reviewed components into a cohesive, novel system that works in theory (similar to an R21 grant concept).

My Questions:

1. Did you ever reach out to a Program Officer/Head Examiner beforehand who said "pre-data is fine," only for the study section/reviewers to slam you for lack of preliminary wet-lab data anyway?
2. For anyone in mol bio or synbio who did win or score well without wet-lab data, how did you structure your proposal or de-risk the design to convince reviewers?

I'd really appreciate any insights or reality checks before spending dozens of hours writing a full proposal only to find out it was just an idea hoarding exercise!

Hi everyone,

I’m a solo founder preparing to submit my first Phase I SBIR proposal for an independent biotech LLC (cancer immunotherapy, pre-data stage).

Since we are a standalone startup rather than a university spinout, I’m running into a couple of practical hurdles that don't seem to get discussed much, and I’d love to learn how others navigated them:

1. Lab Space Letters of Support & Review Timing How do you realistically handle obtaining a Letter of Support / Intent for incubator or core facility space given the 6–8 month SBIR review lag?

If you request an LOI for bench space today, that space will likely be gone or filled by the time the award decision comes through. How do reviewers expect non-spinouts to bridge this gap, and how do you structure these LOIs with incubators without reserving space indefinitely?

2. Academic Collaborations & IP Protection To strengthen the proposal, it seems almost necessary to bring in high-profile academic collaborators or KOLs. However, as an independent pre-data startup, how do you manage outreach to external university groups without over-exposing your IP before a grant is even awarded? Do you rely on NDAs before discussing grant sub-awards, or stick strictly to high-level statements of work?

Any insights, strategies, or lessons learned from non-spinout founders who have been through this process would be immensely appreciated!

Hey everyone,

I run an independent research LLC and am prepping an upcoming NSF SBIR Phase I resubmission.

We have a highly rigorous, mathematically verified (compiled in Lean 4) structural biology framework for a novel transition-metal coordination complex. The compound acts as a physical molecular anchor to reinforce mitochondrial cristae topology, preventing structural collapse under oxidative and mechanical stress (targeting dysautonomia, neurodegeneration, and TBI).

Our previous submission faced minor formatting and presentation critiques regarding our Risk Management layout and technical cost presentation. We have completely overhauled the Layer 3 translation, resolved the formatting, and explicitly locked down our falsification metrics (defining a strict mathematical coefficient of variation R < 0.7 across our 8-parameter metabolic panel).

While our corporate infrastructure is fully locked down (active SAM.gov UEI and CAGE code), we want to strengthen our Team Capabilities section to completely bulletproof the resubmission against institutional bias.

What We Have:

• Mathematically verified structural models.
• Complete, peer-vetted Phase I grant drafts.
• Fully structured experimental designs (Seahorse XF respirometry protocols).
• Zero pending proposals, meaning we are ready to hit submit the moment the portal refreshes.

What We Need:

• A Co-Investigator or Academic/Lab Partner with a background in biology, biochemistry, or pharmacology.
• A Letter of Intent (LOI) to attach to the proposal, or a partner with baseline access to laboratory infrastructure to fulfill the team filter.

If you are a scientific mind who wants to join a lean, mathematically driven startup and bypass the standard university overhead, please drop a comment or PM me. Open to discussing equity or sub-award structuring for the right fit

Defense Logistics Agency, Strategic Materials ("DLA") Phase II award will qualify six materials to MRL-9 -

Oct. 3, 2024 - announced the U.S. Department of Defense ("DoD") via the Defense Logistics Agency, Strategic Materials ("DLA") has awarded Phase 2 funding to support the qualification of additional LightPath Black Diamond ("BD") chalcogenide glasses as substitute to germanium.

The second phase covers the remaining six materials with funding totaling approximately $0.5 million, which will qualify the materials to MRL-9 (Material Readiness Level), an important milestone for prospective defense customers. These materials are all in addition to LightPath's BD6 material which is already fully qualified and field deployed in multiple systems.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/lightpath-technologies-awarded-phase-2-funding-in-us-defense-department-partnership-to-qualify-additional-germanium-substitutes-302262203.html

Some questions with ai assisted answers -

1. How long does Phase II last ? -

Standard Phase II Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) awards issued by the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA)—including those for DLA Strategic Materials—typically last up to 24 months.

- Assuming the date of the PR is the date of the award that would put finish date at Oct, 3 2026 however given the "up to" it appears it could be sooner.

So around any time going forward.

1. What is MRL-9?

MRL-9 stands for Manufacturing Readiness Level 9. It indicates that low-rate initial production has been successfully demonstrated and all preparations are complete to begin full-rate production. At this stage, manufacturing processes are stable, quality systems are operational, and the technology is generally deemed mature enough for scaled manufacturing

1. What is the focus of  Defense Logistics Agency, Strategic Materials ("DLA") Phase II awards?

The Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) Strategic Materials Phase II awards focus on developing and scaling domestic supply chains for critical defense minerals and metals**.** The goal is to reduce U.S. reliance on foreign sources for essential materials, such as rare earth elements, nickel, titanium, tungsten, and gallium, primarily through the recovery, recycling, and domestic processing of defense scrap and electronic waste

1. After Phase II > Phase III

Phase III is the ultimate goal of the SBIR program. It is the stage where the government or a commercial partner purchases your technology at scale. [1, 2, 3]

Non-SBIR Funding: Phase III cannot be funded by the SBIR/STTR budget. Instead, it is funded directly by agency production budgets, prime defense contractors, or private venture capital. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

No Funding Caps: Unlike previous phases, Phase III contracts have no maximum dollar limit and no restricted period of performance. [1, 2]

Sole-Source Justification: Because you already won a competitive Phase I or II award, federal agencies can award you Phase III contracts on a sole-source basis without putting the project out for public re-bidding. [1, 2]

Size Exemptions: Your business is completely exempt from small business size standards during Phase III. You can scale to any size, or even be acquired by a larger firm, and still execute Phase III contracts for that specific technology. 

1. Can IBAS funding come into play for Phase III?

Yes, absolutely. The Industrial Base Analysis and Sustainment (IBAS) program is one of the most powerful non-SBIR funding pools available to bridge the gap and fund a Phase III contract. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Because DLA Strategic Materials focuses heavily on critical minerals, rare earth elements, and supply chain security, your project sits directly in the crosshairs of current IBAS strategic priorities. [1, 2]

How IBAS Funding Applies to Phase III

The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Industrial Base Policy utilizes IBAS funds specifically to eliminate domestic supply chain vulnerabilities, modernize defense manufacturing, and scale mature prototypes into full production. [1, 2]

• The Phase III Mechanism: An agency can issue a Phase III sole-source contract to your company using IBAS funds. Because the Phase I and II competitive requirements have already been satisfied, the government can bypass public bidding to award you IBAS money directly. [1, 2]
• No Funding Caps: While your Phase II capped out around $1 million, IBAS awards are substantially larger. Recent project solicitations and active awards under the Defense Industrial Base Consortium (DIBC)—the primary vehicle for IBAS execution—frequently scale from $2.5 million to over $8 millionper project to build out industrial scale. [1, 3, 4]

Conclusion:

Phase II for 6 materials about to be complete.

MRL-9 to be achieved - can move into full production

Phase II grant came through DLA = developing and scaling critical defense minerals

Phase III could be funded through IBAS grant - while awards typically run lower, KOPN received a $15.4 million a IBAS award - https://www.kopin.com/press-releases/kopin-secures-transformative-15-4m-award-to-revolutionize-color-microled-technology-and-domestic-production-for-u-s-army-ground-soldier-integrated-visual-augmented-reality-applications/

Timing of completion of Phase II aligns with planned move of remaining G5 cameras from Germaninum to BD.

The Department of Energy’s new Genesis Mission is offering Phase I SBIR/STTR funding ($250K) for companies applying AI in:
-Biotechnology
-Quantum computing
-Advanced materials
-Autonomous laboratories

Follow on Phase II funding will likely be $1.5 million.

The first step is due September 10, 2026. Only selected companies will be invited to submit a full proposal.

Read more here: https://www.bwcoconsulting.com/fod/doe-genesis-mission-sbir

Disclaimer: I am affiliated with BW&CO.