How to Prepare for Review
Although SBIR/STTR Program Directors and reviewers are looking for science-base applications with scientific merit, it is important to note that applications are not compared against one another during the review process. Each proposal is scored according to its contribution to program objectives, scientific merit, and marketability.
Program Expectations
The Program Director (PD) is willing to give an informal review of proposals if they are emailed one month before the formal NIH review date (March 5, July 5, and November 5). The PD expects you to:
- Address all program requirements.
- Provide a focused and comprehensive proposal.
- Include appropriate team members and consultants.
- Define your population(s) and include sample sizes, gender, age, race, culture, and other needed demographic information.
- Provided needed human subjects information and adhere to all HS policies.
- Use appropriate research and evaluation methods.
- Use appropriate modes of media communication for the proposed population.
- Provide adequate documentation (literature search, market search, company achievements, letters of support, table of product comparison).
- Provide marketing and evaluation plans if your proposal is a Phase II or Fast Track application.
- Provide sufficient detail in the categories to be reviewed.
- Justify excessive budgets.
Reviewer Expectations
All SBIR and STTR grant applications are reviewed by Special Emphasis Panels (SEP) coordinated by the Center for Scientific Review (CSR). An NIH Scientific Review Administrator (SRA) resides over an external group of academic experts and small business owners experienced in the topic area and in the areas of public health, communications, and/or media technology.
The emphasis panels who review the NCI Multimedia Technology/Health Communication Grants for the Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences assess the following, where applicable, in Phase I and Phase II grants:
- qualifications and experience of the principal investigator, research team, and consultants;
- prior accomplishments in the areas of research and product development;
- the importance and need for the proposed product;
- how the proposed product will help to meet the NCI mission or objectives;
- potential for commercialization;
- adequacy of facilities to conduct research;
- appropriateness of the requested budget;
- scientific and technical merit;
- adherence to human subjects guidelines;
- conduct of an adequate literature search and market search;
- appropriateness of population, settings for testing and evaluation, data collection methods, barriers to product use, and appeal to potential users;
- appropriate developmental and evaluation methods;
- cost- and time-effectiveness of the product;
- inclusion of advisory group for evaluation purposes;
- solicitation of interested parties as promoters or collaborators and commercialization plans for Phase II and Fast Track applications.
The primary SEP for this program includes about 20-25 reviewers. All applications are assigned 2-3 primary reviewers before the SEP meets. When the SEP convenes, it agrees on which half of the applications will be scored and discussed, and which applications will not receive a score or be discussed at the review.
All applicants receive a Summary Statement; it includes highlights of the discussion by the SEP, unedited critiques of the reviewers, and administrative notes, when applicable. Scored applications range between 100 and 350. Non-scored applications are given the symbol **. Initial applications that are not scored or that do not receive a score adequate for funding may be resubmitted two more times for review.
SBIR/STTR Fast Track Reviews
In 1996, the Fast Track application was developed at NIH to expedite the review and funding of scientifically meritorious small business applications that indicate high potential for commercialization. Applicants submit Phase I and Phase II applications simultaneously. Details about the Fast Track application and instructions for completing these forms are found at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/sbir.htm
Reviewers look for Phase I milestones that are clear and measurable and that can be achieved prior to starting the Phase II, and details about the development, implementation, and evaluation of the Phase II project. Both applications must meet the reviewers' expectations to receive a single score. If the Phase I has merit but, the Phase II needs work, the entire application must be revised and resubmitted.
Important Review Links
|
