National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Small Business Innovation Research 1998 Program Solicitation
4.1 Phase I
4.2 Phase II
4.3 Debriefing of Unsuccessful Offerors
All Phase I and II proposals will be evaluated and judged on a competitive basis. NASA may elect to fund several or none of the offers to the same subtopic.
Proposals judged to be responsive to this Solicitation will be evaluated on a competitive basis by peer review.
4.1.1 Evaluation Process. Proposals will be first screened for compliance with administrative requirements of the Solicitation. Those that pass are then reviewed to determine whether they respond to the subtopic chosen by the offeror and have described a relevant, specific innovation. Those found to be responsive are evaluated in greater depth at the NASA Installation(s) responsible for the subtopic, using the factors listed under Section 4.1.2. Other NASA Installations may also evaluate and recommend for selection any proposals accepted for evaluation.
Proposals are expected to provide all information needed for complete evaluation, and evaluators are not required to seek additional information. Evaluators are required to use judgment in assessing proposal information, making use of their personal expertise, knowledge and experience. Evaluations will be performed by NASA scientists and engineers and by qualified experts outside of NASA (industry, academia, and other government agencies) as required to determine or verify the merit of every aspect of a proposal.
4.1.2 Phase I Evaluation Criteria. NASA will give primary consideration to the scientific and technical merit and feasibility of the Phase I proposal. The proposal’s potential for commercial application will also be a consideration. NASA will uniformly apply the following evaluation factors and procedures to all proposals accepted for review:
Factor 1. Scientific and technical merit and feasibility of the proposed innovation; relevance to the subtopic; benefit to NASA; and the specific objectives and approaches. Innovation and originality are essential considerations.
Factor 2. Experience and Qualifications of the offeror, the Principal Investigator and other key personnel, consultants, and subcontractors, if any; and adequacy of instrumentation and facilities to be available for the project.
Factor 3. Soundness of the proposed work plan, budget, and schedule for meeting the Phase I objectives of determining the feasibility and merit of the proposed innovation preparatory to proceeding to Phase II.
Factor 4. Commercial potential of the proposed innovation in terms of future commercial products and services and the likelihood of the offeror to bring successfully developed technology to commercial application (see Section 2.8).
Technical Merit and Feasibility. The sum of the numerical scores for factors 1, 2, and 3 constitutes the numerical value for the Technical Merit and Feasibility of a proposal. Factor 1 has twice the weight of both Factor 2 and Factor 3.
Commercial Merit. This evaluation will be distinct from the evaluation of technical merit and feasibility and will apply an adjectival rating to the proposals expressing one of the following judgments of Commercial Merit: Excellent, Very Good, Average, Below Average, Poor, or Insufficient Data Provided.
Installation Selection Recommendations. Each NASA Installation will prioritize (rank) its recommendations for selection and submit them to the SBIR Source Selection Official. Recommendations will note the Technical Merit and Feasibility scores and the judgments of Commercial Merit for each proposal and any special considerations. The number of proposals recommended for selection by each Installation may exceed the number finally selected.
4.1.3 Selection. The SBIR Source Selection Official has final selection authority for choosing the specific proposals for contract negotiation. Most selection decisions are aligned with priorities recommended by each Installation. Other factors influencing selection decisions include balance between NASA’s strategic enterprises and distribution between critical technology disciplines.
Firms selected for negotiations that may lead to contract awards will be notified by mail. The list of selections will also be made available electronically (see Section 1.5.2) and by NASA Press Release announcement. Each notification letter will identify the Contracting Officer at the NASA Installation responsible for negotiating the Phase I contract.
4.1.4 Contracting. Fixed-price contracts for up to $70,000 and 6-month duration will be issued. Simplified contract documentation is employed. NASA will make the Phase I model contract and other documents available to the public electronically through the Internet (see Section 1.5.2) at the time of selection announcement. Documents that will be available include:
4.2.1 Phase II Proposals. The object of Phase II is to continue the R/R&D effort from Phase I. Only NASA Phase I awardees may compete for NASA Phase II projects. The SBIR Phase I contract will serve as a request for proposal (RFP) for an SBIR Phase II follow-on contract. Phase II proposals are more comprehensive than those required for Phase I. Submission of a Phase II proposal is strictly voluntary and NASA assumes no responsibility for any proposal preparation expenses.
4.2.2 Phase II Proposal Contents. Phase II proposals shall be addressed in the following "Part" order listed. Failure to include any requested information in the proposal may make it non-responsive to the RFP.
Part 1: Cover Page. (Form provided by the NASA Field Center)
Part 2: Project Summary. (Form provided by the NASA Field Center)
Part 3: Table of Contents.
Part 4: Results of the Phase I Project. Briefly describe how Phase I has proven the feasibility of the innovation, provided a rationale for both NASA and commercial applications, and demonstrated the ability of the offeror to conduct R/R&D.
Part 5: Phase II Technical Objectives, Approach, and Work Plan. Define the specific technical objectives of the Phase II research and technical approach to meet these objectives; and provide a work plan defining specific tasks, performance schedules, milestones, and deliverables.
Part 6: Company Information. Describe the capability of the firm to carry out Phase II and Phase III activities including its organization, operations, number of employees, R/R&D capabilities, and experience relevant to the work proposed.
Part 7: Facilities and Equipment. Discuss requirements for and the availability of equipment, instrumentation, and facilities required for Phase II. If an offeror proposes the use of unique or one-of-a-kind Government facilities, a statement, describing the uniqueness of the facility and it's availability to the offeror at specified times, signed by the appropriate Government Official must be included with the proposal. Proposals lacking this signed statement will be rejected without evaluation.
Part 8: Key Personnel. Identify the key personnel for the project, confirm their specific availability for Phase II, and discuss their qualifications in terms of education, work experience, and accomplishments that are relevant to the project. For any PI who is an employee of an academic or non-profit organization, provide a release statement as described in Section 1.4.3 of this Solicitation. Proposals that do not include the required written release statement will be rejected.
Part 9: Consultants and Subcontracts. Describe in detail any subcontracting, consultant, or other business arrangements and provide written evidence of their availability for the project. For Phase II, a minimum of one-half of the work (contract cost less profit) must be performed by the proposing small business concern unless approved in writing by the contracting officer.
Part 10: Commercialization and Phase III Plans. Describe: plans for commercialization (Phase III) in terms of each of the following areas:
(1) Product or Service Commercial Feasibility: Provide a description of the (a) contemplated commercial product and/or service, the corresponding commercial venture, and the unique competitive advantage of both; and (b) technical obstacles to commercial applications, as well as plans to address these obstacles.
(2) Market Feasibility and Competition: Describe: (a) the target market niche including the distinction between U.S. Government and other markets; (b) the estimated potential market size in terms of revenues to be realized by the offeror from U.S. Government markets and, separately, from other markets; (c) the competitive environment in terms of present and likely competing similar and alternative technologies, and corresponding competing domestic and foreign entities; and (d) significant developments within the targeted business sector; (e) offeror’s ability, if any, to protect relevant technology with patents or rights to exclusive access.
(3) Strategic Relevance to the Offeror: Describe the relevance of the targeted commercial venture to the offeror's: (a) current business segments; (b) relative position with respect to its competitors; and (c) strategic planning for the next 5 years.
(4) Key Management and Technical Personnel and Organizational Structure: Describe: (a) the skills and experience of key management and technical personnel relevant to bringing innovative technology to commercial application, (b) current organizational structure, and (c) plans and timeline for obtaining the balance of all necessary key business development expertise and other staffing not currently in-house.
(5) Production and Operations: Describe: (a) business development progress to date regarding the contemplated commercial venture; (b) obstacles, plans, and associated timetable of key milestones regarding all key business development elements; and (c) sources and components of private physical resources committed to date and plans for obtaining the balance of the necessary physical resources.
(6) Financial Planning: Describe: (a) the amounts and sources of private financial resources expended and committed to date with respect to the technology development project, and separately, with respect to business development of the targeted commercial venture; (b) significant requirements of potential investors, creditors, and insurers of the venture; (c) pro forma statement of cash flow with respect to the targeted commercial venture that includes best estimates of at least the following major components and timing thereof: capital investment, revenues, principal and interest payments, depreciation of relevant assets, other operating expenses; and (d) evidence of the offeror’s current financial strength (audited or unaudited financial statements may be appended to address this).
Part 11: Capital Commitments Supporting Phases II and III. Describe and document capital commitments from non-SBIR sources or from internal funds for pursuit of Phase II and Phase III. Offerors for Phase II contracts are strongly urged to obtain valid non-SBIR funding support commitments for follow-on Phase III activities and additional support of Phase II from parties other than the proposing firm. Valid funding support commitments must provide that a specific, substantial amount will be made available to the firm to pursue the stated Phase II and/or III objectives. They must indicate the source, date, and conditions or contingencies under which the funds will be made available. Alternatively, self-commitments of the same type and magnitude that are required from outside sources can be considered. If Phase III will be funded internally, offerors should describe their financial position.
Evidence of funding support commitments from outside parties must be provided in writing to the proposing entity and should accompany the Phase II proposal. Letters of commitment should specify available funding commitments, other resources to be provided, and any contingent conditions. Expressions of technical interest by such parties in the Phase II research or of potential future financial support are insufficient and will not be accepted as support commitments by NASA.
Part 12: Related R/R&D. Describe R/R&D related to the proposed work and affirm that the proposed objectives have not already been achieved and that the same development is not presently being pursued elsewhere under contract to the government.
Part 13: Proposal Pricing. Special instructions for pricing the Phase II proposal will be provided in the Phase I contract and may be provided in writing from the contracting officer.
4.2.3 Phase II Evaluation Factors. The evaluation of Phase II proposals that may result from Phase I contracts awarded under this Solicitation will apply the following factors:
Factor 1. Scientific/technical merit and feasibility of the proposed R/R&D, with special emphasis on its innovation, originality, and technical payoff potential if successful, including the degree to which Phase I objectives were met, the feasibility of the innovation, and whether the Phase I results indicate a Phase II project is appropriate.
Factor 2. Future importance and eventual value of the product, process, or technology results to the NASA mission.
Factor 3. Capability of the Small Business Concern. NASA will assess the capability of the concern to conduct Phase II based on: (a) the validity of the project plans for achieving the stated goals; (b) the qualifications and ability of the project team (Principal Investigator, company staff, consultants and subcontractors) relative to the proposed research; and (c) the availability of any required equipment and facilities.
Factor 4. Commercial Potential. Consideration will be given to the following:
(1) Commercial potential of the technology: This includes an assessment of the offeror’s ability to demonstrate: (a) a specific, well-defined commercial product or service based on the technology to be developed; (b) a realistic target market niche of sufficient size; (c) that the targeted commercial product or service has strong potential for uniquely meeting a well-defined need within the target market niche; and (d) a commitment of significant private financial, physical, and technical personnel resources.
(2) Demonstrated commercial intent of the offeror: This includes the assessment of the offeror's ability to demonstrate: (a) the importance of the targeted commercial venture to the offeror’s current business and strategic planning; (b) a targeted commercial venture that does not rely on continued U.S. Government markets or on other U.S. Government support beyond Government need; and (c) the adequacy of all resource commitments for Phase III development of the technology to a state of readiness for commercial application.
(3) Capability of the offeror to bring successfully developed technology to commercial application: This includes assessment of the offeror's ability to demonstrate: (a) the offeror’s past success in bringing SBIR and other innovative technologies to commercial application; (b) well-thought-out business planning; (c) strong likelihood of the offeror’s bringing the remaining necessary private financial, physical, personnel and other resources to bear in a timely way to achieve commercial application of the technology in the not too distant term subsequent to Phase II; and (d) the strength of the current and continued financial viability of the offeror.
In applying these commercial criteria, NASA will assess proposal information in terms of credibility, objectivity, reasonableness of key assumptions, independent corroborating evidence, internal consistency, demonstrated awareness of key risk areas and critical business vulnerabilities, and other indicators of sound business analysis and judgment.
4.2.4 Evaluation and Selection. Factors 1, 2, and 3 will be scored numerically. Factors 2 and 3 are of equal importance, while Factor 1 is more important than either 2 or 3. The sum of the scores for Factors 1, 2, and 3 will comprise the Total Technical Merit score for a Phase II proposal. Proposals receiving high numerical scores will be evaluated and rated for their commercial potential using the criteria listed in Factor 4 and by applying the same adjectival ratings as set forth for Phase I proposals (see Section 4.1.2).
Each NASA Installation managing Phase I projects will use these factors to evaluate the Phase II proposals it receives that are responsive to the Phase II RFP. The Installation's SBIR Committee will then rank the evaluated proposals on technical merit and commercial potential, noting other considerations such as NASA priority. Their recommendations and supporting information will then be submitted to the SBIR Source Selection Official. Final selections by the SBIR Source Selection Official will be based on recommendations from all Installations; NASA Headquarters Program Offices assessments of project value to NASA programs and plans; and any other evaluations or assessments (particularly of commercial potential) that may become available to the Source Selection Official.
4.3 Debriefing of Unsuccessful Offerors
After final Phase I and Phase II selection decisions have been announced, an offeror may submit a written request for a debriefing (proposal critique). Telephone requests for debriefings will not be accepted. Requests must be made within 60 days after notification has been mailed to the offeror that their proposal was not selected for award. NASA is not obligated to accept late requests.
Debriefings are intended to acquaint the offeror with perceived strengths and weaknesses of the proposal. NASA will provide comments by the evaluators, but debriefings are not opportunities to reopen selection decisions. Debriefings will not disclose the identity of the proposal evaluators nor provide proposal scores, proposal rankings in the competition, or the content of and comparisons with other proposals with which they were in competition.
4.3.1 Phase I. For Phase I proposals, all requests for debriefing must be directed in writing, either by mail or fax, to the SBIR Program Manager (see Section 1.5.2). Written debriefings, which include the comments of the evaluators, will be mailed only to the corporate official designated in the proposal.
4.3.2 Phase II. To obtain debriefings on Phase II proposals, offerors must mail written requests to the Contracting Officer at the NASA Installation to which their Phase II proposal was submitted. Debriefings may be made to either the corporate official or their designee identified in writing to the contracting officer.
[ table of content ]