3 ms·

Small anecdote, but good experience with DARPA and SBIR both. One thing I liked - they seemed pretty low overhead / low hassle and outcome / objective focused.

Small anecdote, but good experience with DARPA and SBIR both. One thing I liked - they seemed pretty low overhead / low hassle and outcome / objective focused. That contrasts VERY strong with most govt contracting which is under allowable cost or cost reimbursement setups where the absolute most important criteria is to bill enough costs to draw contract in the right cost buckets (which can be super annoying if local agencies require super complicated budget mod processes). In the cost based contracts, the focus really focuses on the accounting for the costs and other compliance related items. Ie, did you send someone to a conference with govt money, how can you prove you didn't use the govt money in this way or that way etc etc. Bam, welcome to personal activity reports with fund codes that no one understands (ie, major universities have an insane number of codes), and all the nightmares that follow including a fair bit of rule pending that even normally ethical folks find themselves being asked to to get through the paperwork. Seriously, you deliver the product at 50% of cost? You will get a nasty note from the head of your agency saying make sure you draw full contract because agency budget depends on the indirect portion of this award (ie, 30% to overhead) and even the govt agency supervising (who also budgeted based on a cut of full contract) AND other folks for whom leftover money makes life difficult (harder to close contract etc) AND because a lot of govt funding is on the repeat what we did last year model so drawing down everything avoids a cut next year when you may really need it. You determine it would be cheaper to do x vs y and that required a budget mod? Wait 1-2 months for commission approval if you even bother trying to fight it through (changes < 10% often ignored thankfully). I don't know how the accounting for SBIRs etc work, but somehow those projects always seemed more results oriented (so a LOT more fun to work on, focus is on getting a solution going).

tia4tia 6y ago
SBIR? Totally corrupt. Please don't ask. Can not, will not, must not tell. I can tell you one thing. If not the best but the second best or third best proposal is accepted, IT IS a problem for the US in the long run. Side node: there is money on China! Fell free to down vote me down. Again Please don't ask. Can not, will not, must not tell.
- tia4tia 6y ago
  I can tell you one thing about SBIR. "We have occasionly accepted new researchers" Really? SBIR is about blue sky research and funding blue sky ideas, potentially to risky for VC. It should be about NEW ideas and not about funding for contract research of buddies. And for SME and not for "independwnt" spin offs of large corporations. In China, I can get you funded.
- tia4tia 6y ago
  "don't apply" VC buddy of mine and former SBIR grantee who explained me how his "application" was selected out of the large stack of applicants. If asked: I am drunk and make this up. No wolf. Nothing to see here.
peterwoerner 6y ago
I used to work for a company doing SBIR work. We finished a contract underbudget returned the surplus money and got audited because of it. I don't know all of the accounting details, but SBIR has some leeway (because its supposed to be research) but it's not perfect. However, you are allowed to use surplus money to fund development of things which are related to what you actually put in the proposal/contract. So if you have a $100k contract, and meeting the requirements only required on the $75k, you should and do spend the rest of the $25k on extra features. But you have to spend all the money. I think the real thing about SBIR money, is that three people get phase 1 money and only one or two will get phase 2 money so you really have to deliver in order to get selected. Then if you get the phase 2, there basically isn't phase 3 money, so you better get to a product that is ready to be sold. Finally if can't show on paper a return on investment (e.g. nonSBIR funding or revenue from sales/acquisition) they cut you off from the SBIR spigot. So the incentives align with getting work done.
- m-ee 6y ago
  I worked at company in SBIR phase 2 and one quirk I found strange was that the money could be used for R&D not things deemed “production”. Endless 3D prints were ok, random software features were ok, tooling for injection molding was not. It wasn’t a particularly onerous requirement, but I think reinforced the tendencies of our former academic founders to spend a lot of time on research and none on development.
  - peterwoerner 6y ago
    Part of it is figuring out how to classify "production" as R&D. Well we need to test a prototype and in order to that we need it made as the same was as production due to structure property process relationships. Or manufacturing defects is going to be a huge source of bad thing so we need to do some research into the manufacturing process.

tia4tia 6y ago

SBIR? Totally corrupt. Please don't ask. Can not, will not, must not tell. I can tell you one thing. If not the best but the second best or third best proposal is accepted, IT IS a problem for the US in the long run. Side node: there is money on China! Fell free to down vote me down. Again Please don't ask. Can not, will not, must not tell.

tia4tia 6y ago
I can tell you one thing about SBIR. "We have occasionly accepted new researchers" Really? SBIR is about blue sky research and funding blue sky ideas, potentially to risky for VC. It should be about NEW ideas and not about funding for contract research of buddies. And for SME and not for "independwnt" spin offs of large corporations. In China, I can get you funded.
tia4tia 6y ago
"don't apply" VC buddy of mine and former SBIR grantee who explained me how his "application" was selected out of the large stack of applicants. If asked: I am drunk and make this up. No wolf. Nothing to see here.

peterwoerner 6y ago

I used to work for a company doing SBIR work. We finished a contract underbudget returned the surplus money and got audited because of it. I don't know all of the accounting details, but SBIR has some leeway (because its supposed to be research) but it's not perfect. However, you are allowed to use surplus money to fund development of things which are related to what you actually put in the proposal/contract. So if you have a $100k contract, and meeting the requirements only required on the $75k, you should and do spend the rest of the $25k on extra features. But you have to spend all the money. I think the real thing about SBIR money, is that three people get phase 1 money and only one or two will get phase 2 money so you really have to deliver in order to get selected. Then if you get the phase 2, there basically isn't phase 3 money, so you better get to a product that is ready to be sold. Finally if can't show on paper a return on investment (e.g. nonSBIR funding or revenue from sales/acquisition) they cut you off from the SBIR spigot. So the incentives align with getting work done.

m-ee 6y ago
I worked at company in SBIR phase 2 and one quirk I found strange was that the money could be used for R&D not things deemed “production”. Endless 3D prints were ok, random software features were ok, tooling for injection molding was not. It wasn’t a particularly onerous requirement, but I think reinforced the tendencies of our former academic founders to spend a lot of time on research and none on development.
- peterwoerner 6y ago
  Part of it is figuring out how to classify "production" as R&D. Well we need to test a prototype and in order to that we need it made as the same was as production due to structure property process relationships. Or manufacturing defects is going to be a huge source of bad thing so we need to do some research into the manufacturing process.