introduction to small business research paper

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Research paper

Writing a Research Paper Introduction | Step-by-Step Guide

Published on September 24, 2022 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on March 27, 2023.

The introduction to a research paper is where you set up your topic and approach for the reader. It has several key goals:

• Present your topic and get the reader interested
• Provide background or summarize existing research
• Position your own approach
• Detail your specific research problem and problem statement
• Give an overview of the paper’s structure

The introduction looks slightly different depending on whether your paper presents the results of original empirical research or constructs an argument by engaging with a variety of sources.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Step 1: introduce your topic, step 2: describe the background, step 3: establish your research problem, step 4: specify your objective(s), step 5: map out your paper, research paper introduction examples, frequently asked questions about the research paper introduction.

The first job of the introduction is to tell the reader what your topic is and why it’s interesting or important. This is generally accomplished with a strong opening hook.

The hook is a striking opening sentence that clearly conveys the relevance of your topic. Think of an interesting fact or statistic, a strong statement, a question, or a brief anecdote that will get the reader wondering about your topic.

For example, the following could be an effective hook for an argumentative paper about the environmental impact of cattle farming:

A more empirical paper investigating the relationship of Instagram use with body image issues in adolescent girls might use the following hook:

Don’t feel that your hook necessarily has to be deeply impressive or creative. Clarity and relevance are still more important than catchiness. The key thing is to guide the reader into your topic and situate your ideas.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

This part of the introduction differs depending on what approach your paper is taking.

In a more argumentative paper, you’ll explore some general background here. In a more empirical paper, this is the place to review previous research and establish how yours fits in.

Argumentative paper: Background information

After you’ve caught your reader’s attention, specify a bit more, providing context and narrowing down your topic.

Provide only the most relevant background information. The introduction isn’t the place to get too in-depth; if more background is essential to your paper, it can appear in the body .

Empirical paper: Describing previous research

For a paper describing original research, you’ll instead provide an overview of the most relevant research that has already been conducted. This is a sort of miniature literature review —a sketch of the current state of research into your topic, boiled down to a few sentences.

This should be informed by genuine engagement with the literature. Your search can be less extensive than in a full literature review, but a clear sense of the relevant research is crucial to inform your own work.

Begin by establishing the kinds of research that have been done, and end with limitations or gaps in the research that you intend to respond to.

The next step is to clarify how your own research fits in and what problem it addresses.

Argumentative paper: Emphasize importance

In an argumentative research paper, you can simply state the problem you intend to discuss, and what is original or important about your argument.

Empirical paper: Relate to the literature

In an empirical research paper, try to lead into the problem on the basis of your discussion of the literature. Think in terms of these questions:

• What research gap is your work intended to fill?
• What limitations in previous work does it address?
• What contribution to knowledge does it make?

You can make the connection between your problem and the existing research using phrases like the following.

Now you’ll get into the specifics of what you intend to find out or express in your research paper.

The way you frame your research objectives varies. An argumentative paper presents a thesis statement, while an empirical paper generally poses a research question (sometimes with a hypothesis as to the answer).

Argumentative paper: Thesis statement

The thesis statement expresses the position that the rest of the paper will present evidence and arguments for. It can be presented in one or two sentences, and should state your position clearly and directly, without providing specific arguments for it at this point.

Empirical paper: Research question and hypothesis

The research question is the question you want to answer in an empirical research paper.

Present your research question clearly and directly, with a minimum of discussion at this point. The rest of the paper will be taken up with discussing and investigating this question; here you just need to express it.

A research question can be framed either directly or indirectly.

• This study set out to answer the following question: What effects does daily use of Instagram have on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls?
• We investigated the effects of daily Instagram use on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls.

If your research involved testing hypotheses , these should be stated along with your research question. They are usually presented in the past tense, since the hypothesis will already have been tested by the time you are writing up your paper.

For example, the following hypothesis might respond to the research question above:

Scribbr Citation Checker New

The AI-powered Citation Checker helps you avoid common mistakes such as:

• Missing commas and periods
• Incorrect usage of “et al.”
• Ampersands (&) in narrative citations
• Missing reference entries

The final part of the introduction is often dedicated to a brief overview of the rest of the paper.

In a paper structured using the standard scientific “introduction, methods, results, discussion” format, this isn’t always necessary. But if your paper is structured in a less predictable way, it’s important to describe the shape of it for the reader.

If included, the overview should be concise, direct, and written in the present tense.

• This paper will first discuss several examples of survey-based research into adolescent social media use, then will go on to …
• This paper first discusses several examples of survey-based research into adolescent social media use, then goes on to …

Full examples of research paper introductions are shown in the tabs below: one for an argumentative paper, the other for an empirical paper.

• Argumentative paper
• Empirical paper

Are cows responsible for climate change? A recent study (RIVM, 2019) shows that cattle farmers account for two thirds of agricultural nitrogen emissions in the Netherlands. These emissions result from nitrogen in manure, which can degrade into ammonia and enter the atmosphere. The study’s calculations show that agriculture is the main source of nitrogen pollution, accounting for 46% of the country’s total emissions. By comparison, road traffic and households are responsible for 6.1% each, the industrial sector for 1%. While efforts are being made to mitigate these emissions, policymakers are reluctant to reckon with the scale of the problem. The approach presented here is a radical one, but commensurate with the issue. This paper argues that the Dutch government must stimulate and subsidize livestock farmers, especially cattle farmers, to transition to sustainable vegetable farming. It first establishes the inadequacy of current mitigation measures, then discusses the various advantages of the results proposed, and finally addresses potential objections to the plan on economic grounds.

The rise of social media has been accompanied by a sharp increase in the prevalence of body image issues among women and girls. This correlation has received significant academic attention: Various empirical studies have been conducted into Facebook usage among adolescent girls (Tiggermann & Slater, 2013; Meier & Gray, 2014). These studies have consistently found that the visual and interactive aspects of the platform have the greatest influence on body image issues. Despite this, highly visual social media (HVSM) such as Instagram have yet to be robustly researched. This paper sets out to address this research gap. We investigated the effects of daily Instagram use on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls. It was hypothesized that daily Instagram use would be associated with an increase in body image concerns and a decrease in self-esteem ratings.

The introduction of a research paper includes several key elements:

• A hook to catch the reader’s interest
• Relevant background on the topic
• Details of your research problem

and your problem statement

• A thesis statement or research question
• Sometimes an overview of the paper

Don’t feel that you have to write the introduction first. The introduction is often one of the last parts of the research paper you’ll write, along with the conclusion.

This is because it can be easier to introduce your paper once you’ve already written the body ; you may not have the clearest idea of your arguments until you’ve written them, and things can change during the writing process .

The way you present your research problem in your introduction varies depending on the nature of your research paper . A research paper that presents a sustained argument will usually encapsulate this argument in a thesis statement .

A research paper designed to present the results of empirical research tends to present a research question that it seeks to answer. It may also include a hypothesis —a prediction that will be confirmed or disproved by your research.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Caulfield, J. (2023, March 27). Writing a Research Paper Introduction | Step-by-Step Guide. Scribbr. Retrieved June 24, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-paper/research-paper-introduction/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, writing a research paper conclusion | step-by-step guide, research paper format | apa, mla, & chicago templates, what is your plagiarism score.

Get science-backed answers as you write with Paperpal's Research feature

How to Write a Research Paper Introduction (with Examples)

The research paper introduction section, along with the Title and Abstract, can be considered the face of any research paper. The following article is intended to guide you in organizing and writing the research paper introduction for a quality academic article or dissertation.

The research paper introduction aims to present the topic to the reader. A study will only be accepted for publishing if you can ascertain that the available literature cannot answer your research question. So it is important to ensure that you have read important studies on that particular topic, especially those within the last five to ten years, and that they are properly referenced in this section. 1 What should be included in the research paper introduction is decided by what you want to tell readers about the reason behind the research and how you plan to fill the knowledge gap. The best research paper introduction provides a systemic review of existing work and demonstrates additional work that needs to be done. It needs to be brief, captivating, and well-referenced; a well-drafted research paper introduction will help the researcher win half the battle.

The introduction for a research paper is where you set up your topic and approach for the reader. It has several key goals:

• Present your research topic
• Capture reader interest
• Summarize existing research
• Position your own approach
• Define your specific research problem and problem statement
• Highlight the novelty and contributions of the study
• Give an overview of the paper’s structure

The research paper introduction can vary in size and structure depending on whether your paper presents the results of original empirical research or is a review paper. Some research paper introduction examples are only half a page while others are a few pages long. In many cases, the introduction will be shorter than all of the other sections of your paper; its length depends on the size of your paper as a whole.

• Break through writer’s block. Write your research paper introduction with Paperpal Copilot

Table of Contents

What is the introduction for a research paper, why is the introduction important in a research paper, craft a compelling introduction section with paperpal. try now, 1. introduce the research topic:, 2. determine a research niche:, 3. place your research within the research niche:, craft accurate research paper introductions with paperpal. start writing now, frequently asked questions on research paper introduction, key points to remember.

The introduction in a research paper is placed at the beginning to guide the reader from a broad subject area to the specific topic that your research addresses. They present the following information to the reader

• Scope: The topic covered in the research paper
• Context: Background of your topic
• Importance: Why your research matters in that particular area of research and the industry problem that can be targeted

The research paper introduction conveys a lot of information and can be considered an essential roadmap for the rest of your paper. A good introduction for a research paper is important for the following reasons:

• It stimulates your reader’s interest: A good introduction section can make your readers want to read your paper by capturing their interest. It informs the reader what they are going to learn and helps determine if the topic is of interest to them.
• It helps the reader understand the research background: Without a clear introduction, your readers may feel confused and even struggle when reading your paper. A good research paper introduction will prepare them for the in-depth research to come. It provides you the opportunity to engage with the readers and demonstrate your knowledge and authority on the specific topic.
• It explains why your research paper is worth reading: Your introduction can convey a lot of information to your readers. It introduces the topic, why the topic is important, and how you plan to proceed with your research.
• It helps guide the reader through the rest of the paper: The research paper introduction gives the reader a sense of the nature of the information that will support your arguments and the general organization of the paragraphs that will follow. It offers an overview of what to expect when reading the main body of your paper.

What are the parts of introduction in the research?

A good research paper introduction section should comprise three main elements: 2

• What is known: This sets the stage for your research. It informs the readers of what is known on the subject.
• What is lacking: This is aimed at justifying the reason for carrying out your research. This could involve investigating a new concept or method or building upon previous research.
• What you aim to do: This part briefly states the objectives of your research and its major contributions. Your detailed hypothesis will also form a part of this section.

How to write a research paper introduction?

The first step in writing the research paper introduction is to inform the reader what your topic is and why it’s interesting or important. This is generally accomplished with a strong opening statement. The second step involves establishing the kinds of research that have been done and ending with limitations or gaps in the research that you intend to address. Finally, the research paper introduction clarifies how your own research fits in and what problem it addresses. If your research involved testing hypotheses, these should be stated along with your research question. The hypothesis should be presented in the past tense since it will have been tested by the time you are writing the research paper introduction.

The following key points, with examples, can guide you when writing the research paper introduction section:

• Highlight the importance of the research field or topic
• Describe the background of the topic
• Present an overview of current research on the topic

Example: The inclusion of experiential and competency-based learning has benefitted electronics engineering education. Industry partnerships provide an excellent alternative for students wanting to engage in solving real-world challenges. Industry-academia participation has grown in recent years due to the need for skilled engineers with practical training and specialized expertise. However, from the educational perspective, many activities are needed to incorporate sustainable development goals into the university curricula and consolidate learning innovation in universities.

• Reveal a gap in existing research or oppose an existing assumption
• Formulate the research question

Example: There have been plausible efforts to integrate educational activities in higher education electronics engineering programs. However, very few studies have considered using educational research methods for performance evaluation of competency-based higher engineering education, with a focus on technical and or transversal skills. To remedy the current need for evaluating competencies in STEM fields and providing sustainable development goals in engineering education, in this study, a comparison was drawn between study groups without and with industry partners.

• State the purpose of your study
• Highlight the key characteristics of your study
• Describe important results
• Highlight the novelty of the study.
• Offer a brief overview of the structure of the paper.

Example: The study evaluates the main competency needed in the applied electronics course, which is a fundamental core subject for many electronics engineering undergraduate programs. We compared two groups, without and with an industrial partner, that offered real-world projects to solve during the semester. This comparison can help determine significant differences in both groups in terms of developing subject competency and achieving sustainable development goals.

Write a Research Paper Introduction in Minutes with Paperpal

Paperpal Copilot is a generative AI-powered academic writing assistant. It’s trained on millions of published scholarly articles and over 20 years of STM experience. Paperpal Copilot helps authors write better and faster with:

• Real-time writing suggestions
• In-depth checks for language and grammar correction
• Paraphrasing to add variety, ensure academic tone, and trim text to meet journal limits

With Paperpal Copilot, create a research paper introduction effortlessly. In this step-by-step guide, we’ll walk you through how Paperpal transforms your initial ideas into a polished and publication-ready introduction.

How to use Paperpal to write the Introduction section

Step 1: Sign up on Paperpal and click on the Copilot feature, under this choose Outlines > Research Article > Introduction

Step 2: Add your unstructured notes or initial draft, whether in English or another language, to Paperpal, which is to be used as the base for your content.

Step 3: Fill in the specifics, such as your field of study, brief description or details you want to include, which will help the AI generate the outline for your Introduction.

Step 4: Use this outline and sentence suggestions to develop your content, adding citations where needed and modifying it to align with your specific research focus.

Step 5: Turn to Paperpal’s granular language checks to refine your content, tailor it to reflect your personal writing style, and ensure it effectively conveys your message.

You can use the same process to develop each section of your article, and finally your research paper in half the time and without any of the stress.

The purpose of the research paper introduction is to introduce the reader to the problem definition, justify the need for the study, and describe the main theme of the study. The aim is to gain the reader’s attention by providing them with necessary background information and establishing the main purpose and direction of the research.

The length of the research paper introduction can vary across journals and disciplines. While there are no strict word limits for writing the research paper introduction, an ideal length would be one page, with a maximum of 400 words over 1-4 paragraphs. Generally, it is one of the shorter sections of the paper as the reader is assumed to have at least a reasonable knowledge about the topic. 2 For example, for a study evaluating the role of building design in ensuring fire safety, there is no need to discuss definitions and nature of fire in the introduction; you could start by commenting upon the existing practices for fire safety and how your study will add to the existing knowledge and practice.

When deciding what to include in the research paper introduction, the rest of the paper should also be considered. The aim is to introduce the reader smoothly to the topic and facilitate an easy read without much dependency on external sources. 3 Below is a list of elements you can include to prepare a research paper introduction outline and follow it when you are writing the research paper introduction. Topic introduction: This can include key definitions and a brief history of the topic. Research context and background: Offer the readers some general information and then narrow it down to specific aspects. Details of the research you conducted: A brief literature review can be included to support your arguments or line of thought. Rationale for the study: This establishes the relevance of your study and establishes its importance. Importance of your research: The main contributions are highlighted to help establish the novelty of your study Research hypothesis: Introduce your research question and propose an expected outcome. Organization of the paper: Include a short paragraph of 3-4 sentences that highlights your plan for the entire paper

Cite only works that are most relevant to your topic; as a general rule, you can include one to three. Note that readers want to see evidence of original thinking. So it is better to avoid using too many references as it does not leave much room for your personal standpoint to shine through. Citations in your research paper introduction support the key points, and the number of citations depend on the subject matter and the point discussed. If the research paper introduction is too long or overflowing with citations, it is better to cite a few review articles rather than the individual articles summarized in the review. A good point to remember when citing research papers in the introduction section is to include at least one-third of the references in the introduction.

The literature review plays a significant role in the research paper introduction section. A good literature review accomplishes the following: Introduces the topic – Establishes the study’s significance – Provides an overview of the relevant literature – Provides context for the study using literature – Identifies knowledge gaps However, remember to avoid making the following mistakes when writing a research paper introduction: Do not use studies from the literature review to aggressively support your research Avoid direct quoting Do not allow literature review to be the focus of this section. Instead, the literature review should only aid in setting a foundation for the manuscript.

Remember the following key points for writing a good research paper introduction: 4

• Avoid stuffing too much general information: Avoid including what an average reader would know and include only that information related to the problem being addressed in the research paper introduction. For example, when describing a comparative study of non-traditional methods for mechanical design optimization, information related to the traditional methods and differences between traditional and non-traditional methods would not be relevant. In this case, the introduction for the research paper should begin with the state-of-the-art non-traditional methods and methods to evaluate the efficiency of newly developed algorithms.
• Avoid packing too many references: Cite only the required works in your research paper introduction. The other works can be included in the discussion section to strengthen your findings.
• Avoid extensive criticism of previous studies: Avoid being overly critical of earlier studies while setting the rationale for your study. A better place for this would be the Discussion section, where you can highlight the advantages of your method.
• Avoid describing conclusions of the study: When writing a research paper introduction remember not to include the findings of your study. The aim is to let the readers know what question is being answered. The actual answer should only be given in the Results and Discussion section.

To summarize, the research paper introduction section should be brief yet informative. It should convince the reader the need to conduct the study and motivate him to read further. If you’re feeling stuck or unsure, choose trusted AI academic writing assistants like Paperpal to effortlessly craft your research paper introduction and other sections of your research article.

1. Jawaid, S. A., & Jawaid, M. (2019). How to write introduction and discussion. Saudi Journal of Anaesthesia, 13(Suppl 1), S18.

2. Dewan, P., & Gupta, P. (2016). Writing the title, abstract and introduction: Looks matter!. Indian pediatrics, 53, 235-241.

3. Cetin, S., & Hackam, D. J. (2005). An approach to the writing of a scientific Manuscript1. Journal of Surgical Research, 128(2), 165-167.

4. Bavdekar, S. B. (2015). Writing introduction: Laying the foundations of a research paper. Journal of the Association of Physicians of India, 63(7), 44-6.

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 21+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

• Scientific Writing Style Guides Explained
• 5 Reasons for Rejection After Peer Review
• Ethical Research Practices For Research with Human Subjects
• 8 Most Effective Ways to Increase Motivation for Thesis Writing 

Practice vs. Practise: Learn the Difference

Academic paraphrasing: why paperpal’s rewrite should be your first choice , you may also like, how to write the first draft of a..., mla works cited page: format, template & examples, how to write a high-quality conference paper, academic editing: how to self-edit academic text with..., measuring academic success: definition & strategies for excellence, phd qualifying exam: tips for success , ai in education: it’s time to change the..., is it ethical to use ai-generated abstracts without..., what are journal guidelines on using generative ai..., quillbot review: features, pricing, and free alternatives.

• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
• EDIT Edit this Article
• EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
• Browse Articles
• Learn Something New
• Quizzes Hot
• This Or That Game
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• College University and Postgraduate
• Academic Writing
• Research Papers

How to Write a Research Introduction

Last Updated: December 6, 2023 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Megan Morgan, PhD . Megan Morgan is a Graduate Program Academic Advisor in the School of Public & International Affairs at the University of Georgia. She earned her PhD in English from the University of Georgia in 2015. There are 7 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 2,654,536 times.

The introduction to a research paper can be the most challenging part of the paper to write. The length of the introduction will vary depending on the type of research paper you are writing. An introduction should announce your topic, provide context and a rationale for your work, before stating your research questions and hypothesis. Well-written introductions set the tone for the paper, catch the reader's interest, and communicate the hypothesis or thesis statement.

Introducing the Topic of the Paper

• In scientific papers this is sometimes known as an "inverted triangle", where you start with the broadest material at the start, before zooming in on the specifics. [2] X Research source
• The sentence "Throughout the 20th century, our views of life on other planets have drastically changed" introduces a topic, but does so in broad terms.
• It provides the reader with an indication of the content of the essay and encourages them to read on.

• For example, if you were writing a paper about the behaviour of mice when exposed to a particular substance, you would include the word "mice", and the scientific name of the relevant compound in the first sentences.
• If you were writing a history paper about the impact of the First World War on gender relations in Britain, you should mention those key words in your first few lines.

• This is especially important if you are attempting to develop a new conceptualization that uses language and terminology your readers may be unfamiliar with.

• If you use an anecdote ensure that is short and highly relevant for your research. It has to function in the same way as an alternative opening, namely to announce the topic of your research paper to your reader.
• For example, if you were writing a sociology paper about re-offending rates among young offenders, you could include a brief story of one person whose story reflects and introduces your topic.
• This kind of approach is generally not appropriate for the introduction to a natural or physical sciences research paper where the writing conventions are different.

Establishing the Context for Your Paper

• It is important to be concise in the introduction, so provide an overview on recent developments in the primary research rather than a lengthy discussion.
• You can follow the "inverted triangle" principle to focus in from the broader themes to those to which you are making a direct contribution with your paper.
• A strong literature review presents important background information to your own research and indicates the importance of the field.

• By making clear reference to existing work you can demonstrate explicitly the specific contribution you are making to move the field forward.
• You can identify a gap in the existing scholarship and explain how you are addressing it and moving understanding forward.

• For example, if you are writing a scientific paper you could stress the merits of the experimental approach or models you have used.
• Stress what is novel in your research and the significance of your new approach, but don't give too much detail in the introduction.
• A stated rationale could be something like: "the study evaluates the previously unknown anti-inflammatory effects of a topical compound in order to evaluate its potential clinical uses".

Specifying Your Research Questions and Hypothesis

• The research question or questions generally come towards the end of the introduction, and should be concise and closely focused.
• The research question might recall some of the key words established in the first few sentences and the title of your paper.
• An example of a research question could be "what were the consequences of the North American Free Trade Agreement on the Mexican export economy?"
• This could be honed further to be specific by referring to a particular element of the Free Trade Agreement and the impact on a particular industry in Mexico, such as clothing manufacture.
• A good research question should shape a problem into a testable hypothesis.

• If possible try to avoid using the word "hypothesis" and rather make this implicit in your writing. This can make your writing appear less formulaic.
• In a scientific paper, giving a clear one-sentence overview of your results and their relation to your hypothesis makes the information clear and accessible. [10] X Trustworthy Source PubMed Central Journal archive from the U.S. National Institutes of Health Go to source
• An example of a hypothesis could be "mice deprived of food for the duration of the study were expected to become more lethargic than those fed normally".

• This is not always necessary and you should pay attention to the writing conventions in your discipline.
• In a natural sciences paper, for example, there is a fairly rigid structure which you will be following.
• A humanities or social science paper will most likely present more opportunities to deviate in how you structure your paper.

Research Introduction Help

Community Q&A

• Use your research papers' outline to help you decide what information to include when writing an introduction. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 1
• Consider drafting your introduction after you have already completed the rest of your research paper. Writing introductions last can help ensure that you don't leave out any major points. Thanks Helpful 0 Not Helpful 0

• Avoid emotional or sensational introductions; these can create distrust in the reader. Thanks Helpful 50 Not Helpful 12
• Generally avoid using personal pronouns in your introduction, such as "I," "me," "we," "us," "my," "mine," or "our." Thanks Helpful 31 Not Helpful 7
• Don't overwhelm the reader with an over-abundance of information. Keep the introduction as concise as possible by saving specific details for the body of your paper. Thanks Helpful 24 Not Helpful 14

You Might Also Like

• ↑ https://library.sacredheart.edu/c.php?g=29803&p=185916
• ↑ https://www.aresearchguide.com/inverted-pyramid-structure-in-writing.html
• ↑ https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/introduction
• ↑ https://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/PlanResearchPaper.html
• ↑ https://dept.writing.wisc.edu/wac/writing-an-introduction-for-a-scientific-paper/
• ↑ https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/assignments/planresearchpaper/
• ↑ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3178846/

About This Article

To introduce your research paper, use the first 1-2 sentences to describe your general topic, such as “women in World War I.” Include and define keywords, such as “gender relations,” to show your reader where you’re going. Mention previous research into the topic with a phrase like, “Others have studied…”, then transition into what your contribution will be and why it’s necessary. Finally, state the questions that your paper will address and propose your “answer” to them as your thesis statement. For more information from our English Ph.D. co-author about how to craft a strong hypothesis and thesis, keep reading! Did this summary help you? Yes No

• Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Abdulrahman Omar

Oct 5, 2018

Did this article help you?

May 9, 2021

Lavanya Gopakumar

Oct 1, 2016

Dengkai Zhang

May 14, 2018

Leslie Mae Cansana

Sep 22, 2016

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell or Share My Info
• Not Selling Info

Don’t miss out! Sign up for

wikiHow’s newsletter

An Assessment of the Small Business Innovation Research Program: Project Methodology (2004)

Chapter: 1. introduction.

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Methodology Paper 1. Introduction As the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program approached its twentieth year of operation, the U.S. Congress requested that the National Research Council (NRC) conduct a “comprehensive study of how the SBIR program has stimulated technological innovation and used small businesses to meet federal research and 1 development needs,” and to make recommendations on improvements to the program. Mandated as a part of SBIR’s renewal in 2000, the NRC study is to assess the SBIR program as administered at the five federal agencies that together make up 96 percent of SBIR program expenditures. The agencies, in order of program size, are DoD, NIH, NASA, DoE, and NSF. The objective of the study is not to consider if SBIR should exist or not—Congress has already decided affirmatively on this question. Rather, the NRC Committee conducting this study is charged with providing assessment-based findings to improve public understanding of the program as well as recommendations to improve the program’s effectiveness. In addition to setting out the study objectives, this report defines key concepts, identifies potential metrics and data sources, and describes the range of methodological approaches being developed by the NRC to assess the SBIR program. Following some historical background on the SBIR program, this introduction outlines the basic parameters of this NRC study. A Brief History of the SBIR Program In the 1980s, the country’s slow pace in commercializing new technologies—compared especially with the global manufacturing and marketing success of Japanese firms in autos, steel, and semiconductors—led to serious concern in the United States about the nation’s ability to compete. U.S. industrial competitiveness in the 1980s was frequently cast in terms of American industry’s failure “to translate its research prowess into commercial advantage.”2 The pessimism of some was reinforced by evidence of slowing growth at corporate research laboratories that had been leaders of American innovation in the postwar period and the apparent success of the cooperative model exemplified by some Japanese kieretsu.3 Yet, even as larger firms were downsizing to improve their competitive posture, a growing body of evidence, starting in the late 1970s and accelerating in the 1980s, began to indicate that small businesses were assuming an increasingly important role in both innovation and job creation.4 Research by David Birch and others suggested that national policies should promote and build on the competitive strength offered by small businesses.5 In addition to considerations of economic growth and competitiveness, SBIR was also motivated by concerns that small businesses were being disadvantaged vis-à-vis larger firms in competition for R&D contracts. Federal 1 See Public Law 106-554, Appendix I – H.R. 5667, Section 108. Also Annex A in this volume. 2 David C. Mowery, “America’s Industrial Resurgence (?): An Overview,” in David C. Mowery, ed., U.S. Industry in 2000: Studies in Competitive Performance. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1999, p. 1. Mowery examines eleven economic sectors, contrasting the improved performance of many industries in the late 1990s with the apparent decline that was subject to much scrutiny in the 1980s. Among the studies highlighting poor economic performance in the 1980s are Dertouzos, et al. Made in America: The MIT Commission on Industrial Productivity, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1989 and Eckstein, et al. DRI Report on U.S. Manufacturing Industries, New York: McGraw Hill, 1984. 3 Richard Rosenbloom and William Spencer, Engines of Innovation: U.S. Industrial Research at the End of an Era. Boston: Harvard Business Press, 1996. 4 For an account of the growing importance of the small firm in employment and innovation, see Zoltan J. Acs and David B. Audretsch, Innovation and Small Business. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, 1991, p. 4. For specifics on job growth, see Steven J. Davis, John Haltiwanger, and Scott Schuh, “Small Business and Job Creation: Dissecting the Myth and Reassessing the Facts,” Business Economics, vol. 29, no. 3, 1994, pp. 113-22. More recently, a report by the Organisation for Economic Co- operation and Development (OECD) notes that small and medium-sized enterprises are attracting the attention of policy makers, not least because they are seen as major sources of economic vitality, flexibility, and employment. Small business is especially important as a source of new employment, accounting for a disproportionate share of job creation. See OECD, Small Business Job Creation and Growth: Facts, Obstacles, and Best Practices, Paris, 1997. 5 David L. Birch, “Who Creates Jobs?” The Public Interest. Vol. 65, 1981, pp. 3-14 4 

commissions from as early as the 1960s had recommended the direction of R&D funds toward small businesses.6 These recommendations, however, were opposed by competing recipients of R&D funding. Although small businesses were beginning to be recognized by the late-1970s as a potentially fruitful source of innovation, some in government remained wary of funding small firms focused on high-risk technologies with commercial promise. The concept of early-stage financial support for high-risk technologies with commercial promise was first advanced by Roland Tibbetts at the National Science Foundation (NSF). As early as 1976, Mr. Tibbetts advocated that the NSF should increase the share of its funds going to small business. When NSF adopted this initiative, small firms were enthused and proceeded to lobby other agencies to follow NSF’s lead. When there was no immediate response to these efforts, small businesses took their case to Congress and higher levels of the Executive branch.7 In response, a White House Conference on Small Business was held in January 1980 under the Carter Administration. The conference’s recommendation to proceed with a program for small business innovation research was grounded in: Evidence that a declining share of federal R&D was going to small businesses; Broader difficulties among small businesses in raising capital in a period of historically high interest rates; and Research suggesting that small businesses were fertile sources of job creation. Congress responded under the Reagan Administration with the passage of the Small Business Innovation Research Development Act of 1982, which established the SBIR program.8 The SBIR Development Act of 1982 The new SBIR program initially required agencies with R&D budgets in excess of $100 million to set aside 0.2 percent of their funds for SBIR. This amount totaled $45 million in 1983, the program’s first year of operation. Over the next 6 years, the set-aside grew to 1.25 percent.9 The legislation authorizing SBIR had two broad goals: “to more effectively meet R&D needs brought on by the utilization of small innovative firms (which have been consistently shown to be the most prolific sources of new technologies) and to attract private capital to commercialize the results of federal research.” SBIR’s Structure and Role As conceived in the 1982 Act, SBIR’s grant-making process is structured in three phases: Phase I is essentially a feasibility study in which award winners undertake a limited amount of research aimed at establishing an idea’s scientific and commercial promise. Today, the legislation anticipates Phase I grants as high as $100,000.10 Phase II grants are larger – normally $750,000 – and fund more extensive R&D to further develop the scientific and technical merit and the feasibility of research ideas. Phase III. This phase normally does not involve SBIR funds, but is the stage at which grant recipients should be obtaining additional funds either from a procurement program at the agency that made the award, from private investors, or from the capital markets. The objective of this phase is to move the technology to the prototype stage and into the marketplace. Phase III of the program is often fraught with difficulty for new firms. In practice, agencies have developed different approaches to facilitating this transition to commercial viability; not least among them are additional SBIR awards.11 6 For an overview of the origins and history of the SBIR program, see James Turner and George Brown, “The Federal Role in Small Business Research,” Issues in Science and Technology, Summer 1999, pp. 51-58. 7 Ibid. 8 Additional information regarding SBIR’s legislative history can be accessed from the Library of Congress. See http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d097:SN00881:@@@L 9 Today, the set aside is fixed at 2.5 percent. 10 With the accord of the Small Business Administration, which plays an oversight role for the program, this amount can be higher in certain circumstances; e.g., drug development at NIH, and is often lower with smaller SBIR programs, e.g., EPA or the Department of Agriculture. 5 

Some firms with more experience with the program have become skilled in obtaining additional awards. Previous NRC research showed that different firms have quite different objectives in applying to the program. Some seek to demonstrate the potential of promising research. Others seek to fulfill agency research requirements on a cost- effective basis. Still others seek a certification of quality (and the additional awards that can come from such recognition) as they push science-based products toward commercialization.12 Given this variation and the fact that agencies do not maintain data on Phase III, quantifying the contribution of Phase III is difficult. The 1992 and 2000 SBIR Reauthorizations The SBIR program approached reauthorization in 1992 amidst continued worries about the U.S. economy’s capacity to commercialize inventions. Finding that “U.S. technological performance is challenged less in the creation of new technologies than in their commercialization and adoption,” the National Academy of Sciences at the time recommended an increase in SBIR funding as a means to improve the economy’s ability to adopt and commercialize new technologies.13 Accordingly, the Small Business Research and Development Enhancement Act (P.L. 102-564), which reauthorized the program until September 30, 2000, doubled the set-aside rate to 2.5 percent.14 This increase in the percentage of R&D funds allocated to the program was accompanied by a stronger emphasis on encouraging the commercialization of SBIR-funded technologies.15 Legislative language explicitly highlighted commercial potential as a criterion for awarding SBIR grants. For Phase I awards, Congress directed program administrators to assess whether projects have “commercial potential” in addition to scientific and technical merit when evaluating SBIR applications. With respect to Phase II, evaluation of a project’s commercial potential was to consider, additionally, the existence of second-phase funding commitments from the private sector or other non-SBIR sources. Evidence of third-phase follow-on commitments, along with other indicators of commercial potential, was also sought. Moreover, the 1992 reauthorization directed that a small business’ record of commercialization be taken into account when considering the Phase II application.16 The Small Business Reauthorization Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-554) again extended SBIR until September 30, 2008. It also called for an assessment by the National Research Council of the broader impacts of the program, including those on employment, health, national security, and national competitiveness.17 Previous NRC Assessments of SBIR Despite its size and tenure, the SBIR program has not been comprehensively examined. There have been some previous studies focusing on specific aspects or components of the program—notably by the General Accounting Office and the Small Business Administration.18 There are, as well, a limited number of internal assessments of 11 NSF, for example, has what is called a Phase II-B program that allocates additional funding to help potentially promising technology develop further and attract private matching funds. 12 See Reid Cramer, “Patterns of Firm Participation in the Small Business Innovation Research Program in Southwestern and Mountain States,” in National Research Council, The Small Business Innovation Research Program, An Assessment of the Department of Defense Fast Track Initiative, op. cit. In this report, we use the term “product” to refer to goods and services produced by the SBIR firm. 13 See National Research Council, The Government Role in Civilian Technology: Building a New Alliance, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1992, pp. 29. 14 For fiscal year 2003, this has resulted in a program budget of approximately $1.6 billion across all federal agencies, with the Department of Defense having the largest SBIR program at $834 million, followed by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) at $525 million. The DoD SBIR program, is made up of 10 participating components: (see Figure 1): Army, Navy, Air Force, Missile Defense Agency (MDA), Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Chemical Biological Defense (CBD), Special Operations Command (SOCOM), Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA), and the Office of Secretary of Defense (OSD). NIH counts 23 institutes and agencies making SBIR awards. 15 See Robert Archibald and David Finifter, “Evaluation of the Department of Defense Small Business Innovation Research Program and the Fast Track Initiative: A Balanced Approach,” op. cit. pp. 211-250. 16 A GAO report had found that agencies had not adopted a uniform method for weighing commercial potential in SBIR applications. See U.S. General Accounting Office, 1999, Federal Research: Evaluations of Small Business Innovation Research Can Be Strengthened, AO/RCED-99-114, Washington, D.C.: United States General Accounting Office. 17 The current assessment is congruent with the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993: http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/library/misc/s20.html. As characterized by the GAO, GPRA seeks to shift the focus of government decision-making and accountability away from a preoccupation with the activities that are undertaken - such as grants dispensed or inspections made - to a focus on the results of those activities. See http://www.gao.gov/new.items/gpra/gpra.htm 18 An important step in the evaluation of SBIR will be to identify existing evaluations of SBIR. See for example, GAO, “Federal Research: Small Business Innovation Research shows success but can be strengthened. Washington, D.C.: U.S. General Accounting Office, 1992; and GAO, “Evaluation of Small Business Innovation can be Strengthened,” Washington, D.C.: U.S. General Accounting Office, 1999. There is also a 1999 unpublished SBA study on the commercialization of SBIR surveys Phase II awards from 1983 to 1993 among non-DoD agencies. 6 

agency programs.19 The academic literature on SBIR is also limited.20 Annex E provides a bibliography of SBIR as well as more general references of interest. Against this background, the National Academies’ Committee for Government-Industry Partnerships for the Development of New Technologies—under the leadership of its chairman, Gordon Moore—undertook a review of the SBIR program, its operation, and current challenges. The Committee convened government policy makers, academic researchers, and representatives of small business on February 28, 1998 for the first comprehensive discussion of the SBIR program’s history and rationale, review existing research, and identify areas for further research and program improvements.21 The Moore Committee reported that: SBIR enjoyed strong support both within and outside the Beltway. At the same time, the size and significance of SBIR underscored the need for more research on how well it is working and how its operations might be optimized. There should be additional clarification about the primary emphasis on commercialization within SBIR, and about how commercialization is defined. There should also be clarification on how to evaluate SBIR as a single program that is applied by different agencies in different ways.22 Subsequently, at the request of the DoD, the Moore Committee was asked to review the operation of the SBIR program at Defense, and in particular the role played by the Fast Track Initiative. This resulted in the largest and most thorough review of an SBIR program to date. The review involved substantial original field research, with 55 case studies, as well as a large survey of award recipients. It found that the SBIR program at Defense was contributing to the achievement of mission goals—funding valuable innovative projects—and that a significant portion of these projects would not have been undertaken in the absence of the SBIR funding. The Moore Committee’s assessment also found that the Fast Track Program increases the efficiency of the DoD SBIR program by encouraging the commercialization of new technologies and the entry of new firms to the program. More broadly, the Moore Committee found that SBIR facilitates the development and utilization of human capital and technological knowledge. Case studies have shown that the knowledge and human capital generated by the SBIR program has economic value, and can be applied by other firms. And through the certification function, it noted, SBIR awards encourage further private sector investment in the firm’s technology. Based on this and other assessments of public private partnerships, the Moore Committee’s Summary Report on U.S. Government-Industry Partnerships recommended that “regular and rigorous program-based evaluations and feedback is essential for effective partnerships and should be a standard feature,” adding that “greater policy attention and resources to the systematic evaluation of U.S. and foreign partnerships should be encouraged.”23 Preparing the Current Assessment of SBIR As noted, the legislation mandating the current assessment of the nation’s SBIR program focuses on the five agencies that account for 96 percent of program expenditures (although the National Research Council is seeking to learn of the views and practices of other agencies administering the program as well.) The mandated agencies, in order of program size, are the Department of Defense, the National Institutes of Health, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Department of Energy, and the National Science Foundation. Following the passage of H.R. 5667 in December 2000, extensive discussions were held between the NRC and the responsible agencies on the scope and nature of the mandated study. Agreement on the terms of the study, formalized in a Memorandum of Understanding, was reached in December 2001 (See Annex B), and the funding necessary for the Academies to begin the study was received in September 2002. The study was officially launched on 1 October 2002. The study will be conducted within the framework provided by the legislation and the NRC’s contracts with the five agencies. These contracts identify the following principal tasks: 19 Agency reports include an unpublished 1997 DoD study on the commercialization of DoD SBIR. Following the authorizing legislation for the NRC study, NIH launched a major review of the achievements of its SBIR program. NASA has also completed several reports on its SBIR program. See Annex C for a list of agency reports. 20 See the attached bibliography. 21 See National Research Council, Small Business Innovation Research: Challenges and Opportunities, C. Wessner, ed., Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1999. 22 Ibid. 23 See National Research Council, Government-Industry Partnerships for the Development of New Technologies, Summary Report, C. Wessner, ed., Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2002. 7 

o Collection and analysis of agency databases and studies, o Survey of firms and agencies, o Conduct of case studies organized around a common template, and; o Review and analysis of survey and case study results and program accomplishments. As per the Memorandum of Understanding between the NRC and the agencies, the study is structured in two-phases. Phase I of the study, beginning on October 2002, focuses on identifying data collection needs and the development of a research methodology. Phase II of the study, anticipated to start in 2004, will implement the research methodology developed in Phase I of the study. This document outlines the methodological approach being developed under Phase I of the study. It introduces many of the methodological questions to be encountered during Phase II of the NRC study. Finally, it outlines strategies for resolving these questions, recognizing that some issues can only be resolved in the context of the study itself. Given that agencies covered in this study differ in their objectives and goals, the assessment will necessarily be agency-specific.24 As appropriate, the Committee will draw useful inter-agency comparisons and multiyear comparisons. In this regard, a table with the agencies in one dimension and all of the identified SBIR objectives in the other may be a useful expository tool. The study will build on the methodological models developed for the 1999 NRC study of the DoD’s Fast Track initiative, as appropriate, clearly recognizing that the broader and different scope of the current study will require some adjustments.25 Additional areas of interest, as recognized by the Committee, may also be pursued as time and resources permit. 24 Particularly, with respect to DoD, methodological comparability will be sought to enable multiyear comparisons. Where possible and appropriate, tracking of progress of previously surveyed/interviewed firms will be considered as well. 25 In particular, the objective of the Fast Track study was to compare Fast Track awards and non-Fast Track awards within the DoD SBIR program, in order to determine the efficacy of Fast Track. See National Research Council, The Small Business Innovation Research Program: An Assessment of the Department of Defense Fast Track Initiative, C. Wessner, ed., National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 2000. 8 

In response to a Congressional mandate, the National Research Council conducted a review of the SBIR program at the five federal agencies with SBIR programs with budgets in excess of $100 million (DOD, NIH, NASA, DOE, and NSF). The project was designed to answer questions of program operation and effectiveness, including the quality of the research projects being conducted under the SBIR program, the commercialization of the research, and the program's contribution to accomplishing agency missions. This report describes the proposed methodology for the project, identifying how the following tasks will be carried out: 1) collecting and analyzing agency databases and studies; 2) surveying firms and agencies; 3) conducting case studies organized around a common template; and 4) reviewing and analyzing survey and case study results and program accomplishments. Given the heterogeneity of goals and procedures across the five agencies involved, a broad spectrum of evaluative approaches is recommended.

READ FREE ONLINE

Welcome to OpenBook!

You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

Show this book's table of contents , where you can jump to any chapter by name.

...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter .

Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

View our suggested citation for this chapter.

Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

Get Email Updates

Do you enjoy reading reports from the Academies online for free ? Sign up for email notifications and we'll let you know about new publications in your areas of interest when they're released.

BUAD 101 - Introduction to Business: Type of Research Paper

• Business Plans and Planning
• Evaluating Info
• Type of Research Paper
• Publication Types
• Researching
• Avoiding Plagarism
• Citing Resources

How to Write a Research Paper

Writing an effective research paper starts with knowing what type of paper you are writing.

The goal of a research paper is not to inform the reader what others have to say about a topic, but to draw on what others have to say about a topic and engage the sources in order to thoughtfully offer a unique perspective on the issue at hand. This is accomplished through two major types of research papers.

The argumentative research paper consists of an introduction in which the writer clearly introduces the topic and informs his audience exactly which stance he intends to take; this stance is often identified as the  thesis statement . An important goal of the argumentative research paper is persuasion, which means the topic chosen should be debatable or controversial.

The analytical research paper often begins with the student asking a question (a.k.a. a research question) on which he has taken no stance. Such a paper is often an exercise in exploration and evaluation.

From OWL - Genre and the Research Paper .

• Writing a Research Paper ( OWL ) This link opens in a new window
• << Previous: Evaluating Info
• Next: Publication Types >>
• Last Updated: Apr 17, 2024 1:46 PM
• URL: https://library.millersville.edu/buad101

© Copyright 2016. All Rights Reserved. Millersville University is an Affirmative Action/ Equal Opportunity Institution. A Member of Pennsylvania’s State System of Higher Education.

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Strategic Innovation in Small Firms: An Introduction

Strategic Innovation in Small Firms

Related Papers

Tim Mazzarol

ABSTRACT The paper outlines the design, development and application of a diagnostic assessment and screening tool for entrepreneurs of small firms engaged in early stage commercialisation of new technologies. This tool examines the commercialisation readiness of the small firm with attention given to marketing, resources, innovation management and strategic planning activities. It also examines the proposed innovation and assesses it against one of six generic innovation configurations.

ABSTRACT This study examines the behaviour of small firms in both Australia and France and uses an innovation diagnostic measurement tool to provide benchmarking of their innovation management practices. Using a multiple case study methodology a total of 89 cases was drawn; 55 from Australia and 34 from France.

Small Business Economics

Stephen Roper

International Small Business Journal

Patrick Vermeulen

Research Policy

Orietta Marsili

Journal of Product Innovation Management

Henry Robben , Rudy Moenaert

Journal of Small Business Management

Phillip Phan , Ron Mitchell

Vitor Braga , Alexandra Braga

This study aims at identifying the importance of economical and financial ratios in innovation entrepreneurial decision-making process. We propose a conceptual model based in five dimensions: Obstacles; sources; cooperation; funding; and innovation decision-making process. The data was collected through the administration of questionnaires to a sample of firms which have submitted innovation projects to the Portuguese Innovation Agency. The results show that the economical and financial ratios that influence the innovation decision-making are profit related. In fact, entrepreneurs see profit as the ultimate result of innovative processes. It was also clear that firms motivated by different aims also prefer different mechanisms of funding, and accessing to different institutions.

European Journal of Service Management

Tomasz Norek

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Creativity and Innovation Management

Fernando Gimenez

Sophie Reboud

Industrial Marketing Management

Angela Hausman

Geoffrey Soutar , Tim Mazzarol

IJAERS Journal

Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues

Zuzana Joniaková

Tim Mazzarol , Sophie Reboud

Jonathan Muringani

Robert Leskovar , Conny Christl , Peter Metlikovič

Anmol Sharma

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Module: Entrepreneurship

Small business.

What Is a “Small Business”?

Before we talk about the role of small businesses in the U.S. economy, it’s important to first specify what we mean by “small.” The Small Business Administration (SBA) uses size standards to determine whether a business counts as small. These thresholds indicate the largest that a business concern, including all of its affiliates, can be and still qualify as a small business for most SBA and federal programs. The SBA has established two widely used size standards, expressed either in terms of average number of employees during the previous twelve months or the average annual receipts during the previous three years: five hundred (or fewer) employees for most manufacturing and mining industries and $7.5 million (or less) in average annual receipts for many non-manufacturing industries. (There are exceptions to these size standards, however; these are spelled out in the SBA’s Small Business Size Regulations). In addition to qualifying on the basis of its number of employees or total receipts, small businesses must also meet the following SBA requirements:

• Is organized for profit
• Has a place of business in the U.S.
• Operates primarily within the U.S. or makes a significant contribution to the U.S. economy through payment of taxes or use of American products, materials, or labor
• Is independently owned and operated
• Is not dominant in its field on a national basis

The business may be a sole proprietorship, partnership, corporation, or any other legal form. The definition of “small business” varies somewhat according to industry, but generally when we talk about small business we’re referring to companies that employ fewer than five hundred people. 

Small Business Is BIG!

Consider the following impressive statistics:

• The 28 million small businesses in America account for 54 percent of all U.S. sales.
• Small businesses provide 55 percent of all jobs and 66 percent of all net new jobs since the 1970s.
• The 600,000+ franchised small businesses in the U.S. account for 40 percent of all retail sales and provide jobs for some 8 million people.
• The small business sector in America occupies 30 percent–50 percent of all commercial space—an estimated 20 billion to 34 billion square feet.

And, the small business sector is growing rapidly. While corporate America has been downsizing, the number of small business start-ups has grown, and the rate of small-business failure has declined.

• The number of small businesses in the United States has increased 49 percent since 1982.
• Since 1990, as big business eliminated 4 million jobs, small businesses added 8 million new jobs.

Economic Contributions of Small Business

Small business and entrepreneurs contribute to the larger economy in four very distinct ways:

• Job creation
• Opportunities for individuals to achieve financial success and independence
• Support large business by providing component  parts, services, and product distribution.

Each of these contributions is critical to the overall economic growth and prosperity of the U.S. economy.

Job Creation

On January 15, 2015, Maria Contreras-Sweet, an SBA administrator, reported the following about the role of small business in job creation:

American businesses added back 252,000 jobs and the unemployment rate fell to its lowest level since June 2008. We’re in the midst of 58 month of consecutive job growth—the longest streak on record since the mid-1990s. Once again, it was not large corporations driving this train, but entrepreneurs and small businesses powering us out of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression.  Small businesses created nearly 2 million of the roughly 3 million private-sector jobs generated in 2014. More than 7 million of the 11 million jobs created during our recovery have been generated by start-ups and small enterprises. . . . Entrepreneurs have been our life preserver in this economic storm, because of their resilience in budgeting wisely and effectively deploying their capital.

Innovation in the United States has been one of the driving forces in our development as one of the leading economies in the world. Innovations commercialized by U.S. companies have also benefited our society by allowing us to attain prosperity and a good quality of life. While large corporations and the federal government play important roles in the development of innovative products and services, the story is incomplete without the significant contributions and role of individual entrepreneurs and small, agile, high-growth businesses in developing innovative products in the fields of science, technology, and engineering. [1]   

Small businesses are especially leading the way when it comes to the development of “green” technologies. Small, innovative firms are sixteen times more productive than large innovative firms in terms of patents per employee. Small firms’ green-technology patents are cited 2.5 times as often as large firms in other patent applications, indicating that small firms’ patents are more original and influential. In green technologies, while four times as many large as small innovative firms have at least one green patent, small firms are more likely than larger firms to have green technology as a core part of their business. 

Innovation is not confined to high-tech or green industries, either. In fact, many of the products and services that we use on a day-to-day basis are the result of innovations created in a small business environment.

For example, Burt’s Bees is by far one of the biggest names in natural personal care products. Even though it’s a multi-million-dollar enterprise, the company had very humble beginnings. In 1984, Burt Shavitz and Roxanne Quimby founded Burt’s Bees, a mom-and-pop candle company in Maine. They used the excess beeswax from Shavitz’s honey business to make the candles in an abandoned one-room schoolhouse that they rented, and Quimby began making homemade personal care products from the wax and other natural ingredients. In 1991, Burt’s Bees incorporated, and the company started selling natural soap, perfume, and their best-selling lip balm. In 2007, company was purchased by Clorox for a reported $925 million.

In addition to inventing new products, small businesses change the way we do things. When he founded Amazon—initially a small business—Jeff Bezos transformed the way we read books, watch movies, and shop for everyday household items. The following short video explains:

Opportunities

Small business is the portal through which many people enter the economic mainstream. Business ownership helps individuals, including women and minorities, to achieve financial success and also take pride in their accomplishments. While the majority of small businesses are still owned by white males, the past two decades have seen a substantial increase in the number of businesses owned by women and minorities. From 2011 to 2016, the SBA’s flagship 7(a) loan program increased lending to Hispanic American small business owners by 65 percent, by 45 percent to African American small business owners, 44 percent to Asian American small business owners, 33.8 percent to women-owned small businesses, and 12.9 percent to veteran-owned small businesses. [2]

In 2016 the U.S. Census Bureau released its inaugural Annual Survey of Entrepreneurs, which provides annual estimates on the number of employer firms by economic sector, gender, ethnicity, race, and veteran status.  This survey found that:

• About one-third of employer firms (33.6 percent) in the accommodation and food services sector were minority owned.
• Among all employer firms in the educational services and the health care and social assistance sectors, 28.0 percent were owned by women.
• About one-quarter (254,260, or 24.0 percent) of all women-owned employer firms were minority owned. More than half (137,321, or 54.0 percent) of these minority-women-owned employer firms were Asian owned.

Additional demographic information can be found in Table 1, below.

Source: U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy. Source data from U.S. Census Bureau, 2004 Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), 2008 SIPP Wave 15 (2013 data).

Small Businesses to Big Businesses

Small firms complement large firms in a number of ways. In many industries, component parts are manufactured by small businesses and then used to assemble products bearing a big-business name. This relationship was recognized in 2012 when, as part of the Obama Administration’s American Supplier initiative, IBM created a coalition of more than a dozen corporations that together spend $300 billion on outside suppliers. This Supplier Connection effort invites businesses to register online ( http://www.supplier-connection.net ) for a chance to sell to large corporations. Companies with less than $50 million in revenue or fewer than 500 employees fill in their basic information, and large businesses can then search the site looking for potential suppliers. Another way that small business supports its larger counterparts is through outsourcing. Since the smaller firms can provide fast, flexible, and cost-effective services, many larger companies are passing off nonessential operations to these other companies.  Food service, accounting, customer service, and tech support are just a few of the services that small businesses provide to meet the needs of larger companies. Most obvious to the average consumer is the use of small business as a distributor for the products produced by big business. From the local deli that sells Coca-Cola from its soda machine to the fashion boutique selling Tory Burch handbags, each of these small businesses is serving the role of distributor/marketer/sales force. Without a network of small retailers across the country, big business would have to establish a massive network of outlets and a distribution chain to support these outlets. So, when a small business opens in your hometown and sells brand-name clothing, computers, or sporting goods, they are fulfilling a critical role. Big business needs small business to survive.

Check Your Understanding

Answer the question(s) below to see how well you understand the topics covered above. This short quiz does not count toward your grade in the class, and you can retake it an unlimited number of times.

Use this quiz to check your understanding and decide whether to (1) study the previous section further or (2) move on to the next section.

• https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/FINAL_Innovation_Report.pdf ↵
• https://www.sba.gov/about-sba/sba-performance/sba-accomplishments-fy-2016 ↵
• Revision and adaptation. Authored by : Linda Williams and Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution
• Check Your Understanding. Authored by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution
• The Beginning of Amazon. Provided by : BBC. Located at : https://youtu.be/C8rGdwd03gg . License : CC BY-NC-ND: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives
• OROX Grand Opening 8-1-13. Provided by : Portland Development Commission. Located at : https://www.flickr.com/photos/pdxdevelopmentcomm/9424725018/ . License : CC BY-NC: Attribution-NonCommercial
• Authored by : WestportWiki. Located at : https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Burt%27s_Bees_Hand_Salve,_Sep_2012.JPG . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Qualifying As a Small Business. Provided by : U.S. Small Business Administration. Located at : https://www.sba.gov/contracting/getting-started-contractor/qualifying-small-business . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright
• Small Business Trends. Provided by : U.S. Small Business Administration. Located at : https://www.sba.gov/managing-business/running-business/energy-efficiency/sustainable-business-practices/small-business-trends . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright
• Green Technology Innovation. Provided by : U.S. Small Business Administration. Located at : https://www.sba.gov/advocacy/small-businesses-lead-way-green-technology-innovation . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright
• Nearly 1 in 10 Businesses With Employees Are New. Provided by : U.S. Census Bureau. Located at : https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-148.html . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright
• Demographic Characteristics of Business Owners and Employees: 2013. Provided by : Small Business Administration. Located at : https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/Issue_Brief_6_Demographic_Characteristics_2013.pdf . License : Public Domain: No Known Copyright

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS. A lock ( Lock Locked padlock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Active funding opportunity

Nsf 24-579: nsf small business innovation research / small business technology transfer phase i programs, program solicitation, document information, document history.

• Posted: May 30, 2024
• Replaces: NSF 23-515

Program Solicitation NSF 24-579

Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. submitting organization’s local time):

     September 18, 2024

     November 06, 2024

     March 05, 2025

     July 02, 2025

     November 05, 2025

Important Information And Revision Notes

The NSF SBIR/STTR programs (also known as America’s Seed Fund powered by NSF) provide non-dilutive grants for the development of a broad range of technologies based on discoveries in science and engineering with the potential for societal and economic impacts .

NSF proposals are confidential and will only be shared with a select number of reviewers and NSF staff (as appropriate). All reviewers have agreed to maintain the confidentiality of the proposal content. Proposals to NSF do not constitute a public disclosure. If selected for a Phase I award, the company will be prompted to write a publicly available abstract that summarizes the intellectual merit and broader impact of the project.

The proposer must receive an official invitation via the Project Pitch process to submit a full proposal. Small businesses can submit a Project Pitch at any time. Small businesses that receive an official invite must submit their full proposal within the next two deadlines of the email date of their invite; for example, if a Project Pitch invite is received on May 30, 2024, the proposer may submit their full proposal for either of the next two deadlines (September 18, 2024 or November 6, 2024). Visit the program website ( https://seedfund.nsf.gov/apply/project-pitch/ ) for more information.

The proposal submission system, Research.gov, will stop accepting proposals at 5:00 pm “submitting organization’s local time.” This is a firm deadline (no grace period). If your submission is late, you will not be able to submit again until the next deadline (and only if your Project Pitch invite remains valid). Proposers are strongly urged to submit well in advance of the deadline.

The NSF SBIR/STTR programs do not support clinical trials or proposals from companies whose commercialization pathway involves the production, distribution, or sale by the company of chemical components, natural or synthetic variations thereof, or other derivatives related to Schedule I controlled substances.

All proposals must be submitted through Research.gov .

SBIR and STTR proposals are nearly identical but differ in the amount of work required to be performed by the small business and a not-for-profit institution or a Federally funded research and development center (FFRDC) (as noted in the budget). For more information about the unique requirements for STTR awards, please refer to the Eligibility and Proposal Preparation sections of this solicitation.

NSF SBIR Phase I proposals submitted to this solicitation may, at NSF's discretion, be converted for award as an STTR Phase I.

For the purpose of this solicitation, the following definitions apply:

• Funding Agreement: As used in this solicitation, the funding agreement is a Grant – a legal instrument of financial assistance between NSF and a recipient, consistent with 31 USC 6302-6305 and as noted in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Introduction, Section D ("Definitions & NSF-Recipient Relationships").
• Small Business Concerns (SBCs): SBCs are independently owned and operated businesses that are not dominant in their field of operation. For this solicitation, firms qualifying as a small business concern are eligible to participate in the SBIR/STTR programs (see Section IV. "Eligibility Information" of this solicitation for more details). Please note that the size limit of 500 employees includes affiliates. The firm must be in compliance with the SBA SBIR/STTR Policy Directive and the Code of Federal Regulations .
• SBIR/STTR Data: As defined by the SBA SBIR/STTR Policy Directive , SBIR/STTR Data is all Data developed or generated in the performance of an SBIR or STTR award, including Technical Data and Computer Software developed or generated in the performance of an SBIR or STTR award. The term does not include information incidental to contract or grant administration, such as financial, administrative, cost or pricing or management information.
• SBIR/STTR Data Rights: The Federal Government may, use, modify, reproduce, perform, display, release, or disclose SBIR/STTR Data that are Technical Data within the Government; however, the Government shall not use, release, or disclose the data for procurement, manufacturing, or commercial purposes; or release or disclose the SBIR/STTR Data outside the Government except as permitted by paragraph 10(B) of the SBIR/STTR Policy Directive 's Data Rights Clause or by written permission of the recipient.
• the application of creative, original, and potentially transformative concepts to systematically study, create, adapt, or manipulate the structure and behavior of the natural or man-made worlds;
• the use of the scientific method to propose well-reasoned, well-organized activities based on sound theory, computation, measurement, observation, experiment, or modeling;
• the demonstration of a well-qualified individual, team, or organization ready to deploy novel methods of creating, acquiring, processing, manipulating, storing, or disseminating data or metadata; and/or
• the novel integration of new theories, analysis, data, or methods regarding cognition, heuristics, and related phenomena, which can be supported by scientific rationale.
• Non-Dilutive Funding: financing that does not involve equity, debt, or other elements of the business ownership structure.
• Technical Risk: Technical risk assumes that the possibility of technical failure exists for an envisioned product, service, or solution to be successfully developed. This risk is present even to those suitably skilled in the art of the component, subsystem, method, technique, tool, or algorithm in question.
• Technical Innovation: Technical innovation indicates that the new product or service is differentiated from current products or services; that is, the new technology holds the potential to result in a product or service with a substantial and durable advantage over competing solutions on the market. It also generally provides a barrier to entry for competitors. This means that if the new product, service, or solution is successfully realized and brought to the market, it would be difficult for a well-qualified, competing firm to reverse-engineer or otherwise neutralize the competitive advantage generated by leveraging fundamental science or engineering research techniques.

Significant Revisions Made Since the Last Solicitation:

The maximum total Phase I award amount has been increased from $275,000 to $305,000. This amount is inclusive of all direct and indirect costs as well as the small business fee.

In an effort to increase the award amount, to increase the flexibility of the PI to make decisions based on the needs of their particular company, and to decrease the administrative burden associated with preparing and processing significant numbers of supplement requests, SBIR/STTR Phase I recipients should budget for Technical and Business Assistance (TABA) and National Innovation-Corps training (I-Corps TM ) (see below) within their Phase I budget. Other supplements to SBIR/STTR Phase I awards will not be allowed .

TABA provides an opportunity to assist small businesses in commercialization of their technologies. Up to $6,500 for TABA funding may be budgeted by the proposing small business for their well justified commercialization activities. TABA funding enables the recipient business to secure the services of one or more third-party providers to assist in one or more of the following commercialization activities: making better technical decisions on SBIR/STTR projects; solving technical problems that arise during SBIR/STTR projects; minimizing technical risks associated with SBIR/STTR projects; and/or commercializing the SBIR/STTR product or process, including securing intellectual property protections.

I-Corps training is highly recommended; The proposal budget should include $25,000 for this training. Beat the Odds Boot Camp (a condensed version of I-Corps) will no longer be offered.

The award duration has been extended; SBIR/STTR Phase I awards may be 6-18 months.

Publication, documentation, and dissemination costs are not allowed.

An Allocation of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (IP Rights Agreement) is required for STTR proposals and strongly recommended for SBIR proposals when there is a subaward to another institution. A fully signed agreement is not required for STTR proposals at the initial proposal submission but will be required before a recommendation for an award can be made.

In addition to the two NSF Merit Review Criteria (Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts), additional solicitation specific review requirements related to Intellectual Merits, Broader Impacts, Company/Team, and Commercialization Potential have been clarified, see Section VI.A. An Elevator Pitch is no longer required in the Project Description.

Four documents: Biographical Sketch(es), Current and Pending (Other) Support forms, Collaborators and Other Affiliations (COA), and Synergistic Activities must be submitted for the PI, Co-PI (if STTR), and each Senior/Key Personnel specified in the proposal. Biographical Sketches and Current and Pending Support forms must be submitted using SciENcv: Science Experts Network Curriculum Vitae . Collaborators & Other Affiliations (COA) Information is submitted using the instructions and spreadsheet template . Additional information is given in the solicitation. Synergistic Activities. Each individual identified as a Senior/Key person must provide a document of up to one-page that includes a list of up to five distinct examples of synergistic activities that demonstrate the broader impact of the individual’s professional and scholarly activities that focus on the integration and transfer of knowledge as well as its creation.

In accordance with Section 10632 of the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 (42 U.S.C. § 19232), the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must certify that all individuals identified as Senior/Key Personnel have been made aware of and have complied with their responsibility under that section to certify that the individual is not a party to a Malign Foreign Talent Recruitment Program.

In accordance with Section 223(a)(1) of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (42 U.S.C. § 6605(a)(1)), each individual identified as Senior/Key Personnel is required to certify in SciENcv that the information provided in the Biographical Sketch and Current and Pending (Other) Support documents is accurate, current, and complete. Senior/Key Personnel are required to update their Current and Pending (Other) Support disclosures prior to award, and at any subsequent time the agency determines appropriate during the term of the award. See additional information on NSF Disclosure Requirements in the PAPPG, Chapter II.B. Each Senior/Key Person must also certify prior to proposal submission that they are not a party to a Malign Foreign Talent Recruitment Program and annually thereafter for the duration of the award.

Letters of Support from potential product/service users or customers are NOT ALLOWED in SBIR/STTR Phase I proposals. Letters of Commitment from subawardees that confirm the role of the subaward organization in the project and explicitly state the subaward amount should be included in the Supplementary Documents.

Additional information on the due diligence process , used as part of the review and selection process, has been clarified in Section VI. The due diligence process may include requests for clarification of the company structure, key personnel, conflicts of interest, foreign influence, cybersecurity practices, or other issues as determined by NSF. Participation in due diligence does not ensure an award recommendation.

This solicitation contains many instructions that deviate from the standard NSF PAPPG proposal preparation instructions. In the event of a conflict between the instructions in this solicitation and the PAPPG, use this solicitation’s instructions as a guide.

Any proposal submitted in response to this solicitation should be submitted in accordance with the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) that is in effect for the relevant due date to which the proposal is being submitted. The NSF PAPPG is regularly revised and it is the responsibility of the proposer to ensure that the proposal meets the requirements specified in this solicitation and the applicable version of the PAPPG. Submitting a proposal prior to a specified deadline does not negate this requirement.

Summary Of Program Requirements

General information.

Program Title:

NSF Small Business Innovation Research / Small Business Technology Transfer Phase I Programs (SBIR/STTR Phase I)

The NSF SBIR/STTR programs provide non-dilutive funds for use-inspired research and development (R&D) of unproven, leading-edge, technology innovations that address societal challenges. By investing federal research and development funds into startups and small businesses, NSF helps build a strong national economy and stimulates the creation of novel products, services, and solutions in the private sector; strengthens the role of small business in meeting federal research and development needs; increases the commercial application of federally-supported research results; and develops and increases the U.S. workforce, especially by fostering and encouraging participation by socially and economically-disadvantaged and women-owned small businesses. NSF seeks unproven, leading-edge technology innovations that demonstrate the following characteristics: The innovations are underpinned and enabled by a new scientific discovery or meaningful engineering innovation. The innovations still require intensive technical research and development to be fully embedded in a reliable product or service. The innovations have not yet been reduced to practice by anyone and it is not guaranteed, at present, that doing so is technically possible. The innovations provide a strong competitive advantage that are not easily replicable by competitors (even technically proficient ones). Once reduced to practice, the innovations are expected to result in a product or service that would either be disruptive to existing markets or create new markets/new market segments. The NSF SBIR/STTR programs fund broadly across scientific and engineering disciplines and do not solicit specific technologies or procure goods and services from startups and small businesses. The funding provided is non-dilutive. Any invention conceived or reduced to practice with the assistance of SBIR/STTR funding is subject to the Bayh-Dole Act. For more information, refer to the SBIR/STTR Frequently Asked Questions, #75 . NSF encourages input and participation from the full spectrum of diverse talent that society has to offer which includes underrepresented and underserved communities. This program is governed by 15 U.S.C. 638 and the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended ( 42 U.S.C. 1861 et seq. ). Introduction to Program: The SBIR and STTR programs, initiated at NSF, were established in 1982 as part of the Small Business Innovation Development Act. The NSF SBIR/STTR programs focus on stimulating technical innovation from diverse entrepreneurs and startups by translating new scientific and engineering discoveries emerging from the private sector, federal labs, and academia into products and services that can be scaled and commercialized into sustainable businesses with significant societal benefits. The NSF SBIR/STTR programs are now part of the Directorate for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships (TIP) , which was recently launched to accelerate innovation and enhance economic competitiveness by catalyzing partnerships and investments that strengthen the links between fundamental research and technology development, deployment, and use.

Cognizant Program Officer(s):

Please note that the following information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

NSF SBIR/STTR Inbox, telephone: (703) 292-5111, email: [email protected]

• 47.041 --- Engineering
• 47.049 --- Mathematical and Physical Sciences
• 47.050 --- Geosciences
• 47.070 --- Computer and Information Science and Engineering
• 47.074 --- Biological Sciences
• 47.075 --- Social Behavioral and Economic Sciences
• 47.076 --- STEM Education
• 47.079 --- Office of International Science and Engineering
• 47.083 --- Office of Integrative Activities (OIA)
• 47.084 --- NSF Technology, Innovation and Partnerships

Award Information

Anticipated Type of Award: Standard Grant

• approximately 230-235 awards for SBIR Phase I per year, pending the availability of funds
• approximately 45-50 awards for STTR Phase I per year, pending the availability of funds
• Approximately $70,000,000-$72,000,000 for SBIR Phase I
• Approximately $13,000,000-$15,000,000 for STTR Phase I
• Estimated program budget, number of awards and average award size/duration are subject to the availability of funds.

Eligibility Information

Who May Submit Proposals:

Proposals may only be submitted by the following: Proposers must obtain an official invitation to submit a proposal. To receive the invitation, potential proposers must submit a Project Pitch and receive an official response (via email) from the cognizant Program Officer. Project Pitch invitations are valid for two deadlines after the date of the initial official invitation from NSF; for example, if an official invitation is received on May 30, 2024, the proposer may submit for either the September 18, 2024, or November 6 deadline. In this example, submissions after November 6, 2024 will require a new Project Pitch invitation. Firms qualifying as a small business concern are eligible to participate in the NSF SBIR/STTR programs (see  Eligibility Guide  for more information). Please note that the size limit of 500 employees includes affiliates. The firm must be in compliance with the  SBIR/STTR Policy Directive  and the Code of Federal Regulations ( 13 CFR Part 121 ). For STTR proposals, the proposing small business must also include a partner research institution in the project, see additional details below. In compliance with the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022 , Section 10636 (Person or entity of concern prohibition) ( 42 U.S.C. 19235 ): No person published on the list under section 1237(b) of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999 ( Public Law 105-261 ; 50 U.S.C. 1701 note ) or entity identified under section 1260H of the William M. (Mac) Thornberry National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 ( 10 U.S.C. 113 note ; Public Law 116-283 ) may receive or participate in any grant, award, program, support, or other activity under the Directorate for Technology, Innovation and Partnerships. Individuals who are a current party to a Malign Foreign Talent Recruitment Program are not eligible to serve as a Senior/Key Person on an NSF proposal or on any NSF award made after May 20, 2024. See current PAPPG for additional information on required certifications associated with Malign Foreign Talent Organization. The Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must certify that all individuals identified as Senior/Key Personnel have been made aware of and have complied with their responsibility under that section to certify that the individual is not a party to a Malign Foreign Talent Recruitment Program. The startup’s or small business’ research and development (R&D) must be performed within the United States. Startups and small businesses funded by NSF must be majority U.S.-owned companies. NSF does not fund proposals from companies that are majority-owned by one or more venture capital operating companies (VCOCs), hedge funds, or private equity firms. Proposals from joint ventures and partnerships are permitted, provided the proposing entity qualifies as a small business concern (see Eligibility Guide for more information). “Collaborative Proposal from Multiple Organizations” (a special proposal type in Research.gov) are not allowed. Startups and small businesses that have a social mission in their charter are encouraged to apply. Socially and economically disadvantaged small businesses and women-owned small businesses are also encouraged to apply.

Who May Serve as PI:

The primary employment of the Principal Investigator (PI) must be with the small business at the time of award and for the duration of the award, unless a new PI is named. Primary employment is defined as at least 51 percent employed by the small business. NSF normally considers a full-time work week to be 40 hours and considers employment elsewhere of greater than 19.6 hours per week to be in conflict with this requirement. The PI must have a legal right to work for the proposing company in the United States, as evidenced by citizenship, permanent residency, or an appropriate visa. The PI does not need to be associated with an academic institution. There are no PI degree requirements (i.e., the PI is not required to hold a Ph.D. or any other degree). A PI must devote a minimum of one calendar month of effort per six months of performance to an NSF SBIR/STTR Phase I project.

Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization: 1

An organization may submit only one NSF SBIR/STTR Phase I Project Pitch and/or proposal per submission deadline. The organization must wait for a determination from NSF (e.g., invite/not invite for a Project Pitch or award, decline, or return without review for a proposal) before submitting a new Project Pitch or proposal. This eligibility constraint is strictly enforced. If an organization exceeds this limit, the first Project Pitch/proposal that is received will be reviewed and any additional Project Pitches/proposals will be Returned Without Review. Previously declined proposals require a new Project Pitch be submitted and invited. If invited, these proposals must represent a significant revision to the previously submitted SBIR/STTR Phase I proposal and must include a Resubmission Change Description describing these revisions, in the Other Supplementary Documents section. Proposals that have been Returned Without Review may be submitted using the same Project Pitch invitation (assuming that the proposal is received within two (2) deadlines of the initial Project Pitch invitation from NSF).

Limit on Number of Proposals per PI or co-PI: 1

For NSF SBIR – 1 PI, co-PIs are not allowed. For NSF STTR - 1 PI and 1 co-PI are required (the PI must be an employee of the proposing small business and the co-PI must be part of the STTR partner research institution). An individual may act as the co-PI on an unlimited number of proposals. An individual may be listed as the PI for only one proposal submitted at a time to this NSF SBIR/STTR Phase I solicitation.

Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions

A. proposal preparation instructions.

• Letters of Intent: Not required
• Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not required

Full Proposals: This solicitation contains information that deviates from the standard NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG) proposal preparation guidelines. Please see the full text of the solicitation for further information.

B. Budgetary Information

Cost Sharing Requirements:

Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is prohibited.

Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations:

Not Applicable

Other Budgetary Limitations:

Other budgetary limitations apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

C. Due Dates

Proposal review information criteria.

Merit Review Criteria:

National Science Board approved criteria. Additional merit review criteria apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Award Administration Information

Award Conditions:

Additional award conditions apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

Reporting Requirements:

Additional reporting requirements apply. Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.

I. Introduction

The NSF SBIR/STTR programs focus on transforming scientific discovery into commercial potential and/or societal benefit through the development of products or services.

The NSF SBIR/STTR programs fund research and development (R&D) and are designed to provide non-dilutive funding to support small business concerns with technologies at their earliest stages. NSF SBIR/STTR awards are not government contracts. The NSF does not use its SBIR/STTR programs to procure goods or services for the government. Any invention conceived or reduced to practice with the assistance of SBIR/STTR funding is subject to the Bayh-Dole Act. For more information, refer to the SBIR/STTR Frequently Asked Questions, #75 .

The NSF SBIR/STTR programs do not have a specific topical or technology focus. Generally, the topics included in the NSF SBIR/STTR solicitation are intended to be broad enough to permit startups with science- and engineering-based innovations to compete for funding, transforming science and engineering discovery and innovation into both societal and economic impact. NSF encourages people from all backgrounds and geographic areas to apply for funding. At the conclusion of the project, a recipient company must submit a final annual project report to NSF to ensure that the company properly spent NSF funds on approved activities, as originally proposed. Recipient companies will also need to submit a project outcomes report for the general public. NSF does not purchase these project reports and does not benefit from these reports, beyond an oversight function. NSF does not test, verify, or otherwise use the technology developed under its SBIR/STTR awards.

The NSF SBIR/STTR Phase I program is highly competitive. While success rates vary year-to-year, only a fraction of proposals submitted are selected for an award. Thus, there are many qualified businesses applying to the program each year that do not receive funding.

II. Program Description

The NSF SBIR/STTR program encourages startups and small businesses to submit proposals across nearly all areas of science and engineering. *

While startups and small businesses face many challenges, the NSF SBIR/STTR funding is intended to specifically focus on challenges associated with technological innovation; that is, on the creation of new products, services, and other scalable solutions based on fundamental science or engineering. A successful Phase I proposal demonstrates how NSF funding will help the small business create a proof-of-concept or prototype by retiring technical risk. Funding from NSF may only be used to conduct research and development (R&D) to demonstrate technical feasibility.

NSF seeks SBIR/STTR proposals that represent success in three distinct, but related merit review criteria: Intellectual Merit, Broader Impacts, and Commercialization Potential.

The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge and leverages fundamental science or engineering research techniques to overcoming technical risk. This can be conveyed through the Research and Development (R&D) of the project. R&D is broadly defined in 2 CFR § 200.1, but specified for the NSF SBIR/STTR program as follows:

• the use of the scientific method to propose well-reasoned, well-organized activities based on sound theory, computation, measurement, observation, experiment, or modeling ;
• the novel integration of new theories, analysis, data, or methods regarding cognition, heuristics, and related phenomena.

NSF SBIR/STTR proposals are evaluated via the concepts of Technical Risk and Technological Innovation. Technical Risk assumes that the possibility of technical failure exists for an envisioned product, service, or solution to be successfully developed. This risk is present even to those suitably skilled in the art of the component, subsystem, method, technique, tool, or algorithm in question. Technological Innovation indicates that the new product or service is differentiated from current products or services; that is, the new technology holds the potential to result in a product or service with a substantial and durable advantage over competing solutions on the market. It also generally provides a barrier to entry for competitors. This means that if the new product, service, or solution is successfully realized and brought to the market, it should be difficult for a well-qualified, competing firm to reverse-engineer or otherwise neutralize the competitive advantage generated by leveraging fundamental science or engineering research techniques.

The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential benefit to society and contribution to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes as outlined in the NSF PAPPG Merit Review Broader Impacts Criteria.

The NSF SBIR/STTR program funds the development of new, high-risk technology innovations intended to generate positive societal and economic outcomes. Proposers should also consider the Broader Impacts Review Criterion at 42 U.S.C. §1862p-14:

• Increasing the economic competitiveness of the United States.
• Advancing of the health and welfare of the American public.
• Supporting the national defense of the United States.
• Enhancing partnerships between academia and industry in the United States.
• Developing an American STEM workforce that is globally competitive through improved pre-kindergarten through grade 12 STEM education and teacher development and improved undergraduate STEM education and instruction.
• Improving public scientific literacy and engagement with science and technology in the United States.
• Expanding participation of groups underrepresented in STEM.

The Commercialization Potential of the proposed product or service is the potential for the resulting technology to disrupt the targeted market segment by way of a strong and durable value proposition for the customers or users.

• The proposed product or service addresses an unmet, important, and scalable need for the target customer base.
• The proposed small business is structured and staffed to focus on aggressive commercialization of the product/service.
• The proposed small business can provide evidence of good product-market fit (as validated by direct and significant interaction with customers and related stakeholders).

More details and information regarding the NSF SBIR/STTR merit review criteria can be found in Section VI of this solicitation.

* The NSF SBIR/STTR program does not support clinical trials or proposals from companies whose commercialization pathway involves the production, distribution, or sale by the company of chemical components, natural or synthetic variations thereof, or other derivatives related to Schedule I controlled substances.

III. Award Information

Phase I proposals may be submitted for up to $305,000 in R&D funding intended to support projects for 6-18 months. This amount is inclusive of all direct and indirect costs as well as the small business fee, Technical and Business Assistance (TABA) funding, and the optional, but highly encouraged Innovation Corps (I-Corps).

IV. Eligibility Information

Additional Eligibility Info:

Required Project Pitch Invitation: Potential proposers must receive an invitation to submit a full NSF SBIR/STTR Phase I proposal. Please see Project Pitch website for details. STTR Research Institution.  The  SBIR/STTR Policy Directive  requires that STTR Phase I proposals include an eligible research institution as a subawardee on the project budget. The STTR partner research institution is typically either a not-for-profit institution focused on scientific or educational goals (such as a college or university), or a Federally funded research and development center (FFRDC). For an NSF STTR Phase I proposal, a minimum of 40% of the research, as measured by the budget, must be performed by the small business concern, and a minimum of 30% must be performed by a single partner research institution, with the balance permitted to be allocated to either of these, or to other subawards or consultants. Partnering. Proposing firms are encouraged to collaborate with experienced researchers at available facilities such as colleges, universities, national laboratories, and from other research sites. Funding for such collaborations may include research subawards or consulting agreements. Although partnering is encouraged, proposals should NOT be marked as a "Collaborative Proposal from Multiple Organizations" during submission. The employment of faculty and students by the small business is allowed; however, For an NSF SBIR Phase I proposal , a minimum of two-thirds of the research, as measured by the budget, must be performed by the small business. The balance of the budget may be outsourced to subawards or consultants or a combination thereof. For an NSF STTR Phase I proposal , the SBIR/STTR Policy Directive requires proposals to include an eligible research institution as a subawardee on the project budget. The institution is typically either a not-for-profit institution focused on scientific or educational goals (such as a college or university), or a Federally funded research and development center (FFRDC). A minimum of 40% of the research, as measured by the budget, must be performed by the small business. A minimum of 30% must be performed by a single partner research institution; The balance (remaining 30%) may be allocated to the small business, partner research institution, or to other subawards or consultants. Government-Wide Required Benchmarks (applies to previous SBIR/STTR recipients only): Phase I to Phase II Transition Rate Benchmark. For Phase I proposers that have received more than 20 Phase I SBIR/STTR awards from any federal agency over the past five fiscal years, the minimum Phase I to Phase II Transition Rate over that period is 25%. Small businesses that fail to meet this transition requirement will be notified by the Small Business Administration and will not be eligible to submit a Phase I proposal for one (1) year. Commercialization Benchmark. The commercialization benchmark required by the SBIR/STTR Reauthorization Act of 2011 only applies to proposers that have received more than 15 Phase II Federal SBIR/STTR awards over the past 10 fiscal years, excluding the last two years. These companies must have achieved the minimum required commercialization activity to be eligible to submit a Phase I proposal, as determined by the information entered in the company registry at SBIR.gov . Visit link for more information on required benchmarks .

V. Proposal Preparation And Submission Instructions

Full Proposal Preparation Instructions : Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation should be prepared and submitted in Research.gov in accordance with the general guidelines contained in the NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide (PAPPG). The complete text of the PAPPG is available electronically on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg . Paper copies of the PAPPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] . The Prepare New Proposal setup will prompt you for the program solicitation number.

See PAPPG Chapter II.D.2 for guidance on the required sections of a full research proposal submitted to NSF. Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in this program solicitation may deviate from the PAPPG instructions.

This solicitation contains MANY instructions that deviate from the standard NSF PAPPG proposal preparation instructions. This solicitation contains the information needed to prepare and submit a proposal and refers to specific sections of the PAPPG ONLY when necessary (and noted throughout the solicitation). In the event of a conflict between the instructions in this solicitation and the PAPPG, use this solicitation’s instructions as a guide.

Phase I Proposal and Program Objectives: NSF supports innovative technologies showing promise of commercial and/or societal impact and involving technical risk, to be addressed with techniques drawn from fundamental science and engineering research.

Required Project Pitch: To submit a full NSF SBIR or STTR Phase I proposal, potential proposers must first submit a Project Pitch and receive an invitation. The Project Pitch is designed to inform potential proposers if they meet the program’s objectives to support innovative technologies that show promise of commercial or societal impact and involve a level of technical risk. If the Project Pitch does meet the program’s objectives, then an invitation to submit a full proposal will be sent to the small business. This official invitation is valid for the next two submission deadlines. Those Project Pitches not invited to submit a full proposal may resubmit a Project Pitch (with revisions to address any deficiencies) after the close of the next submission deadline.

To start this process, potential proposers must first create a log in and submit a Project Pitch via the online form . The cognizant NSF SBIR/STTR Program Officer will use the Project Pitch to determine whether the proposed project is a good fit for the program.

Only one Project Pitch per submission deadline is allowed, and a small business with a pending Project Pitch, Open Invitation, or full SBIR or STTR Phase I proposal under review must wait to receive a response before submitting another Project Pitch.

Proposals submitted without a Project Pitch invitation will be Returned Without Review.

Project Activities Not Responsive to the Solicitation:

• Evolutionary development or incremental modification of established products or proven concepts;
• Straightforward engineering or test and optimization efforts that are not hypothesis driven;
• Evaluation or testing of existing products;
• Basic scientific research or research not connected to any specific market opportunity or potential new product;
• Business development, market research, and sales and marketing;
• Clinical trials;
• Research or commercialization pathways involving chemical components, natural or synthetic variations thereof, or other derivatives related to Schedule I controlled substances; or
• Non-profit business concerns.

A. Registrations

Small businesses applying for NSF SBIR/STTR Phase I funding must be registered in the following systems to submit a proposal to NSF.

The registrations below can take several weeks or even months to process, so please start early.

You must register your company name, physical address, and all other identifying information  identically in  each of these systems.  We recommend that you register your small business in the following order:

• NSF will validate that each proposer’s UEI and SAM registration are valid and active prior to allowing submission of a proposal to NSF. If a registration is not active, an organization will not be able to submit a proposal. Additionally, if the SAM registration is not renewed annually and is not valid, NSF will block any award approval actions.
• Any subawardees or subcontractors are also required to obtain a UEI and register in Research.gov. Entities can obtain a SAM UEI without full SAM registration. If you have a subrecipient that is not fully registered in SAM, but has been assigned a UEI number, please call the IT Help desk for further assistance.
• Small Business Administration (SBA) Company Registration.  A Small Business Concern Identification number (SBC ID) is required prior to submission of the proposal. SBA maintains and manages a Company Registry for SBIR/STTR proposers at  https://www.sbir.gov/registration/  to track ownership and affiliation requirements. All SBCs must report ownership information prior to each SBIR/STTR proposal submission and update the SBC if any information changes prior to award.
• Research.gov:  For more information, consult the "About Account Management" page at  https://www.research.gov/ .

Note: Each of these registrations is free through the federal government. Beware of scammers charging fees for SAM and/or SBA registrations.

B. Tips on the Proposal Preparation and Submission

Failure to comply with the below guidelines means that a proposal may be Returned Without Review. 

INCLUDE ALL REQUIRED ELEMENTS.  Submit a proposal that is complete. Proposals must have each of the items listed below:

• Cover Sheet
• SBIR (or STTR) Phase I Questionnaire
• SBIR (or STTR) Phase I Certification Questions
• Project Summary
• Table of Contents (automatically generated)
• Project Description (no less than 10 pages and no more than 15 pages)
• References Cited
• Budget(s) (no more than $305,000 total)
• Budget Justification(s)
• Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources
• Biographical Sketch(es)
• Current and Pending (Other) Support
• Collaborators & Other Affiliations (COA) Information (Single Copy Document)
• Synergistic Activities
• Data Management and Sharing Plan
• Mentoring Plan (Conditionally required)
• Letter(s) of Support (NOT ALLOWED)
• IP (Intellectual Property) Rights Agreement (Required for STTR proposals and strongly recommended for SBIR proposals when there is a subaward to another institution
• Other Personnel Biographical Information
• Company Commercialization History (if applicable)
• Letters of Commitment from Subawardees and Consultants
• Resubmission Change Description (if applicable)
• List of Suggested Reviewer s (Single Copy Document)
• List of Reviewers Not to Include (Single Copy Document)
• Deviation Authorization
• Additional Single Copy Documents

DO NOT  upload information beyond what is specifically required and permitted into the proposal (i.e., do not include marketing materials, research results, academic papers, patent applications, etc.).

DO NOT include samples, videotapes, slides, appendices, or other ancillary items within a proposal submission. Websites containing demonstrations and Uniform Resource Locators (URLs) (if applicable) must be cited in the References Cited section. Note: reviewers are not required to access them. Please refer to the NSF PAPPG (Chapter II.C) for more details on accepted proposal fonts and format. The incorporation of URLs or websites within the proposal’s Project Description will not be accepted.

C. Detailed Instructions on Invited Proposal Preparation

Full Proposal Set-up: In Research.gov, complete the following steps.

• Select "Prepare & Submit Proposals,” then “Letters of Intent and Proposals”
• Funding Opportunity. Either filter by “SBIR” or “STTR”, and select radio button for Phase I solicitation. Next.
• Where to Apply. Select program: SBIR Phase II or STTR Phase II. Next. Select the appropriate SBIR or STTR program (Phase I or Phase II). Next.
• Proposal Type: SBIR or STTR. Next.
• Is your organization a sole proprietorship? Use radio buttons.
• Enter your Proposal Title.
• Enter Proposal Title, then click on Prepare Proposal
• You will now be on a new proposal page – Select Due Date (upper right corner),

For additional detailed instructions on how to submit, see the website: https://seedfund.nsf.gov/apply/full-proposal/

Cover Sheet. This section requests general information about the proposal and proposing organization.

Other Federal Agencies (if applicable). If this proposal is being submitted to another Federal Agency, state or local governments, or non-governmental entities, enter a reasonable abbreviation, up to 10 characters, for each agency or entity. Only the first 5 agencies you enter will appear on the PDF version of the proposal, but all should be entered below. IT IS ILLEGAL TO ACCEPT DUPLICATE FUNDING FOR THE SAME WORK. IF A PROPOSER FAILS TO DISCLOSE EQUIVALENT OR OVERLAPPING PROPOSALS, THE PROPOSER COULD BE LIABLE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, CIVIL, AND/OR CRIMINAL SANCTIONS.

Human Subjects (if applicable). According to 45 CFR 46 , a human subject is "a living individual about whom an investigator (whether professional or student) conducting research:

• Obtains information or biospecimens through intervention or interaction with the individual, and uses, studies, or analyzes the information or biospecimens; or
• Obtains, uses, studies, analyzes, or generates identifiable private information or identifiable biospecimens.”

NIH provides a Decision Tool to assist investigators in determining whether their project involves non-exempt human subjects research, meetings the criteria for exempt human subjects research, or does not involve human subjects research.

Projects involving research with human subjects must ensure that subjects are protected from research risks in conformance with the relevant Federal policy known as the Common Rule ( Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, 45 CFR 690 ). All projects involving human subjects must either (1) have approval from an Institutional Review Board (IRB) before issuance of an NSF award; or (2) must obtain a statement from the IRB indicating research exemption from IRB review; or 3) must obtain a just in time IRB designation and documentation. This documentation needs to be completed during due diligence discussions, in accordance with the applicable subsection, as established in section 101(b) of the Common Rule. If certification of exemption is provided after submission of the proposal and before the award is issued, the exemption number corresponding to one or more of the exemption categories also must be included in the documentation provided to NSF. The small business has three basic options with regard to human subjects review:

• Establish your own IRB (see Office for Human Research Protections (OHRP) at the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS): https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/irbs-and-assurances.html#registernew .
• Use the review board of a (usually local) university or research institution, either via consultants to the project, a project subcontract, or directly through its own contacts;
• Use a commercial provider.

For projects lacking definite plans for the use of human subjects, their data, or their specimens, pursuant to 45 CFR § 690.118 , NSF can accept a determination notice that establishes a limited time period under which the PI may conduct preliminary or conceptual work that does not involve human subjects. See more information and instructions regarding this documentation in the PAPPG.

Live Vertebrate Animals (if applicable). Any project proposing use of vertebrate animals for research or education shall comply with the Animal Welfare Act ( 7 USC 2131, et seq. ) and the regulations promulgated thereunder by the Secretary of Agriculture ( 9 CFR 1 .1 -4.11 ) pertaining to the humane care, handling, and treatment of vertebrate animals held or used for research, teaching or other activities supported by Federal awards.

In accordance with these requirements, proposed projects involving use of any vertebrate animal for research or education must be approved by the submitting organization's Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) before an award can be made. For this approval to be accepted by NSF, the organization must have a current Public Health Service (PHS) Approved Assurance. See also PAPPG for additional information on the administration of awards that utilize vertebrate animals. This documentation must be completed before issuance of an NSF award.

SBIR (or STTR) Phase I Questionnaire. The Phase I Questionnaire must be filled in completely including: Phase I Information (SBIR/STTR Phase I Topic and required Project Pitch Number), Authorized Company Officer Information, Proposing Small Business Information, SBIR/STTR Award History, Affiliated Companies, and Other Information.

Other Information. Proprietary Information. To the extent permitted by law, the Government will not release properly identified and marked technical and commercially sensitive data.

If the proposal does not contain proprietary information, uncheck the box in the Phase I Questionnaire.

If the proposal does contain proprietary information identify the proprietary technical data by clearly marking the information and also providing a legend. NSF SBIR/STTR data, including proposals, are protected from disclosure by the participating agencies for not less than 20 years from the delivery of the last report or proposal associated with the given project. Typically, proprietary information is identified in the text either with an asterisk at the beginning and end of the proprietary paragraph, underlining the proprietary sections, or choosing a different font type. An entire proposal should not be marked proprietary.

SBIR (or STTR) Phase I Certification Questions. This form must be filled in completely.

Project Summary [One (1) page MAXIMUM]. The Project Summary should be written in the third person, informative to other persons working in the same or related fields, and insofar as possible, understandable to a scientifically or technically literate lay reader. It should not be an abstract of the proposal. Do not include proprietary information.

The Project Summary is to be completed with headers on three separate lines for Overview, Intellectual Merit, and Broader Impacts. To be valid, a heading must be on its own line with no other text on that line. The document must be converted to pdf format to be uploaded into Research.gov.

• Overview: Describe the potential outcome(s) of the proposed activity in terms of a product, process, or service. Provide a list of key words or phrases that identify the areas of technical expertise to be invoked in reviewing the proposal and the areas of application that are the initial target of the technology. Provide the subtopic name.
• Intellectual Merit: This section MUST begin with "This Small Business Innovation Research (or Small Business Technology Transfer) Phase I project..." Address the intellectual merits of the proposed activity. Briefly describe the technical hurdle(s) that will be addressed by the proposed R&D (which should be crucial to successful commercialization of the innovation), the goals of the proposed R&D, and a high-level summary of the plan to reach those goals.
• Broader Impacts: The Broader Impact is considered in two ways: 1) the impact on education, the environment, science, society, the nation, and/or the world and 2) the potential commercial impact. Discuss the expected outcomes in terms of both of these impacts. For the Commercialization Potential: describe how the proposed project will bring the innovation closer to commercialization under a sustainable business model. In this box, also describe the potential commercial and market impacts that such a commercialization effort would have, if successful.

Project Description [Ten (10) pages MINIMUM; fifteen (15) pages MAXIMUM]. The project description is the core of the proposal document. Ensure that the following headers: Intellectual Merits, Company/Team, Broader Impacts, and Commercialization Potential are used. Questions under each header are for your consideration in considering the scope and depth of the response – every proposal topic is different, and it is up to the proposer to provide a convincing/compelling case for a funding recommendation.

Intellectual Merit (recommend 7-10 pages, including the technical solution and R&D plan):

• What is(are) the proposed technical innovation(s)? What is the new scientific/engineering insight that underpins it? (Provide a description of the innovation including the novel scientific/engineering aspects that enable the realization of the final product.)
• What are the technical risks/barriers and how does the proposal address them? What are the go/no-go technical risks/barriers that are unique to your approach and are preventing the innovation from achieving the impact the team intends it to make?
• Please provide a detailed R&D plan, including a timeline, milestones, risk mitigation and quantitative success criteria.
• Explain the significance of the Phase I milestones and how they relate to the commercial objectives of the technology.

Company/Team (recommend 1-2 pages):

• Describe the company founders or key participants in this proposed project. What level of effort will these persons devote to the proposed Phase I activities? How does the background and experience of the team enhance the credibility of the effort? Have they previously taken similar products/services to market? Describe the company’s core competencies as related to this project. What capabilities (e.g., personnel, consultants, and subawardees) and resources (facilities, equipment, etc.) will need to be deployed to successfully achieve the Phase I objectives? Outline how the company and the project team have the necessary expertise, resources, and support to carry out the project and that they are committed to building a viable business around the product/service being developed. If your proposal includes consultants, within the text of the Project Description discuss how the requested consultant effort will contribute to the project. Describe your vision for the company and the company's expected impact over the next five years.
• If the company has existing operations, describe how the proposed effort would fit into these activities.
• Provide the date when the company was founded and describe the revenue history, if any, for the past three years. Include and explicitly state government funding and private investment in this discussion.

Broader Impacts (recommend 1-2 pages):

• What is the motivation for the company to take on this project?
• Clearly articulate how the proposed technology will result in a societal benefit. Which communities will benefit and on what timeline?
• How will the societal benefits be measured and tracked?
• What steps are being taken to recognize and minimize the unintended consequences of the proposed technology?

Commercialization Potential (recommend 1-3 pages):

• Is there a compelling potential business model?
• What is your initial target market and its size? How have you validated this market needs your technology?
• Provide a detailed plan on your pathway to generate revenue and to become a self-sustaining entity. Present a compelling case that the project will significantly advance the readiness of the technology and strengthen its commercial position.
• Describe the value proposition of the proposed technology.
• Describe your plans to address regulatory (including permitting) or safety standards and ethical considerations involved in developing your technology and bringing your product or service to market.
• Describe your intellectual property strategy and provide a brief rationale for why you chose this strategy.
• Provide a detailed description of the competitive landscape and your sustainable competitive advantage.
• Describe the company’s complete funding history.

Note: The incorporation of URLs or websites within the Project Description is not acceptable and the proposal may be Returned without Review.

References Cited. Provide a comprehensive listing of relevant references, including websites or relevant URLs, patent numbers, and other relevant intellectual property citations. A list of References Cited must be uploaded into the system. If there are no references cited in the proposal, please indicate this by putting the statement "No References Cited" into this module.

Budget(s). Proposers are required to submit budgets with their proposals, including specific dollar amounts by budget category. Budget justification(s) are used to explain these amounts in detail. The proposed Budget should reflect the needs of the proposed R&D project. Enter budget figures for each project year into Research.gov. The system will automatically generate a cumulative budget for the entire project.

You can add Subaward Organization(s) to your proposal (required for STTR submissions and allowed for SBIR submissions) and make changes to personnel information by navigating to the "Manage Personnel and Subaward Organizations" page.

The total budget shall not exceed $305,000 for the SBIR/STTR Phase I proposal.

All activities on an NSF SBIR/STTR project, including services that are provided by consultants, must be carried out in the United States ("United States" means the 50 states, the territories and possessions of the U.S. Federal Government, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the District of Columbia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau).Based on a rare and unique circumstance, agencies may approve a particular portion of the R/R&D work to be performed or obtained in a country outside of the United States, for example, if a supply or material or other item or project requirement is not available in the United States. The Funding Agreement officer must approve each such specific condition in writing.

The total budget shall not exceed $305,000 for the Phase I proposal.

You can add additional senior/key personnel to your proposal (e.g., for STTR submissions), and make changes to personnel information by navigating to the "Manage Personnel and Subaward Organizations" page.

Postdoctoral scholars and students (undergraduate and graduate) are generally listed on a subaward budget to a research institution. If they are employees of the company, they may be listed in Line A. Senior/Key Personnel (Line A), or Line B. Other Professionals or Other, as appropriate.

Secretarial/clerical effort is generally included as part of indirect costs. Salaries for secretarial/clerical should be budgeted as a direct cost only if this type of cost is consistently treated as a direct cost in like circumstances for all other project and cost objectives.

• Line C. Fringe Benefits. It is recommended that proposers allot funds for fringe benefits here ONLY if the proposer's usual (established) accounting practices provide that fringe benefits be treated as direct costs. Otherwise, fringe benefits should be included in Line I. Indirect Costs.
• Line D. Equipment . Equipment may NOT be purchased on an NSF SBIR/STTR Phase I grant. Equipment is defined as an item of property that has an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more (unless the organization has established lower levels) and an expected service life of more than one year.
• Line E. Travel. With the exception of attendance of the NSF SBIR/STTR Grantees’ Conference (which should be acknowledged), all budgeted travel must be necessary for the successful execution of the Phase I R&D effort. Travel for purposes other than the project R&D effort (e.g., marketing or customer engagements) is not permitted, EXCEPT for participation in I-Corps, see discussion below for Line G. Other. Foreign travel expenses are NOT permitted.
• Line F. Participant Support Costs. Participant support costs are NOT permitted.

Publication Costs/Documentation/Distrib . Publication, documentation, and dissemination costs are not allowed.

Consultant Services. Consultant services include specialized work that will be performed by professionals that are not employees of the proposing small business. See Budget Justification for information on inclusion of Letters of Commitment, Consultant Rate and Biographical Sketch. All consultant activities must be carried out in the United States (see above).

No person who is an equity holder, employee, or officer of the proposing small business may be paid as a consultant unless an exception is recommended by the cognizant Program Director and approved by the Division Director of Translational Impacts (TI).

Computer Services. Funds may be allocated for computer services. Requested services with a total cost exceeding $5,000 may require pricing documentation (e.g., quote, link to online price list, prior purchase order or invoice) after the proposal is reviewed, as part of the cognizant Program Director’s due diligence efforts. Please see Section VI for details.

Subaward(s). Subawards may be utilized when a significant portion of the work will be performed by another organization and when the work to be done is not widely commercially available. Work performed by a university or research laboratory is one example of a common subaward. A subawardee research institution partner is mandatory for STTR proposals .

For NSF SBIR proposals , subaward funds do not count as funds spent by the small business. The total amount requested for subawards (when added to consultant funds) cannot exceed 1/3 of the total project budget.

For STTR proposals , a minimum of 40% of the research, as measured by the budget, must be performed by the small business concern and a minimum of 30% of the research, as measured by the budget, must be performed by a single subawardee research institution, with the balance permitted to be allocated to either of these, or to other subawards or consultants.

Subawards require a separate subaward budget and subaward budget justification, in the same format as the main budget. To enter a subaward budget in Research.gov, go to the Budget module tab and add Subaward Organization(s) by opening “ Manage Personnel and Subaward Organizations .” Each subawardee will have its own budget pages for each year of the project.

Subawardees (the institution, not the individual PI or researcher) should also provide a Letter of Commitment that confirms the role of the subaward organization in the project and explicitly states the subaward amount. Provide this letter as part of the Supplementary Documents. Multiple letters should be combined as a single PDF before uploading.

Any subrecipients named in the proposal are also required to obtain a SAM UEI and register in Research.gov . Subrecipients named in the proposal, however, do not need to be registered in SAM. Entities can obtain a SAM UEI without full SAM registration. If you have a subrecipient that is not fully registered in SAM, but has been assigned a UEI number, please call the IT Help desk for further assistance.

An Allocation of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (IP Rights Agreement) is required for STTR proposals and strongly recommended for SBIR proposals when there is a subaward to another institution. A fully signed agreement is not required for STTR proposals at the initial proposal submission but will be required before a recommendation for an award can be made. Provide this Agreement, as a PDF, as part of the Optional Documents.

No person who is an equity holder, employee, or officer of the proposing small business may be paid under a subaward unless an exception is recommended by the cognizant Program Director and approved by the TI Division Director.

Other. This line includes the purchase of analytical services, other services, or fabricated components from commercial sources. Requested services or components with a total cost exceeding $5,000 may require pricing documentation (e.g., quote, link to online price list, prior purchase order or invoice) after the proposal is reviewed, as part of the SBIR/STTR Program Officer’s due diligence efforts. There are 3 other activities that may be included on G. Other Direct Costs - Other. The funds noted below may ONLY be spent on the commercial or business purposes explicitly permitted below.

• Hiring a certified public accountant (CPA) to prepare audited, compiled, or reviewed financial statements;
• Hiring a CPA to perform an initial financial viability assessment based on standard financial ratios so the recipient organization would have time to improve their financial position prior to submitting the Phase II proposal;
• Hiring a CPA to review the adequacy of the recipient's project cost accounting system; and/or
• Purchasing a project cost accounting system.
• NSF Innovation Corps (I-Corps): The proposer is strongly encouraged to budget up to an additional $25,000 to cover costs related to undertaking the I-Corps program. I-Corps is an immersive, seven-week, entrepreneurial training program that facilitates the translation of invention to impact. This program provides direct, hands-on experience in customer discovery — a key step in the entrepreneurial process that involves talking to and getting critical feedback from potential customers, partners, and other industry stakeholders. The interviews allow the team to evaluate the commercial potential of their innovation for translation into a successful product and/or service. Other benefits of the I-Corps program include mentorship and networking opportunities. Simply list this item as “I-Corps" in the Budget Justification. I-Corps is a competitive program, acceptance into the program is not guaranteed as a result of an SBIR/STTR Phase I award. Costs that are allowable are limited to travel costs related to customer discovery as part of the I-Corps program (this could include costs associated with registration/attendance at events for the purpose of customer discovery) and salary/wages for team members who participate. All costs related to the I-Corps training must be in line with approved salary rates and other relevant Federal guidelines. Note: International travel for customer discovery cannot be reimbursed, nor can any salary/wages for work done while outside of the United States.
• SBIR/STTR Technical and Business Assistance (TABA) : Proposers are encouraged to include up to $6,500 to assist in technology commercialization efforts (as outlined in the current SBIR/STTR Policy Directive and H.R.5515 - 115th Congress (2017-2018): John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 . Prior to expending funds for TABA, the recipient will be required to obtain approval from their cognizant NSF SBIR/STTR Program Officer. Specifically, TABA funding is for securing the services of one or more third-party service providers that will assist with one or more of the following commercialization activities:
• Phase II commercialization plan research and preparation;
• Phase II broader impact plan research and preparation;
• Making better technical decisions on SBIR/STTR projects;
• Solving technical problems that arise during SBIR/STTR projects;
• Minimizing technical risks associated with SBIR/STTR projects; and/or
• Commercializing the SBIR/STTR product or process, including securing intellectual property protections.
• Line I. Indirect Costs . Indirect costs are defined as costs that are necessary and appropriate for the operation of the business, but which are not specifically allocated to the project. Common indirect cost expenses include legal and accounting expenses, employee health insurance, fringe benefits, rent, and utilities. If your small business has a Federally negotiated rate, please provide a copy of the negotiated indirect cost rate agreement. If your organization has no negotiated rate with a federal agency, and no previous experience with Federal indirect cost rate negotiation, you may claim (without submitting justification) a total amount of indirect costs (inclusive of fringe benefits) either up to 50% of total budgeted salary and wages on the project or equal to 10% de minimis on MODIFIED total direct costs on the project. Modified Total Direct Cost (MTDC): MTDC means all direct salaries and wages, applicable fringe benefits, materials and supplies, services, travel, and up to the first $25,000 of each subaward (regardless of the period of performance of the subawards under the award). MTDC excludes equipment, capital expenditures, charges for patient care, rental costs, tuition remission, scholarships and fellowships, participant support costs and the portion of each subaward in excess of $25,000. Other items may only be excluded when necessary to avoid a serious inequity in the distribution of indirect costs, and with the approval of the cognizant agency for indirect costs.
• Line K. Fee. Up to 7% of the total indirect and direct project costs may be requested as a small business fee (7% of Line J). The fee is intended to be consistent with normal profit margins provided to profit-making firms for R&D work. The fee applies solely to the small business receiving the award and not to any other participant in the project. The fee is not a direct or indirect "cost" item and may be used by the small business concern for any purpose, including additional effort under the NSF SBIR/STTR award (including items on the "Prohibited Expenditures" list below). Prohibited Expenditures including, but not limited to, Equipment, Foreign Travel, Participant Support Costs, and Publication Costs are not allowable expenditures as either direct or indirect costs. However, these expenses may be purchased from the small business fee funds (Line K).

Budget Justification(s). The Budget Justification is uploaded in the Budget Justification section of Research.gov as a single PDF file. Provide details for each non-zero line item of the budget, including a description and cost estimates. Identify each line item by its letter and number (e.g., Subawards). Each non-zero line item should be described in the Budget Justification, but several sections also require more specific information as detailed below. There is a five-page limit for each Budget Justification (including Subaward Budget Justifications, where required). Additional information to help prepare your proposal budget is available here .

Lines A. and B. Personnel . Provide the names, titles, and a brief description of responsibilities for the PI, co-PI (if STTR), and each of the Senior/Key Personnel. Also provide a concise description of their responsibilities on the project. Provide the actual annual, monthly, or hourly salary rate, the time commitment and a calculation of the total requested salary.

Line C. Fringe Benefits. Describe what is included in fringe benefits and the calculations that were used to arrive at the amount requested. It is recommended that proposers allot funds for fringe benefits here ONLY if the proposer's usual (established) accounting practices provide that fringe benefits be treated as direct costs. Otherwise, fringe benefits should be included in Line I. Indirect Costs.

Line E. Travel. Describe the purpose for domestic travel and acknowledge attendance at the NSF SBIR/STTR Grantees’ Conference. A good estimate for the NSF SBIR/STTR Grantees’ Workshop is $2,000 per person and is limited to $4,000 per year. No supporting detail is required for attendance at the Awardee Workshop at $2,000 (or less) per person. If the Conference is organized virtually only, proposers can (if awarded) reallocate these funds towards other project activities, pending the approval of the cognizant SBIR/STTR Program Officer.

For other trips, include the expected number of trips, number of persons traveling, length of each trip, purpose and destination of each trip, and a rough breakdown of the expected cost of each trip.

Line F. Participant Support Costs. Participant Support costs are not permitted as part of an SBIR/STTR Phase I proposal.

Line G. Other Direct Costs.

Materials and Supplies. Provide an itemized list of the materials and supplies, with the quantity, unit cost, and total cost for each item. Items with a total line item cost over $5,000 may require quote or pricing documentation after the proposal has been reviewed, as part of the NSF SBIR/STTR Program Officer’s due diligence efforts.

Consultant Services. Provide a copy of the signed Letter of Commitment in the proposal’s Supplementary Documents section. Each consultant, whether paid or unpaid, must provide a signed statement that confirms availability, time commitment, role in the project, and the agreed upon consulting rate. The consulting rate under this solicitation can be a maximum of $1,000 per day (NSF defines a day as 8 hours). Consultant travel should be shown under the domestic travel category, Line E, but counts as an outsourcing expense for the purpose of determining whether the small business concern meets the minimum level of effort for an NSF SBIR/STTR proposal. The consultant agreement should identify the number of days and its associated daily rate.

Biographical sketches for each consultant may be requested by the NSF SBIR/STTR Program Director after the proposal is reviewed, as part of their due diligence efforts. Please see Section VI for details.

Subawards. Explicitly list who the research partner will be and provide a brief description of the work they will perform.

Other. The Budget Justification should indicate the specifics of the materials and supplies required, including an estimated cost for each item. Items with a total cost exceeding $5,000 may require pricing documentation (e.g., quote, link to online price list, prior purchase order or invoice) after the proposal is reviewed, as part of the NSF SBIR/STTR Program Officer’s due diligence efforts. Please see Section VI. NSF Proposal Processing and Review Procedures for details. Companies should provide a detailed itemized list (a table works well) of all materials including item description, quantity, unit price and total price in the Budget Justification, and provide a total that matches the amount in this line.

Line I. Indirect Costs. Provide the calculations that were used to arrive at the amount requested. Please briefly indicate the major cost categories that are included as indirect costs.

Line K. Fee. Provide the calculation that was used to arrive at the amount requested.

Facilities, Equipment and Other Resources. Specify the availability and location of significant equipment, instrumentation, computers, and physical facilities necessary to complete the portion of the research that is to be carried out by the proposing firm in Phase I. If the equipment, instrumentation, computers, and facilities for this research are not the property (owned or leased) of the proposing firm, include a statement signed by the owner or lessor which affirms the availability of these facilities for use in the proposed research, reasonable lease or rental costs for their use, and any other associated costs. Upload images of the scanned statements into this section.

Many research projects require access to computational, data, analysis, and/or visualization resources to complete the work proposed. For projects that require such resources at scales beyond what may be available locally, researchers in all disciplines can apply for allocations for computer or data resources from over two dozen high-performance computational systems via the Advanced Cyberinfrastructure Coordination Ecosystem: Services & Support (ACCESS) program. See cognizant Program Officer or PAPPG for additional details. If a proposer wants to arrange the use of unique or one-of-a-kind Government facilities, a waiver must be obtained from the Small Business Administration to approve such use.

Senior/Key Personnel Documents. For the PI, Co-PI, and for each person in the “Senior/Key Personnel” section, the four required documents are listed below.

• Biographical Sketch(es). The biographical sketch is used to assess how well qualified the individual, team, or organization is to conduct the proposed activities. A biographical sketch must be provided separately for each individual (PI, co-PI (if STTR), and Senior/Key Personnel (individuals with critical expertise who will be working on the project and are employed at the proposing company or at a subaward organization). Proposers must prepare biographical sketch files using SciENcv (Science Experts Network Curriculum Vitae) , which will produce a compliant PDF. Senior/Key Personnel must prepare, save, certify, and submit these documents as part of their proposal via Research.gov. Full requirements for these documents can be found in the current NSF Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide. Frequently Asked Questions on using SciENcv can be found here .
• Name of sponsoring organization.
• Total award amount (if already awarded) or expected award amount (if pending) for the entire award period covered (including indirect costs).
• Title and performance period of the proposal or award.
• Annual person-months (calendar months) devoted to the project by the PI or Senior/Key Personnel.

Please report:

• All current and pending support for ongoing projects and proposals (from any source, including in kind support or equity investment), including continuing grant and contract funding.
• Proposals submitted to other agencies. Concurrent submission of a proposal to other organizations will not influence the review of the proposal submitted to NSF.
• Upcoming submissions.
• The current Phase I proposal is considered "pending" and therefore MUST appear in the Current and Pending Support form for each PI and Senior/Key Personnel.
• Collaborators and Other Affiliations (COA) Information (Single Copy Document). This document must be provided for the PI, Co-PI (if STTR) and each Senior/Key Person. This document will not be viewable by reviewers but will be used by NSF to manage the selection of reviewers. Download the required Collaborators and Other Affiliations template and follow the instructions. Detailed information about the required content is available in the current PAPPG. Frequently Asked Questions on COA can be found here .
• Synergistic Activities. Each individual identified as a senior/key person must provide a PDF document of up to one-page that includes a list of up to five distinct examples that demonstrates the broader impact of the individual’s professional and scholarly activities that focus on the integration and transfer of knowledge as well as its creation. Examples of synergistic activities may include but are not limited to the training of junior scientists and engineers in innovation and entrepreneurship; the development of new and novel products, tools, and/or services based on deep technologies; broadening participation of groups underrepresented in STEM; service to the scientific and engineering communities outside the individual’s company; and/or participation in the national and/or international commercial market.

Data Management and Sharing Plan. Proposals MUST contain a supplementary PDF labeled "Data Management and Sharing Plan," which should include the statement, "All data generated in this NSF SBIR/STTR Phase I project is considered proprietary." This single sentence is sufficient to fulfill the Data Management and Sharing Plan requirement, but proposers may add more detail about how the resulting data will be managed, if they desire. The PDF cannot exceed 2 pages.

Mentoring Plan (Conditionally required). If a proposal requests funding to support postdoctoral scholars or graduate students at a research institution (through a subaward), a Mentoring Plan MUST be uploaded to the system. The mentoring plan must describe the mentoring that will be provided to all postdoctoral scholars or graduate students supported by the project, regardless of whether they reside at the submitting organization or at any subrecipient organization. Describe only the mentoring activities that will be provided to all postdoctoral scholars or graduate students supported by the project. The PDF cannot exceed 1 page.

Individual Development Plans (IDP) for Postdoctoral Scholars and Graduate Students. For each NSF award that provides substantial support to postdoctoral scholars and graduate students, each individual must have an Individual Development Plan, which is updated annually. The IDP maps the educational goals, career exploration, and professional development of the individual. NSF defines “substantial support” as an individual that has received one person month or more during the annual reporting period under the NSF award. Certification that a postdoctoral scholar(s) and/or graduate student(s) has and IDP must be included in the annual and final reports.

Optional. NOTE: Various subsections are REQUIRED depending on the type of proposal (SBIR or STTR), whether the company has a Commercialization History, whether this proposal is a resubmission, etc. Please read section requirements carefully.

• Letters of Support. Letters of Support are NOT allowed; Do not upload documents here.

(i) State specifically the degree of responsibility, and ownership of any product, process, or other invention or Innovation resulting from the cooperative research. The degree of responsibility shall include responsibility for expenses and liability, and the degree of ownership shall also include the specific rights to revenues and profits.

(ii) State which party may obtain United States or foreign patents or otherwise protect any inventions resulting from the cooperative research.

(iii) State which party has the right to any continuation of research, including non-STTR follow-on awards

• Other Personnel Biographical Information (Strongly recommended). This optional section can be used to provide additional biographical information about project participants who are not listed as Senior/Key Personnel for the small business or for a subawardee. Documents must use the format provided in the PAPPG instructions. Biographical sketches should be prepared using SciENcv .
• Company Commercialization History (required, if applicable). A Company Commercialization History is required for all proposers certifying receipt of previous SBIR/STTR Phase II awards from any Federal agency in Question 11 of the SBIR Phase I Certification Questions. All items must be addressed in the format given in the NSF Commercialization History Template . Changes to the NSF template, additional narratives and/or commercialization history documents from other agencies are not permitted.
• Letters of Commitment from Subawardees and Consultants (Strongly recommended). Please refer to Budget(s) – Subaward(s) for details.
• Resubmission Change Description (required, if applicable). A declined proposal may be resubmitted only after it has undergone substantial revision and only with the receipt of a new invited Project Pitch . A resubmitted proposal that has not clearly considered the major comments or concerns resulting from the prior NSF review may be Returned Without Review. The Foundation will treat the revised proposal as a new proposal, subject to the standard review procedures.

Note: The proposing company must indicate in Question 10 of the SBIR/STTR Phase I Certification Questions if the current proposal is a revision of a previously declined proposal. The Resubmission Change Description, uploaded in the Other Supplementary Documents, must detail the substantial revisions that have been made to the original submission.

List of Suggested Reviewers (Single Copy Document). This optional section can be used to suggest the names of reviewers who might be appropriate to assess the technical and commercial merits of the proposal. Reviewers who have significant personal or professional relationships with the proposing small business or its personnel should generally not be included.

List of Reviewers Not to Include (Single Copy Document). This optional section can be used to suggest names (or even specific affiliations) of reviewers that the proposer prefers not be involved in the review of their proposal.

Deviation Authorization (Single Copy Document). This section should generally not be used unless NSF staff have specifically instructed the proposer to do so.

Additional Single Copy Documents: Project Pitch Invitation (required). In this section, proposers must submit a copy of the email invitation from an NSF SBIR/STTR Program Officer – in response to a submitted Project Pitch – inviting the company to submit a full proposal. Please convert this invitation email to a PDF before uploading.

Cost Sharing:

D. Research.gov Requirements

Proposers are required to prepare and submit all proposals for this program solicitation via Research.gov. Detailed instructions regarding the technical aspects or proposal preparation and submission via Research.gov are available at: https://www.research.gov/research-portal/appmanager/base/desktop?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=research_node_display&_nodePath=/researchGov/Service/Desktop/ProposalPreparationandSubmission.html . For Research.gov user support, call the Research.gov Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail [email protected] . The Research.gov Help Desk answers general technical questions related to the use of the Research.gov system. Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section VIII of this funding opportunity.

VI. NSF Proposal Processing And Review Procedures

Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program for acknowledgement and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review. All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists, or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal. These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names, however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award process (and associated timeline) is included in PAPPG Exhibit III-1.

A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process is available on the NSF website at: https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/merit_review/ .

Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in Leading the World in Discovery and Innovation, STEM Talent Development and the Delivery of Benefits from Research - NSF Strategic Plan for Fiscal Years (FY) 2022 - 2026 . These strategies are integrated in the program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through the integration of research and education and broadening participation in NSF programs, projects, and activities.

One of the strategic objectives in support of NSF's mission is to foster integration of research and education through the programs, projects, and activities it supports at academic and research institutions. These institutions must recruit, train, and prepare a diverse STEM workforce to advance the frontiers of science and participate in the U.S. technology-based economy. NSF's contribution to the national innovation ecosystem is to provide cutting-edge research under the guidance of the Nation's most creative scientists and engineers. NSF also supports development of a strong science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce by investing in building the knowledge that informs improvements in STEM teaching and learning.

NSF's mission calls for the broadening of opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines, which is essential to the health and vitality of science and engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and supports.

A. Merit Review Principles and Criteria

The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and engineering research and education. To identify which projects to support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission "to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes." NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive, transparent merit review process for the selection of projects.

1. Merit Review Principles

These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in basic research and education, the following three principles apply:

• All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of knowledge.
• NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to achieving societal goals. These "Broader Impacts" may be accomplished through the research itself, through activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. The project activities may be based on previously established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in either case must be well justified.
• Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should be based on appropriate metrics, keeping in mind the likely correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is not likely to be meaningful. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of these activities may best be done at a higher, more aggregated, level than the individual project.

With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document the outputs of those activities.

These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the criteria can better understand their intent.

2. Merit Review Criteria

All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances, however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.

The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to be given full consideration during the review and decision-making processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria. (PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i). contains additional information for use by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the proposal). Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria, including PAPPG Chapter II.D.2.d(i), prior to the review of a proposal.

When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to evaluate all proposals against two criteria:

• Intellectual Merit: The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses the potential to advance knowledge; and
• Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes.

The following elements should be considered in the review for both criteria:

• Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and
• Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader Impacts)?
• To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
• Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale? Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success?
• How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to conduct the proposed activities?
• Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the proposed activities?

Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself, through the activities that are directly related to specific research projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities, and other underrepresented groups in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and education.

Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the Data Management and Sharing Plan and the Mentoring Plan, as appropriate.

Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria

The NSF SBIR/STTR program has an additional criterion, Commercial Impact, to reflect the emphasis on commercialization and complement the standard NSF review criteria listed above. Commercial impacts (both economic and otherwise) for the NSF SBIR/STTR program focuses on the potential of the activity to lead to significant outcomes in the commercial market. The following criteria should be applied in the review of this criterion:

• Is there a significant market opportunity that could be addressed by the proposed product, process, or service?
• Does the company possess a significant and durable competitive advantage, based on scientific or technological innovation, that would be difficult for competitors to neutralize or replicate?
• Does the proposing company/team have the essential elements, including expertise, structure, and experience, that would suggest the potential for strong commercial outcomes?
• Will NSF support serve as a catalyst to improve substantially the technical and commercial impact of the underlying commercial endeavor?

NSF SBIR/STTR Phase I Award Considerations

Once the panel and/or ad hoc review of an individual NSF SBIR or STTR Phase I proposal has concluded and the proposal is considered potentially meritorious, a follow-on due diligence process may be conducted in which the PI will be asked to provide additional information and/or to answer questions specific to their proposal in order to inform the final decision. This due diligence process will address weaknesses and questions raised during the external merit review as well as by the cognizant SBIR/STTR Program Officer. The due diligence process may include requests for clarification of the company structure, key personnel, conflicts of interest, foreign influence, cybersecurity practices, or other issues as determined by NSF. Participation in the due diligence process does not ensure an award recommendation.

NSF SBIR Phase I proposals submitted to this solicitation which are considered meritorious, and which meet all the requirements of the NSF STTR Phase I program may, based on budgetary considerations and at NSF's discretion, be converted for award as an NSF STTR Phase I project. NSF may also, at its discretion, convert NSF STTR Phase I proposals to NSF SBIR Phase I proposals. The award mechanism for either will be a fixed price grant.

NSF requires each NSF SBIR/STTR Phase I recipient company to attend and participate in the NSF SBIR/STTR Phase I Awardees Workshop.

Requirements Relating to Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) and Registration in the System for Award Management (SAM). Organizations are responsible for utilizing SAM to submit government-wide representations and certifications. Prior to proposal submission, all proposing organizations are required to have reviewed and certified compliance with the government-wide financial assistance representations and certifications maintained in SAM. Failure to comply with SAM certification and registration requirements will impact the submission and processing of the proposal. If a registration is not active, an organization will not be able to submit a proposal, nor will NSF be able to take approval actions on any submitted proposals or recommended awards. Additionally, payments will not be able to be processed and approved. An expired registration will impact an organization’s ability to submit proposals and/or receive award payments. Note that if an organization’s registration lapses, it will take longer to reactivate the registration than if the registration is still active when doing the revalidation and recertification.

SAM is the NSF system of record for organizational information, including financial and address information. The Legal Business Name and Physical Address information are automatically pulled from SAM and used by NSF to validate organizational information. All name and address changes must be handled via SAM. NSF has no control over SAM and cannot override SAM data or statuses

Debriefing of Unsuccessful Proposals. As outlined in Chapter IV of the PAPPG, a proposer may request additional information from the cognizant Program Officer or Division Director. Proposers may contact the cognizant Program Officer to set up a date/time for a debrief call.

Reconsideration . SBIR or STTR Phase I proposals are ineligible for reconsideration.

Resubmission. A proposer of a previously declined proposal must submit a new Project Pitch and, if invited, submit a new proposal after substantial revision, to be explicitly noted at submission. Proposals Returned Without Review may be corrected for solicitation compliance issues and resubmitted with the same invited Project Pitch (within two deadlines of the initial Project Pitch invite). If two submission deadlines have passed, the proposer will need to submit a new Project Pitch for review.

B. Review and Selection Process

Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be reviewed by Ad hoc Review and/or Panel Review.

Reviewers will be asked to evaluate proposals using two National Science Board approved merit review criteria and, if applicable, additional program specific criteria. A summary rating and accompanying narrative will generally be completed and submitted by each reviewer and/or panel. The Program Officer assigned to manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and will formulate a recommendation.

After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or recommended for award. NSF strives to be able to tell proposers whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding within six months. Large or particularly complex proposals or proposals from new recipients may require additional review and processing time. The time interval begins on the deadline or target date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the Division Director acts upon the Program Officer's recommendation.

After programmatic approval has been obtained, the proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of Grants and Agreements or the Division of Acquisition and Cooperative Support for review of business, financial, and policy implications. After an administrative review has occurred, Grants and Agreements Officers perform the processing and issuance of a grant or other agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer does so at their own risk.

Once an award or declination decision has been made, Principal Investigators are provided feedback about their proposals. In all cases, reviews are treated as confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the names of the reviewers or any reviewer-identifying information, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.

VII. Award Administration Information

A. notification of the award.

Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer. Organizations whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section VI.B. for additional information on the review process.)

B. Award Conditions

An NSF award consists of: (1) the award notice, which includes any special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3) the proposal referenced in the award notice; (4) the applicable award conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1)*; or Research Terms and Conditions* and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance that may be incorporated by reference in the award notice. Cooperative agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC) and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.

*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF . Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-8134 or by e-mail from [email protected] .

More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .

Administrative and National Policy Requirements

Build America, Buy America

As expressed in Executive Order 14005, Ensuring the Future is Made in All of America by All of America’s Workers (86 FR 7475), it is the policy of the executive branch to use terms and conditions of Federal financial assistance awards to maximize, consistent with law, the use of goods, products, and materials produced in, and services offered in, the United States.

Consistent with the requirements of the Build America, Buy America Act (Pub. L. 117-58, Division G, Title IX, Subtitle A, November 15, 2021), no funding made available through this funding opportunity may be obligated for infrastructure projects under an award unless all iron, steel, manufactured products, and construction materials used in the project are produced in the United States. For additional information, visit NSF’s Build America, Buy America webpage.

Special Award Conditions:

NSF SBIR/STTR recipients are subject to the Small Business Innovation Research/Small Business Technology Transfer Phase I Grant General Conditions (SBIR-I) dated May 20,2024. These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at https://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/sbir/sbiri_0524.pdf .

SBIR/STTR Funding Agreement Certification:

SBIR/STTR prospective grantees will be notified by NSF to provide a signed SBIR/STTR Funding Agreement Certification. The Federal government relies on the information provided by grantees to determine whether the business is eligible for an SBIR or STTR Program award. Certification will be used to ensure continued compliance during the life of the funding agreement ( https://seedfund.nsf.gov/assets/files/awardees/SBIR_STTR_Funding_Agreement.pdf ).

NSF SBIR/STTR Statement on Harassment:

The PI and any co-PI(s) identified on an NSF award are in a position of trust. These individuals must comport themselves in a responsible and accountable manner during the award period of performance, including but not limited to the following environments: the lab, online, or at locales such as field sites, facilities, customer discovery sites, or conferences/workshops. All personnel supported by an NSF award must remain in full compliance with grantee policies and/or codes of conduct, statutes, regulations, or executive orders relating to sexual harassment, other forms of harassment, or sexual assault.

Fraud, Waste, and Abuse (FWA) Notification:

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) maintains a Hotline to receive this information, which can be reached at https://oig.nsf.gov/contact/hotline . Disclosures can also be made via an anonymous phone line at (800) 428-2189. Upon request, OIG will take appropriate measures to protect the identity of any individual who reports misconduct, as authorized by the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended. Reports to OIG may be made anonymously.

The mailing address of OIG is 2415 Eisenhower Ave, Alexandria, VA 22314 ATTN: OIG HOTLINE.

C. Reporting Requirements

For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project report to the cognizant Program Officer no later than 90 days prior to the end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require submission of more frequent project reports). No later than 120 days following expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final annual project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.

Failure to provide the required annual or final annual project reports, or the project outcomes report, will delay NSF review and processing of any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for all identified PIs and co-PIs on a given award. PIs should examine the formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of required data.

PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system, available through Research.gov, for preparation and submission of annual and final annual project reports. Such reports provide information on accomplishments, project participants (individual and organizational), publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project. Submission of the report via Research.gov constitutes certification by the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted using Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it is submitted by the PI.

More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained in the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) Chapter VII, available electronically on the NSF Website at https://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=pappg .

A table entitled, NSPM-33 Implementation Guidance Pre- and Post-award Disclosures Relating to the Biographical Sketch and Current and Pending (Other) Support has been created to provide helpful reference information regarding pre-award and post-award disclosures. The table includes the types of activities to be reported, where such activities must be reported in the proposal, as well as when updates are required in the proposal and award lifecycle. A final column identifies activities that are not required to be reported.

NSF SBIR/STTR Phase I recipients are required to submit a report describing the technical accomplishments and outcomes of the Phase I project. The Phase I final annual project report will be due to NSF within 15 days following the end date of the award and is limited to 15 pages in length. A Phase II proposal requires a Phase I technical report to be uploaded as part of the Phase II proposal package in Research.gov. If the Phase II proposal is submitted prior to the completion of the Phase I award, an interim Phase I technical report may be uploaded as part of the Phase II proposal package in Research.gov. Please see more details here .

VIII. Agency Contacts

Please note that the program contact information is current at the time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of contact.

General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:

For questions related to the use of NSF systems contact:

• NSF Help Desk: 1-800-381-1532
• Research.gov Help Desk e-mail: [email protected]

For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:

Grants.gov Contact Center: If the Authorized Organizational Representatives (AOR) has not received a confirmation message from Grants.gov within 48 hours of submission of application, please contact via telephone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail: [email protected] .

IX. Other Information

The NSF website provides the most comprehensive source of information on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and funding opportunities. Use of this website by potential proposers is strongly encouraged. In addition, "NSF Update" is an information-delivery system designed to keep potential proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Grants Conferences . Subscribers are informed through e-mail or the user's Web browser each time new publications are issued that match their identified interests. "NSF Update" also is available on NSF's website .

Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities may be accessed via this mechanism. Further information on Grants.gov may be obtained at https://www.grants.gov .

About The National Science Foundation

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42 USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of science and engineering."

NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems, businesses, informal science organizations and other research organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic research.

NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research, education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative research between universities and industry, US participation in international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational activities at every academic level.

Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities (FASED) provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide Chapter II.F.7 for instructions regarding preparation of these types of proposals.

The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf (TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800) 877-8339.

The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at (703) 292-5111.

The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences, mathematics, and engineering. To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit the NSF Website at 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314 (NSF Information Center) (703) 292-5111 (703) 292-5090 Send an e-mail to: or telephone: (703) 292-8134 (703) 292-5111 Privacy Act And Public Burden Statements The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project reports submitted by proposers will be used for program evaluation and reporting within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants as part of the proposal review process; to proposer institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government agencies or other entities needing information regarding proposers or nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in order to coordinate programs or policy; and to another Federal agency, court, or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See System of Record Notices , NSF-50 , "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and Associated Records," and NSF-51 , "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records.” Submission of the information is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete information, however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control number for this collection is 3145-0058. Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 120 hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments regarding the burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to: Suzanne H. Plimpton Reports Clearance Officer Policy Office, Division of Institution and Award Support Office of Budget, Finance, and Award Management National Science Foundation Alexandria, VA 22314 Global Growth Is Stabilizing for the First Time in Three Years But 80% of world population will experience slower growth than in pre-COVID decade WASHINGTON, June 11, 2024 — The global economy is expected to stabilize for the first time in three years in 2024—but at a level that is weak by recent historical standards, according to the World Bank’s latest Global Economic Prospects report. Global growth is projected to hold steady at 2.6% in 2024 before edging up to an average of 2.7% in 2025-26. That is well below the 3.1% average in the decade before COVID-19. The forecast implies that over the course of 2024-26 countries that collectively account for more than 80% of the world’s population and global GDP would still be growing more slowly than they did in the decade before COVID-19. Overall, developing economies are projected to grow 4% on average over 2024-25, slightly slower than in 2023. Growth in low-income economies is expected to accelerate to 5% in 2024 from 3.8% in 2023. However, the forecasts for 2024 growth reflect downgrades in three out of every four low-income economies since January. In advanced economies, growth is set to remain steady at 1.5% in 2024 before rising to 1.7% in 2025. “Four years after the upheavals caused by the pandemic, conflicts, inflation, and monetary tightening, it appears that global economic growth is steadying,” said Indermit Gill, the World Bank Group’s Chief Economist and Senior Vice President. “ However, growth is at lower levels than before 2020. Prospects for the world’s poorest economies are even more worrisome. They face punishing levels of debt service, constricting trade possibilities, and costly climate events. Developing economies will have to find ways to encourage private investment, reduce public debt, and improve education, health, and basic infrastructure. The poorest among them—especially the 75 countries eligible for concessional assistance from the International Development Association—will not be able to do this without international support.” This year, one in four developing economies is expected to remain poorer than it was on the eve of the pandemic in 2019. This proportion is twice as high for countries in fragile- and conflict-affected situations. Moreover, the income gap between developing economies and advanced economies is set to widen in nearly half of developing economies over 2020-24 —the highest share since the 1990s. Per capita income in these economies—an important indicator of living standards—is expected to grow by 3.0% on average through 2026, well below the average of 3.8% in the decade before COVID-19. Global inflation is expected to moderate to 3.5% in 2024 and 2.9% in 2025, but the pace of decline is slower than was projected just six months ago. Many central banks, as a result, are expected to remain cautious in lowering policy interest rates. Global interest rates are likely to remain high by the standards of recent decades—averaging about 4% over 2025-26, roughly double the 2000-19 average. “Although food and energy prices have moderated across the world, core inflation remains relatively high—and could stay that way,” said Ayhan Kose, the World Bank’s Deputy Chief Economist and Director of the Prospects Group . “That could prompt central banks in major advanced economies to delay interest-rate cuts. An environment of ‘higher-for-longer’ rates would mean tighter global financial conditions and much weaker growth in developing economies.” The latest Global Economic Prospects report also features two analytical chapters of topical importance. The first outlines how public investment can be used to accelerate private investment and promote economic growth. It finds that public investment growth in developing economies has halved since the global financial crisis, dropping to an annual average of 5% in the past decade. Yet public investment can be a powerful policy lever. For developing economies with ample fiscal space and efficient government spending practices, scaling up public investment by 1% of GDP can increase the level of output by up to 1.6% over the medium term. The second analytical chapter explores why small states—those with a population of around 1.5 million or less—suffer chronic fiscal difficulties. Two-fifths of the 35 developing economies that are small states are at high risk of debt distress or already in it. That’s roughly twice the share for other developing economies. Comprehensive reforms are needed to address the fiscal challenges of small states. Revenues could be drawn from a more stable and secure tax base. Spending efficiency could be improved —especially in health, education, and infrastructure. Fiscal frameworks could be adopted to manage the higher frequency of natural disasters and other shocks. Targeted and coordinated global policies can also help put these countries on a more sustainable fiscal path. Download the full report: https://bit.ly/GEP-June-2024-FullReport Download growth data:   https://bit.ly/GEP-June-2024-Data Download charts: https://bit.ly/GEP-June-2024-Charts Regional Outlooks: East Asia and Pacific:  Growth is expected to decelerate to 4.8% in 2024 and to 4.2% in 2025. For more, see  regional overview. Europe and Central Asia:  Growth is expected to edge down to 3.0% in 2024 before moderating to 2.9% in 2025. For more, see  regional overview . Latin America and the Caribbean:  Growth is expected to decline to 1.8% in 2024 before picking up to 2.7% in 2025. For more, see  regional overview . Middle East and North Africa:  Growth is expected to pick up to 2.8% in 2024 and 4.2% in 2025. For more, see  regional overview. South Asia:  Growth is expected to slow to 6.2% in 2024 and remain steady at 6.2% in 2025. For more, see regional overview. Sub-Saharan Africa: Growth is expected to pick up to 3.5% in 2024 and to 3.9% in 2025. For more, see  regional overview. Website:  www.worldbank.org/gep Facebook:  facebook.com/worldbank X (Twitter):  twitter.com/worldbank YouTube:  youtube.com/worldbank This site uses cookies to optimize functionality and give you the best possible experience. If you continue to navigate this website beyond this page, cookies will be placed on your browser. To learn more about cookies, click here . 455 IMAGES How to Write an Introduction for a Research Paper Step-by-Step? How to Write a Research Paper Introduction in 4 Steps Business Report FREE 46+ Research Paper Examples & Templates in PDF, MS Word How to make an introduction for a research paper example 38+ Research Paper Samples VIDEO How to Choose the Right Small Business Insurance Company Why small business owners should do research? FY MBA SEM-2 C25 BUSINESS RESEARCH PAPER MBA 125 QUESTION PAPER 2014 Discover Business Premium Collection Managerial Values Of Business Research Unlock R&D Funding: A Step-by-Step Walkthrough of SBIR STTR Grants COMMENTS Full article: Small business and entrepreneurship: their role in Introduction. Since the 1980s, small business owners and entrepreneurs have been receiving greater recognition as drivers of economic growth. Recently, several studies (Forsman Citation 2011; McKeever, Anderson, and Jack Citation 2014) have reported that long-term economic growth and prosperity require participation from entrepreneurs.Both experts and governmental authorities opt for fostering ... Full article: Small business strategic management practices and Search calls for papers Journal Suggester Open access publishing ... Introduction. In 2018, small businesses accounted for 99.9% of U.S. firms, ... one would expect a positive relationship between financial ratio analysis and small business performance. However, research findings are mixed in regard to this relationship, (e.g., ... Writing a Research Paper Introduction Table of contents. Step 1: Introduce your topic. Step 2: Describe the background. Step 3: Establish your research problem. Step 4: Specify your objective (s) Step 5: Map out your paper. Research paper introduction examples. Frequently asked questions about the research paper introduction. How to Write a Research Paper Introduction (with Examples) Define your specific research problem and problem statement. Highlight the novelty and contributions of the study. Give an overview of the paper's structure. The research paper introduction can vary in size and structure depending on whether your paper presents the results of original empirical research or is a review paper. PDF An Introduction to Business Research Put another way, in the honeycomb, the six main elements - namely: (1) research philosophy; (2) research approach; (3) research strategy; (4) research design; (5) data collection and (6) data analysis techniques - come together to form research methodology. This structure is characteristic of the main headings you will find in a methodology ... (PDF) SMALL BUSINESS, INNOVATION AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP Abstract. The purpose of this special issue is to examine small businesses, innovation, and entrepreneurship and show that although these three concepts have their own specific literature and can ... PDF The Impact of Covid-19 on Small Business Owners: National Bureau of paper addresses this limitation by creating estimates of the number of business owners from monthly Current Population Survey (CPS) microdata files. Using these timely data, I examine how COVID-19 impacted small business owners in mid-April 2020 - the first month to capture the wide-spread shelter-in-place restrictions in the United States. The importance of literature reviews in small business and The Journal of Small Business Management (JSBM) is a leading periodical in the field of small business and entrepreneurship. Founded in 1963, JSBM is considered the first academic journal dedicated to publishing scholarly research in this particular area (Finkle & Deeds, Citation 2001).The journal consistently ranks among the top 10 of all academic journals in the field of entrepreneurship ... Corporate entrepreneurship: a systematic literature review and future This article analyzes the state of the art of the research on corporate entrepreneurship, develops a conceptual framework that connects its antecedents and consequences, and offers an agenda for future research. We review 310 papers published in entrepreneurship and management journals, providing an assessment of the current state of research and, subsequently, we suggest research avenues in ... How to Write a Research Paper Introduction in 4 Steps Hannah, a writer and editor since 2017, specializes in clear and concise academic and business writing. She has mentored countless scholars and companies in writing authoritative and engaging content. A great research paper introduction starts with a catchy hook and ends with a road map for the research. At every step, QuillBot can help. How to Write a Research Introduction: 10 Steps (with Pictures) Download Article. 1. Announce your research topic. You can start your introduction with a few sentences which announce the topic of your paper and give an indication of the kind of research questions you will be asking. This is a good way to introduce your readers to your topic and pique their interest. The Impact of COVID-19 on Small Businesses' Performance and Innovation In light of COVID-19's far-reaching impact on all areas of life, and especially on the economy and the business sector, the aim of the present study was to investigate the pandemic's effect on the scope of operations and the revenues of small businesses in industrial sectors, and the extent to which adjustments or changes were made to ... 1. Introduction Methodology Paper 1. Introduction As the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program approached its twentieth year of operation, the U.S. Congress requested that the National Research Council (NRC) conduct a â comprehensive study of how the SBIR program has stimulated technological innovation and used small businesses to meet federal ... Introduction: Innovation and small business Abstract. This paper introduces the special issue of Small Business Economics on Innovation. What binds the papers together is either their focus on the effect of firm size on the causes and consequences of innovation or their focus on the role small firms play in reshaping the industrial landscape. Open innovation in small and medium-sized enterprises: An overview Pooran Wynarczyk is Professor of Small Enterprise Research and Director of the Small Enterprise Research Unit, Newcastle University Business School. She is an elected 'At Large Councillor' of the Royal Society for the Encouragement of the Arts, Manufacturers and Commerce (FRSA) and a former board director of the Institute for Small Business and Entrepreneurship. BUAD 101 The argumentative research paper consists of an introduction in which the writer clearly introduces the topic and informs his audience exactly which stance he intends to take; this stance is often identified as the thesis statement. An important goal of the argumentative research paper is persuasion, which means the topic chosen should be ... Small Business: Articles, Research, & Case Studies Between 2008 and 2014, the Top 4 banks sharply decreased their lending to small business. This paper examines the lasting economic consequences of this contraction, finding that a credit supply shock from a subset of lenders can have surprisingly long-lived effects on real activity. 31 Jul 2017. HBS Case. Strategic Innovation in Small Firms: An Introduction Tim Mazzarol and Sophie Reboud - 9781781003022 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 07/16/2020 11:30:59AM via free access fIntroduction 5 THE RESEARCH CHALLENGE The fields of entrepreneurship, innovation and small business management encompass a wide range of often eclectic and disconnected areas of inquiry. Small Business Growth and Performance: A Review of Literature This paper attempts to overcome this limitation by reviewing and synthesizing extant research on business growth. First, we begin by examining Penrose's view of firm growth. Second, we highlight ... Strategies for Enhancing Small Business Owners' Success Rates Walden University. Small-business owners represent 99.9% of all U.S. employer firms, employ 48% of the private sector employees, and provide 41.2% of the total U.S. private payroll. However, 50% of new small-business startups fail within the first 5 years of operation. PDF Understanding Small Business Growth and Development in the Context of By drawing the research from Kosova, this doctoral thesis offers a contextualized view of entrepreneurship and small business growth, enabling a better understanding of the importance of context for research in this field. The thesis concludes by discussing theoretical and practical Small Business Small businesses provide 55 percent of all jobs and 66 percent of all net new jobs since the 1970s. The 600,000+ franchised small businesses in the U.S. account for 40 percent of all retail sales and provide jobs for some 8 million people. The small business sector in America occupies 30 percent-50 percent of all commercial space—an ... (PDF) Introduction to Business Research Abstract. This book is intended for graduate and senior level undergraduate students pursuing business research. It provides through and specific details for writing research in business. It is ... NSF Small Business Innovation Research / Small Business Technology Introduction to Program: ... (i.e., do not include marketing materials, research results, academic papers, patent applications, ... NSF SBIR/STTR recipients are subject to the Small Business Innovation Research/Small Business Technology Transfer Phase I Grant General Conditions (SBIR-I) dated May 20,2024. ... Digital Technology Innovation as a Catalyst for Real Economy ... The study explored the influence of digital technology innovation on enterprises' primary business performance within the digital economy's integration with the real economy. By analyzing data from Chinese A-share listed companies between 2013 and 2021 and utilizing digital technology patents' IPC classification numbers to measure innovation, this research investigates the impact of ... The Frequency Regulation Strategy for Grid‐Forming Wind Turbine This paper proposes a coordinated frequency regulation strategy for grid-forming (GFM) type-4 wind turbine (WT) and energy storage system (ESS) controlled by DC voltage synchronous control (DVSC), where the ESS consists of a battery array, enabling the power balance of WT and ESS hybrid system in both grid-connected (GC) and stand-alone (SA) modes. Combination of the biologically inspired coupled system and high 1 introduction In many maritime countries, the monitoring of Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) has attracted significant attention due to its importance to homeland security [ 1 ]. According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the EEZ refers to an area of 200 nautical miles from the baseline of the territorial sea. Global Growth Is Stabilizing for the First Time in Three Years But 80% of world population will experience slower growth than in pre-COVID decade. WASHINGTON, June 11, 2024— The global economy is expected to stabilize for the first time in three years in 2024—but at a level that is weak by recent historical standards, according to the World Bank's latest Global Economic Prospects report.. Global growth is projected to hold steady at 2.6% in 2024 ... assignment essay homework paper phd report resume review speech thesis