Bill Overview
Title: A bill to permanently authorize the SBIR and STTR programs.
Description: This bill permanently authorizes the Small Business Innovation and Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs. The programs are administered by various federal agencies and provide competitive awards for domestic small businesses to conduct research and development projects that have the potential for commercialization.
Sponsors: Sen. Shaheen, Jeanne [D-NH]
Target Audience
Population: Domestic small businesses involved in research and development
Estimated Size: 5000000
- The SBIR and STTR programs are specifically designed for domestic small businesses focused on research and development projects.
- Hundreds of thousands of small businesses exist in the United States, many of which could potentially benefit from these programs.
- Not all small businesses will apply or qualify for these specific programs, but these initiatives are considered crucial for innovation in the realms of technology and science.
- The impact can be quite indirect as well since commercialization of new technologies can lead to job creation and economic growth, affecting a broader population.
Reasoning
- The policy targets a relatively small segment of the entire small business population in the US because only businesses involved in R&D can participate.
- Not all eligible businesses will apply, or even know about the programs, limiting the immediate impact.
- The indirect impact is significant over time as successful commercialization of research could lead to broader economic benefits and job creation.
- This policy's long-term benefits hinge on successful commercialization, which is uncertain and depends on various factors including market conditions and business execution.
Simulated Interviews
CEO of a tech startup (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 43 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The SBIR program could provide us with crucial funding that could make or break our next project.
- It’s not just about the money but the validation and partnerships that come with it.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Research Scientist at a biotech startup (Boston, MA)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- SBIR funding could significantly delay the financial crunch we face as we move from research to trials.
- It could potentially save us years of looking for venture capital.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Product Manager (Austin, TX)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think this policy could encourage our management to apply for STTR funding, especially with the commercialization focus.
- It would be great to channel more funds into sustainable technology efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Owner of a manufacturing small business (Detroit, MI)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These programs seem like a great opportunity, but I’m unsure how to navigate them or if we even qualify.
- A resource hub or guidance might increase our likelihood of applying.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 4 |
Chief Financial Officer (New York, NY)
Age: 34 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- These programs could accelerate our development processes by providing financial aid without equity loss.
- We are cautious but optimistic about the potential benefits.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Engineer and business owner (Chicago, IL)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- SBIR grants have helped us pivot our resources effectively in the past, and this policy will ensure continuity.
- With assured future funding rounds, we can plan longer-term projects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Software Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 28 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I feel optimistic that SBIR could give us the boost we need to stay competitive.
- It’s critical for keeping our competitive edge in the fast-moving tech industry.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
CEO of a small agricultural equipment company (Raleigh, NC)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Getting funding from SBIR or STTR would allow us to test new agri-tech solutions.
- We’re hopeful about the opportunities for sustainable farming technologies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Entrepreneur in renewable energy (Houston, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The extension of SBIR and STTR is crucial for us, especially during the scaling phase.
- This could transform how we integrate innovation into our business practices.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 3 |
Tech entrepreneur (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 32 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy recognizes the vital role small businesses play in tech advancement.
- Access to this kind of fund allows small players to act quickly in the market.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2900000000 (Low: $2500000000, High: $3400000000)
Year 2: $2900000000 (Low: $2500000000, High: $3400000000)
Year 3: $2900000000 (Low: $2500000000, High: $3400000000)
Year 5: $2900000000 (Low: $2500000000, High: $3400000000)
Year 10: $2900000000 (Low: $2500000000, High: $3400000000)
Year 100: $2900000000 (Low: $2500000000, High: $3400000000)
Key Considerations
- The programs were initially temporary and already contribute significantly to the innovation ecosystem.
- A permanent authorization might attract more firms to engage in R&D, enhancing innovation.
- Federal agencies may need adjustments in budget allocation to permanently fund these programs at current or increased levels.