SBTDC | SBIR newsletter (September '05) / Proposal-writing basics

SBIR proposal-writing basics: If at first you don't succeed...

Ideally, the first Phase I SBIR/STTR proposal that you submit will be funded. The reality, however, is that these are very competitive programs, and with odds of about one out of every six Phase I SBIR proposals being funded, chances are you will get a "Dear John" reply the first time you submit.

So assuming you are one of the many crestfallen proposers who got a rejection notice, what do you do?

First, resist the temptation to write-off SBIR/STTR as dumb governmental programs in which only the most politically-connected companies can win. Also resist the temptation to tell the agency that they are unworthy of your great ideas. And especially resist the temptation to tell your Congresspersons how dishonest/inept/blind/high carb the agency is. It's time, instead, for a long walk, a good glass of wine, and maybe join a rugby team to vent your frustrations constructively.

Second, seek a debriefing. This is feedback from the agency on your proposal, ideally telling you exactly what you did well and what you did poorly (in the eyes of the reviewers). Some agencies send you this feedback automatically after winners have been announced, while others require that you request a debriefing. When you read the debriefing comments, you likely again will be angry and will want to write-off the SBIR/STTR programs, write a scathing letter to the agency, and call your Congressperson to "set straight" the agency. Once again, resist these evil temptations.

Third, look at the silver lining in the comments of the debriefing. Sure, they failed to see the great ideas you were proposing, but WHY didn't they see them? Isn't there a chance you didn't express them well enough, or that those ideas were buried in a bunch of gobbledygook? They didn't think your project was innovative enough - again, is it possible that you failed to make a compelling case for the ingenuity that is so obvious to you (you've had this idea stewing in your brain for years) but not so obvious to a harried reviewer trying to plow through a stack of proposals in a short time period? The debriefing, therefore, represents a learning opportunity -a chance to improve your proposal-writing skills so that next time…

Speaking of next time, some agencies allow you to resubmit an unfunded SBIR/STTR Phase I proposal. If the agency to which you applied allows a resubmittal, and if the debriefing indicates the reviewers didn't think your idea was crazy, and if you still want to pursue this project (can you say "persistence?"), then consider resubmitting the proposal.

If you decide to resubmit, there are several important considerations:

What are the agency's requirements and limitations on resubmittals? Many, for example, require that you include a page summarizing the changes you have made to the original proposal, and that you mark on the cover page (or elsewhere) that this is a resubmittal.

What legitimate comments did the reviewers make that require you to alter the original proposal? Every debriefing we've seen has had legitimate points that the proposer should address. You need to identify these; respond with changes in your team, strategy, work plan, etc.; and then convey the changes within the revised proposal. This conveyance means both summarizing the changes in the aforementioned one-page summary of revisions as well as usually making significant changes to one or more portions of the text.

What reviewers' comments were perhaps "off mark" in terms of being inaccurate, unfair, or ignoring something you said in the proposal? These require a little more tact - no, we didn't say "attack," we said TACT, meaning you need to be very diplomatic about your response. If the comment seems to indicate the reviewer did not see something that was in the original proposal, this is your opportunity to reference the original proposal and embellish a bit on the point (since it is obviously important to the reviewer, it deserves a little embellishment). If you disagree with a comment, then you again diplomatically state your case (and perhaps add additional evidence to support it), and hope it is not a "deal killer" in terms of the resubmittal's reviewer deciding no way, no how, will s/he fund someone with your point of view. But again, practice diplomacy, because as soon as your resubmittal points out the shortcomings of the reviewers' intellect or the appearance of his/her mother, you might as well tear your proposal in half to save reviewers the effort.

What portions of the proposal need to be updated? You'd be amazed how many resubmitted proposal we review that still have support letters from 2002, don't reflect recent changes in technology or world events, or fail to indicate additional work you've done in this area.

Remember, SBIR/STTR grants are very competitive programs, and no one wins all the time. The differences between SBIR/STTR winners and losers, though, are that the winners learn from their mistakes, they resubmit when appropriate, and they apply what they learn to future proposals.