Warning: Declaration of Graphene_Description_Walker::start_el(&$output, $item, $depth, $args) should be compatible with Walker_Nav_Menu::start_el(&$output, $item, $depth = 0, $args = Array, $id = 0) in /home/resear15/public_html/wp-content/themes/graphene/inc/theme-menu.php on line 49

Warning: Declaration of Walker_PageDescription::start_el(&$output, $page, $depth, $args, $current_page) should be compatible with Walker_Page::start_el(&$output, $page, $depth = 0, $args = Array, $current_page = 0) in /home/resear15/public_html/wp-content/themes/graphene/inc/theme-menu.php on line 160
NAVAIR SBIR Advice: Part 3 of 3 » DIEHL Research Grant Services
Warning: count(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable in /home/resear15/public_html/wp-includes/post-template.php on line 284



Sep 26

NAVAIR SBIR Advice: Part 3 of 3

Understand the Review Process

(Part 1 and Part 2 published previously)

The “SBIR Program” is not one thing. Each government department (NSF, DoD, NIH, NASA, etc.) has broad latitude in structuring its own version of an SBIR program. Furthermore, within large departments like DoD, each agency (Army, Navy, etc.) has its own rules. Even within an agency there are idiosyncrasies in how the proposals are reviewed, meaning that NAVAIR has different internal policies from NAVSEA. Dan was kind enough to share some insights into how NAVAIR reviews topics, and I’ve distilled those into three points.

  1. NAVAIR actively seeks to fund research on each topic. Prior to posting its solicitation for proposals, NAVAIR ranks and vets the topics. The final solicitation only includes topics for which there is adequate funding. The result is an “implicit commitment” by the Navy to support every topic. Exceptions occur, of course, and sometimes the reviewers rank all the proposals poorly, in which case no proposals are funded. In general, though, NAVAIR does not post “dud” topics.
  2. The TPOC leads the review process. The TPOC selects other members of the review committee from people within the government (not necessarily NAVAIR or even Navy). This is quite different from departments like NSF or NIH, which follow a more academic “peer-review” model.
  3. NAVAIR prefers to fund 2 or 3 different approaches during Phase I. These different approaches compete during Phase I. Usually only one approach is awarded a Phase II, unless the approaches end up solving complementary aspects of the problem. In that case, the TPOC might be able to argue that two Phase II awards should be made.


Entering “personal opinion” mode (i.e., this is the opinion of Damon W. Diehl and is not approved or endorsed by the Navy)

These three points capture what I admire most about NAVAIR’s implementation of the SBIR program. Eliminating “dud” topics at the outset easily saves small businesses millions of dollars of wasted effort every single year. Letting the TPOCs lead the review process ensures that the topics that win are aligned to the technical challenges the TPOCs are facing. Funding multiple Phase I topics maximizes competition between technical approaches and ensures that every small business puts in its best efforts during Phase I, as Phase II funding is not assured. Together these three features of the NAVAIR SBIR program have fostered technological gains that have had very broad impacts both on defense and on the economy.

That wraps up this series. My apologies for the long delay in updates. I have an embarrassingly long queue of backlogged posts (including a new DoD SBIR win for one of my clients!), and I hope to churn those out rapidly.


  1. Greg Ames

    Mr. Dhiel,
    Thank you very much for the tips. I’ve bookmarked your web site and I look forward to working with you or taking one of your seminars.
    Best to you,

  2. James Zott

    The only thing I could add is the DoD pre posts the topics before the bid process begins. There are several reasons they are pulled after that stage, but usually the topics will be refined for the next cycle.The topics are not duds but are something just short of the NDAA technology thrust level. If selected for Phase I, make sure you talk often to your technology lead, it can make a difference for the Phase II selection since you will know more of the specifics. But don’t bug them too much since they already have a full time job and monitoring SBIR topics is an additional duity. Make sure that the Statement of Work included is clear, and to point. Clearly identify your costs and subcontractors. Make sure you identify early a marketing team. All these will make it easier to have a successful product / technology to sell later on.

    1. Damon Diehl

      Thanks for dropping in, James, and my apologies for letting your comment linger so long before posting it. Great advice from you all-around.

Comments have been disabled.