Review of the SBIR and STTR Programs at the Department of Energy
The Department of Energy (DOE) asked the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to conduct a quadrennial review of its Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) programs, in accordance with a legislative mandate. Using quantitative and qualitative analyses of data, the committee convened by the National Academies to conduct the assessment produced this report on the operations and outcomes stemming from the SBIR/STTR grants awarded by DOE. The report undertakes a detailed examination of the SBIR and STTR programs at DOE in compliance with the legislative mandate. Drawing on published research plus existing data, the committee analyzed (1) the effectiveness of DOE’s SBIR/STTR processes and procedures on topic and awardee selection; (2) DOE outreach efforts to SBIR and STTR applicants, particularly to increase applications from small businesses that are new to the programs, from under-represented states, woman-owned, or minority-owned; (3) collaborations created between small businesses and research institutions on account of the programs; (4) a range of direct economic and non-economic impacts to awardees; and (5) the role of SBIR/STTR programs in stimulating technological innovation and contributing to DOE’s research and development needs, whether directly from awardees or indirectly through spillovers from other firms. The committee found that DOE’s SBIR and STTR programs are effective at funding small businesses that provide and stimulate research, experimentation, and innovation in the energy sector. The programs stimulate energy innovation, contribute to DOE’s research and development needs, and advance the national energy innovation system. DOE’s SBIR/STTR programs encourage research in technical areas identified by DOE as important to their research and development (R&D) needs directly through patents and products produced by the grantees and indirectly by stimulating complementary innovation. The majority of DOE SBIR/STTR awards go to firms that are not only small but also are young. This type of firm offers the potential for significant technological advances. A sizable fraction of awards goes to small firms that receive multiple awards over time, and the committee explored the underlying reasons for this pattern. The SBIR/STTR programs also help to diversify the geographic reach of DOE research activities. While the bulk of DOE research activities are centered at a relatively small number of institutions (17 national labs and a small number of public and private research universities), the SBIR/STTR programs provide a channel for DOE research funding and technical expertise to be accessed by small businesses throughout the United States. However, the programs attract only a small number of successful applications from businesses that are (a) woman-owned, (b) minority-owned, or (c) from under-represented states. DOE has not had a measurable impact on increasing the incidence of successful applications from these groups since 2012. The committee recommends that DOE modify its diversity and outreach efforts as a means of improving its ability to find firms with creative solutions to mission-oriented scientific needs. Finally, the committee found that although some firms have achieved significant commercialization outcomes, there has not been large-scale commercialization on a systematic basis by the awardees. In part this is due to the inherent risk in developing new technologies. The committee recommends that improvements be made to the commercialization assistance provided to awardees. Recent legislative changes have increased the amount available for assistance, but this assistance must be provided through third-party vendors. This commercialization assistance cannot be used to recruit and retain in-house marketing and business talent which might improve long-run commercial prospects for the small business. From its set of 16 findings, the committee developed eight recommendations, listed in full at the end of this summary, in Boxes S-1 and S-2. This summary presents an overview of the study and highlights the 10 findings and six recommendations the committee believes are most important.
