Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Dustin Huber's avatar

Ben, great article. I would argue that there is a responsibility on the side of the government to ensure that actual requirements are tied to SBIR/STTR topics, which the INNOVATE Act also addresses. RIght now, any technical lead can generate a topic, regardless of whether there is any funding or acquisition tail associated with the project. It's not the fault of SBIR mills that some of these are "science projects", with absolutely zero chance of getting more federal dollars after SBIR money runs dry. Low TRL projects are also tough to transition - as you've previously mentioned, '80's level funding and the current SBIR timeline doesn't allow for DARPA-like efforts that will likely take 15 - 20 years of R&D to bear fruit. The risk assessment from the government side on whether to pursue these projects using SBIR dollars is skewed because of the perception of SBIR being "free money", or worse, a "tax" on the budget that must be clawed back regardless of ROI.

Expand full comment
itsaworkout55's avatar

💪💪

Expand full comment

No posts