91990025R0002.ResponsestoQuestions.docx

Request for Proposals 91990025R0002 Small Business Innovation Research Program Phase IA Amendment 0001 Closing Date: January 8, 2025, 11:00 a.m. ET

U.S. Department of Education’s (Department or ED) responses to clarification questions submitted by December 2, 11:00 A.M. ET:

NOTES!

· Offerors must note that there are email attachment size restrictions. The Department of Education cannot accept attachments larger than 25 MB. The Government is not responsible for attachment size restrictions that may exist on offerors' email servers! Offerors are advised to check with their provider for information on email size restrictions and plan accordingly.

· The Phase IA solicitation has incorrect nomenclature regarding the saving of the Phase IA proposal, which guided offerors to save their file as a “Phase IB” proposal. The amended information is this document is that the Phase IA proposal must be named using the nomenclature:

“CompanyName.PhaseIA.ProposalTitle.pdf” or “CompanyName.PhaseIA.ProposalTitle.doc(x)”

Question 1.

I have downloaded the Phase 1B documents, however, I do not see the submission documentation for the Phase 1A program which is referenced in the 1B solicitation. Can you provide some clarification as to which solicitation proposal we should address?

Response:

Offerors can locate information on submitting Phase IA (and Phase IB) proposals in the respective solicitations in Section V. INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSAL SUBMISSION.

The link to the Phase IA solicitation is: https://sam.gov/opp/c5f2a4831ad14a869d23f3de34f5b58a/view The link to the Phase IB solicitation is:

https://sam.gov/opp/14d0f2ff3b944f4fa14e1c690d5b696e/view

Question 2.

Would it be correct to apply for Phase 1A if you have a prototype in the market with a small number of users, not yet research based, and the component you would like to prototype and build is based on early data collected from the first prototype? The 'new and novel' component was not even on the radar until data collected over late summer? I hope that question made sense.

Response:

If a prototype is already available in the market with a small number of users, a proposal focusing on either further developing that prototype or adding a new component to that prototype would not be appropriate for the Phase IA solicitation which focuses on novel prototype development where no or limited development has previously occurred. Offerors are advised to review the guidelines in the Phase IA and IB solicitations for additional information.

Question 3.

We are currently preparing the proposal for SBIR of DOE. I am just wondering, with Trump's term, would the SBIR still be open and have funds allocated for FY2025, i.e. # 91990025R0002 Response:

ED/IES has a legislative mandate to operate the Department of Education’s SBIR program and currently has active funding opportunities that we anticipate fully funding in FY2025.

Question 4.

Question: (Redacted) is a for-profit social enterprise, registered as a Low-Profit Limited-Liability Company (L3C) in Illinois registered in 2022. (Redacted 1) I majority owned (70%) by a 501c3 nonprofit organization, (Redacted 2). We have two partners who are also for-profit entities, that could apply as primes but we would prefer to submit under (Redacted 1). I wasn’t clear in the eligibility for SBIR if we could apply with (Redacted 1) the prime recipient?

Response:

The offeror is required to be a for-profit small business and to spend at least two-thirds of the Phase I budget. As described in the solicitations, the small business can subcontract to other entities including for-profit or non-profits or consultants. Subcontractors are permitted to spend up to a maximum of one-third of the Phase I budget. See Page 73. Under A. SBIR Program Information, Eligibility for additional information.

Question 5.

(1) Phase I Status as a Sole Proprietorship: Would it be acceptable to start as a Sole Proprietor with a DBA filing in Phase I to minimize initial expenses? In addition to a DBA filing and bank account, are there any other entity creation requirements I would need to meet?

(2) Conversion to Corporation in Phase II: Is it permissible to convert to a Corporation by or during Phase II, potentially to seek private capital?

(3) Assignment or Transfer to a Corporation: Would it be possible to assign or transfer the grant to a Corporation before or during Phase II, assuming the conditions such as same ownership, model, and business name are maintained?

Response:

(1) It would it be acceptable to start as a Sole Proprietor with a DBA filing in Phase I, provided the DBA has obtained a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) as registered on SAM.gov: SAM.gov | Duns - Sam UEI and included the UEI in the proposal.

(2) It would be permissible to convert to a Corporation by or during Phase II, potentially to seek private capital.

(3) It would be possible to assign or transfer the ED/IES SBIR award to a Corporation before or during Phase II, assuming the conditions such as same ownership, model, and business name are maintained.

Question 6:

My company, (Redacted), was awarded a Phase I SBIR grant from the (other agency). We had a successful Phase I project have submitted our Phase II proposal, but we are interested in the ED-IES SBIR program. Are we eligible to apply for a Phase II award from ED-IES if our Phase I was with (other agency)? If so, how do we go about applying? I couldn't find a clear pathway online (sorry if I missed something). If not, is applying for Phase I an option through ED-IES an option?

Response:

ED/IES SBIR does not permit Phase I awardees who received the award from a different agency to submit a Phase II proposal under its program. Offerors who have received a prior SBIR award from ED/IES or a different agency are permitted to submit an additional proposal through the ED/IES SBIR program, provided the proposal is for the development of something new and different. Offerors are required to disclose prior similar or related awards in Section H. of the proposal.

Question 7.

I'm preparing a proposal for the 2025 ED/IES SBIR Phase IA and require a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) via SAM.gov registration. During registration, I encountered the question: Q: Select the answer that best fits your intentions today: Out of all available options, I believe the appropriate selection is "Participate in, or apply for another type of US Federal Government program," with program name "2025 ED/IES SBIR." Please confirm if this is the correct approach.

Response:

It is the correct approach to select “All Awards”. Make sure the purpose of registration is for “All Awards”.

Question 8:

I opened the FAQ pdf file provided from this webpage but there seems to be no answers to the questions and the links aren't working. Please let me know if there's a different FAQ pdf I should be seeing. https://ies.ed.gov/sbir/pdf/SBIR_FAQ.pdf Response:

The FAQ file is working at that same URL, https://ies.ed.gov/sbir/pdf/SBIR_FAQ.pdf

Question 9.

Is the application limited to K-12 Education? Are ideas and technologies that address college level education eligible for applying?

Response:

No, the ED/IES SBIR Priority Areas allow for proposals outside of the K-12 age range. Offerors should refer to the solicitation on page 9, C. Priority Area for information in response to this question.

Question 10.

We would greatly appreciate the opportunity to schedule a 15-minute feedback session to discuss our proposal and gather your valuable insights.

Response:

Per U.S. Government Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), ED/IES SBIR program personnel and other government personnel are not permitted to engage with potential offerors to provide technical assistance or answer questions while the solicitations are open or during proposal review. Program personnel are available to provide technical assistance outside of the dates when the annual program is open.

Question 11.

(1) I’ve been speaking with multiple software developers regarding my project and most have said that the initial budget of Phase I isn’t enough to develop a fully functioning prototype; however, they could create a clickable prototype and the technical documentation. Would a clickable prototype and technical documentation be enough to be awarded Phase I as well as be able to move to Phase II to build actually develop the software?

(2) Also, in one of my budget pathways, I have a production venue buildout in Phase II of the grant and I want to know if that’s feasible within the parameters of the grant award.

Response:

(1) The solicitation indicates that the Phase I project is intended to result in a functioning prototype and to conduct a pilot study to test the prototype when used by end-users. It would seem unlikely that a Phase I proposal to develop a clickable prototype would be sufficient to meet this requirement.

(2) Without further information it is not possible to address the question about plans for a production venue buildout in relation to its inclusion in a proposal.

Question 12.

My team is working on a novel approach (REDACTED). I would love to connect to introduce myself and better understand if this path aligns with the goals of the current solicitation, particularly considering the focus and capabilities of our edtech company. Could you let me know when you might have some time for a brief conversation?

Response:

Per U.S. Government Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), ED/IES SBIR program personnel and other government personnel are not permitted to engage with potential offerors to provide technical assistance or answer questions while the solicitations are open or during proposal review. Program personnel are available to provide technical assistance outside of the dates when the annual program is open.

Question 13.

I saw your solicitation on SAM.gov, and wanted to see if you might have a few minutes to review and discuss a potential “easy button” option from a contracting perspective using the (REDACTED). I have attached a description of one contract vehicle that may be an option in the future, but have a couple of others if you or your other contracting officers have time to review?

Response:

Per U.S. Government Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), ED/IES SBIR program personnel and other government personnel are not permitted to engage with potential offerors to provide technical assistance or answer questions while the solicitations are open or during proposal review. Program personnel are available to provide technical assistance outside of the dates when the annual program is open.

Question 14.

I want to check that I am reading correctly the statement that I cannot submit a similar proposal for more than one SBIR opportunity. Specifically, the DoE opportunity is one avenue due in January and there is a 2nd opportunity from NSF that is due in March. Am I not allowed to apply for both? Any clarity would be greatly appreciated.

Response:

Offerors are permitted to submit similar or related proposal to multiple SBIR programs, or other funding programs. The offeror must disclose this information in SECTION H: Disclosure of Similar or Related Awards or Proposals. Funding cannot be accepted from multiple programs to conduct the same or similar work.

Question 15.

We are looking forward to submitting and SBIR proposal, but if you have time, I would love to find a quick window to ask questions regarding if we should be a Phase IA or Phase IB submission.

Response:

Per U.S. Government Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), ED/IES SBIR program personnel and other government personnel are not permitted to engage with potential offerors to provide technical assistance or answer questions while the solicitations are open or during proposal review. Program personnel are available to provide technical assistance outside of the dates when the annual program is open.1

Question 16.

Do you do any technical assistance to applicants prior to application or during the actual award?

Response:

Per U.S. Government Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), ED/IES SBIR program personnel and other government personnel are not permitted to engage with potential offerors to provide technical assistance or answer questions while the solicitations are open or during proposal review. Program personnel are available to provide technical assistance outside of the dates when the annual program is open. There are also regular check-ins during the award period to address the final clause of the question.

Question 17.

I developed a software approach to deal with unsolvable real-life problems. It won a (Redacted) award for (REDACTED) in 2005. It has not been field tested because unique solutions ‘solve’ the problem and then there is no problem to solve, see sample below. The software has seven books that could be used as ‘texts.’ Is this a IA or IB proposal?

Response:

The offeror must make the determination if a proposal is a better fit for a Phase IA or Phase IB proposal. See the solicitations for guidance and specifications.

Question 18.

On page 36 of the solicitation, it says there is a maximum of 3 commercial pathway letters for Section F. However, on page 94, it says there is a maximum of 5 commercial pathway letters for Section F. This discrepancy was found by my colleague, (Redacted). Would you be able to clarify the limit for us?

Response:

The correct number of letters in Section F. to support commercial pathways toward commercialization that can be included in a Phase I proposal is 3. (Offerors who submit a proposal under the Direct to Phase II solicitation can include up to 5 letters.)

Question 19.

Question: Recognizing that only 1/3 of the grant can be provided to subrecipients, is there a requirement on which partner applies to the project as the prime recipient between a researcher, developer, and the edtech company/organization?

Response:

The offeror must determine how to include members of the project team in relation to the requirements for the budget.

Question 20.

Question: (1) Compliance with 13 CFR 121.702, ownership and control; I am a U.S. citizen and professor at a U.S. university. I conceived of an educational innovation and created it with the help of two colleagues who are E.U. citizens and E.U. residents. I formed a single owner LLC in the U.S. (I am the owner) so that we could do small volume sales and pilot studies of the educational innovation. As the pilot studies were favorable, I would like to compete for an SBIR award. Prior to doing so, I would like to amend the operating agreement and membership of the LLC in a way that provides equity to my colleagues, while maintaining eligibility for SBIR funding.

(1) If I maintain 51 % ownership of the LLC and provide 49 % to my E.U. colleagues, is that acceptable for compliance with 13 CFR 121.702? If, after the award is over, I provide additional equity to my E.U. colleagues, does that violate any provision of 13 CFR 121.702 (i.e., is there a “look forward” period for ownership and control?)? Alternatively, if prior to the SBIR proposal I dissolve the LLC and form a C-corp in which I own 33.3 % voting stock, and distribute the remainder of the stock as non-voting stock to my E.U. colleagues, would that be compliant with 13 CFR 121.702?

(2): Project team and work; My colleagues in the E.U. have deep technical, sales, and entrepreneurial expertise. Their insight has been critical to the project’s success so far, and I believe their continued participation will ensure future success. At the same time, I understand that all R&D and work for the project must be performed in the U.S. by U.S. citizens or legally eligible workers. May I list my E.U. colleagues as project team members as long as they serve in an advisory capacity and do not receive SBIR funds for their participation? Is a waiver or U.S. government approval for unpaid participation necessary? Or, is there a waiver or U.S. government approval I could or should seek that would enable my colleagues’ paid participation?

Response:

(1) The majority ownership (51%) must be maintained throughout the duration of the contract award. This also applies if an LLC changes to a C-Corp (i.e., majority ownership/voting stock).

(2) Individuals who are outside of the United States may not serve as project team members nor can team members who act in advisory capacity and do not receive SBIR funds for their participation. A waiver for participation of individuals in an ED/IES SBIR award will not be provided.

Question 21:

Do you have any time on your schedules this week or early next week for a quick virtual meeting?

Per U.S. Government Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), ED/IES SBIR program personnel and other government personnel are not permitted to engage with potential offerors to provide technical assistance or answer questions while the solicitations are open or during proposal review. Program personnel are available to provide technical assistance outside of the dates when the annual program is open.

Question 22.

(1) Is it possible to know if I am eligible to submit for the Phase IA through a non-profit who has the UEI number (Redacted). I would like to partner with them with my new LLC.

(2) How long does the LLC have to be active before submitting.

Response:

(1) Non-profit businesses are not eligible to receive awards from ED/IES SBIR. Offerors should refer to Page 73. under A. SBIR Program Information, Eligibility for additional information.

(2) There is no length of time that is required for a business entity to be active before submitting a proposal.

Question 23.

I have read the frequently asked questions. I may have missed it but it is not clear to me how to find the link to the actual application or how to navigate to get to the application.

Response:

There is no link to an application included in the ED/IES SBIR solicitations. Offerors must construct a proposal following and using the templates from the sections in the solicitation under 3. Proposal Contents.

Question 24.

Inquiring whether the Ed SBIR has the same requirements as the NSF SBIR, where you submit a pitch, prior to having to register on SAM.Gov, and before submitting a full proposal.

Response:

ED/IES SBIR does not include a project pitch prior to submission or prior to registration on SAM.gov.

Question 25:

I'm working with a small edtech business that is planning to pursue a Phase 1A SBIR submission. I worked with them to develop their product's Logic Model, and Phase 1 R&D will test key assumptions related to it. I will serve as their research partner and will help them develop the R&D plan that we'll include in the proposal. I'd like to know what we are permitted to include in an Appendix or section with supplemental materials? Given narrative space constraints, I anticipate that it will make sense to provide a written description of the Logic Model in the body of the narrative (the full diagram would take up a lot of space in order to make the content legible). We'd like to include the Logic Model Diagram in the Appendix if we're allowed to do so Response:

All requested information is required to be included in the 10-page Technical Narrative, unless specifically requested in another section. A Logic Model would be included within the Technical Narrative and not in any of the section outside of the narrative.

Question 26.

I'm reaching out to you about the role of research in submitting a strong proposal for the ED/IES SBIR solicitation. Specifically, I would like to confirm if offerors are required to have conducted prior research surveys—such as concept testing with eventual users or pilot research on prototype feasibility, usability, or promise—in order to be considered competitive. The FAQ mentions that all offerors must present results from concept testing and pilot research (when relevant) and propose plans for iterative and pilot research within the development process. However, it is not entirely clear whether prior research is an essential prerequisite or if a strong proposal could hinge primarily on a well-articulated plan for future research. I would appreciate any clarification you can provide on this matter.

Response:

Page 22 of the Phase IA solicitation indicates that offerors should detail prior research conducted by the project team related to the current project and how this previous research guides and provides a foundation for the novel product. Offerors are strongly encouraged to include results from concept testing research in which users (e.g., learners, educators, administrators) provided feedback after viewing mock-ups detailing the proposed novel product and its intended implementation. Results from concept testing can help developers to iteratively refine their concept, and also help reviewers determine how the intended users have reacted to the proposed concept.

Question 27.

The RFP mentions the need for the project director to be employed at 51% of the time by the bidding company. Is the definition of employment a w2 worker or can the director be a w9 contract worker, receiving contract salary or simply an owners draw?

Response:

The solicitation does not define how the Project Director is to be employed by the small business, whether as a W2 works or a W9 contract worker.

Question 28.

(1) Have there been any updates or edits to the requirements of this solicitation since it was announced?

(2) When submitting multiple proposals, are there any requirements to acknowledge the different proposals within a specific proposal, or should they just be submitted completely independently of one another?

(3) Related to Question #2, is it possible to be awarded concurrently for two separate proposals? If so, should there be different Project Directors and should we avoid having overlapping duties in the Project Team composition?

(4) The Phase 1a Budget template includes line items for "Consultant" and "Subcontractors". Can you provide examples of each of these, and specify the difference with respect to the offeror's small business being "required to be allocated a minimum of 66 2/3% of the funds"? (5) I served as Principal Investigator for a previous SBIR Phase I award. The company that was awarded also received a follow up Phase 2 award, but I was not Principal Investigator and was only involved in developing the Phase II proposal before leaving the company (for reasons unrelated). Which template should I use in Section G.? The template under Part II is for linked Phase I and II awards, which seems to have been the outcome for the Phase I award I'm affiliated with. However, I wasn't an employee of the company at the conclusion of Phase II and don't have the documentation or information required. The template for Part III explicitly calls for when no Phase II was awarded, which doesn't apply unless one interprets not awarded to mean Phase II didn't commence within my tenure.

Response:

(1) All corrections to the solicitations are posted as Amendments on the same SAM.gov page where the solicitations are posted.

(2) Offerors are required to disclose prior similar or related awards in Section H. of the proposal.

(3) Offerors are permitted to receive multiple awards and to have concurrent projects, provided there is no overlap in the research and development between projects. A Project Direct can serve on more than one project at a time.

(4) For the purpose of this solicitation, consultants and subcontracts are the same and combined, may not exceed 1/3 of the budget.

(5) The Offeror should provide information on the previous Phase I in which the Principal Investigator served, and does not need to provide additional information for prior awards that do not apply to the offeror or the Principal Investigator.

Question 30.

(1) The RFP states “The small business that is the prime on the contract is required to be allocated a minimum of 66 2/3% of the funds, or $166,667. Budgeting for subcontractors cannot exceed 33.3% ($83,333) of the budget.” a. Is an independent consultant/contractor considered a “sub”?

(2) If so, can the 33.3% of the budget include multiple subcontractors?

(3) In 13 CFR 121.702, it states “Two or more small business concerns may submit an application as a joint venture. The joint venture will qualify as small as long as each concern is small under the size standard for the SBIR program, found at § 121.702(c), or the joint venture meets the exception at § 121.103(h)(3)(ii) for two firms approved to be a mentor and protégé under SBA's All Small Mentor-Protégé Program.” a. Does this mean that two small businesses can apply as a “joint venture” and collaborate as the prime? b. If so, how would you indicate this within the narrative?

Response:

(1) Yes, an independent consultant/contractor is considered a sub.

(2) Yes, multiple subcontractors can account for the 33%.

(3) Yes, two small business may create a joint venture and collaborate as a prime. Traditionally when creating a joint venture it will have its own name. You will indicate that within the narrative and also specify the companies that make up the joint venture.

Question 31:

(1) Can the prime for-profit small business include a for-profit small business education research organization as a subcontractor?

(2) Can the Letter of Agreement for School Participation include a recruitment plan with an education research subcontractor for currently enrolled postsecondary students over age 18?

(3) Can Phase IA applicants work with students across multiple education settings?

(4) Based on the statement on page 16: "All work must be conducted by individuals who are located within the United States who are either citizens or hold a green card. Individuals who are in the United States without citizenship, visa, or green card, and U.S. citizens working outside the U.S. are not eligible to conduct work on the contract.". We are a U.S. company and the core work is and will continue to be conducted here in the U.S., can we have portions of our work done by our team members that are non-U.S. citizens and living abroad?

Response:

(1) Yes, a for-profit subcontractor, in this case a research organization, can be a subcontractor.

(2) From the question it is not clear what entity provided a letter demonstrating that currently enrolled postsecondary students over age 18 will be available to participate in research. It is noted that in Section E of the solicitation, the Letter of Agreement for School Participation must come from either a school or early care setting indicating that students or children will participate in the research, or from a representative of an organization to indicate that research will be conducted under the auspice of their organization.

(3) Yes, research can occur across multiple settings.

(4) No, no work done can be performed by non-U.S. citizens or anyone living abroad.

Question 32.

This summer at America's Road Show, I was disappointed by the absence of representatives from the Department of Education and the Institute of Education Sciences. I've recently learned about this solicitation and believe we fit the IA classification. Are there any webinars or videos available to guide us in writing this proposal?

Response:

ED/IES SBIR does not have any specific videos or webinars to guide the proposal writing process. ED/IES SBIR program representatives are available for one-on-one telephone meetings with all potential applicants to answer questions and provide technical assistance in the period of time when the solicitation is not open. Per U.S. Government Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), ED/IES SBIR program personnel and other government personnel are not permitted to engage with potential offerors to provide technical assistance or answer questions while the solicitations are open and during proposal review. Program personnel are available to provide technical assistance outside of the dates when the annual program is open.

Question 33

(1) Will offerors be disadvantaged if they (i) do not have members of the project team who are members of institutions of higher education or (ii) do not plan to have the research done in conjunction with the development of the proposed project by a project team member holding a PhD, whether or not associated currently with such an institution, or currently pursuing a PhD at any such institution? Our current plan is to have the research conducted by our own team, within the company, or potentially consultants, which includes several persons with degrees in relevant disciplines, at both the undergraduate and advanced degree level (MA, MS).

(2) Is there any limitation on the amount of the salary and any benefit costs of employees of the offering compensated on an hourly basis and working less than full time for the offeror (i.e., less than 40 hours per week) counting towards the ⅔ of expenses that must be spent directly by the offeror and not through a subcontractor? These are part-time employees of our company, compensated as employees.

(3) How much commentary can be included in the Citations list, explaining the citation and its findings within the context of the section of the Narrative that cited it?

(4) As a small, recently founded privately-owned technology company, with no outside or venture capital funding, we do not have an internal review board (IRB) and thus have no IRB process or protocol: how could we satisfy the IRB pilot review process, if such is determined to be needed, within our proposal?

Response:

(1) Technical Evaluation Reviewers will judge the merit of the proposal and the backgrounds and expertise of the members of the project team. Most education researchers who participate on ED/IES SBIR projects have earned a Ph.D., have an active research program, and have peer reviewed publications presenting findings from their research.

(2) Offerors must stay within the rules of the budget stated in the solicitation. No further guidance can be provided in response to this question and how the budget is constructed.

(3) As noted in the solicitation, citations should be included on page 11 (and beyond if needed), or the page immediately following the project narrative. Offerors are encouraged to use the formatting citation style of the American Psychological Association (APA). No commentary is included in the citations.

(4) ED/IES SBIR awardees who conduct research involving human subjects are required for their research to be cleared through an IRB. Many small businesses subcontract to researchers who have access to an IRB or who can locate a private IRB company to pursue a clearance.

Question 34.

(1) Can you please clarify what the IES definition of an ed tech product is?

(2) We are a certified Women-Owned business, but do not qualify as an SBA or SBC; will you consider awarding non-small businesses for this opportunity as well?

(3) Will you accept print with digital, such as decodable books that include instructional videos within the book?

(4) 1B appears to be the best fit for our organization. Can you please provide a link to the Phase 1B solicitation #91990025R0003 for review?

Response:

(1) ED/IES SBIR does not explicitly define the term “education technology product” in its solicitations, but the solicitations do provide guidance on the types of education technology products that could be proposed in the Priority Area. Offerors to ED/IES SBIR makes awards for new education technology products to improve education, and these products take many forms. See the recent awards for ED/IES SBIR which describe the wide array of education technology products here https://ies.ed.gov/sbir/awards.asp .

(2) No, all offerors and awardees are required to be for-profit small businesses and meet the eligibility requirements detailed in the solicitation.

(3) Offerors must determine the goodness of fit for a potential product concept based on the Priority Area and other specifications in the solicitation.

Question 35.

One of our products is the (Redacted), an interactive (Redacted). We are interested in developing and evaluating additional novel capabilities for this device, specifically tailored for elementary-aged students. I have a few questions regarding this:

(1) The cost of a device is $18,000 per unit. As part of the $250,000 Phase 1 grant, can we include the purchase of four units to be used by contractors who will test the usability and feasibility of the device with elementary-aged students who are blind?

(2) REDACTED. Based on this scope, would this project be better suited for the 1A or 1B competition?

(3) As we reviewed previously funded IES Phase 1 awards, we observed that they are primarily awarded through NCER. However, we noted a reference to universal design for learning on p. 22 of the solicitation. Are we correct in understanding that IES funding can also support populations under NCSER, such as students who are blind or have low vision?

Response:

(1) Offerors are free to propose costs in a Phase I budget that are necessary to successfully complete the research and development, and evaluation of the prototype. Offerors provide a justification in the budget for proposed costs, and must weigh the cost of specific parts of the projects so that the whole of the project can be successful. Using the evaluation criteria in the solicitation, Technical Evaluation Reviewers will evaluate the contents of the budget and narrative in their review and scoring of proposals.

(2) Based on the guidelines in solicitations, offerors must make the determinations for submitting a proposal under the Phase IA or IB program track. No further guidance can be provided.

(3) ED/IES SBIR priority areas allow for proposals for all learners, including learners with disabilities or learning differences.

Question 36.

I am writing to submit questions for the next IES SBIR funding round: 1. (p. 28) What do you all mean by the team must have expertise in commercialization? 2. (p. 28) What expertise are you requiring exactly? 3. (p. 28) What type of demonstration of the above expertise is sought? 4. (p. 32) What is an ideal (based on previous successful proposals) amount for commercialization planning?

Planning for the commercialization, or private sector launch, of the new education technology product is a required component of the Phase I and Phase II ED/IES SBIR projects, hence the solicitations requests information on what team member will lead in this area. An individual may have prior experience in the marketing and sales of education technology, or have created a business plan for the business. Offerors include letters in Section F. to demonstrate that there are viable pathways to successful commercialization should the Phase I and II projects lead to an education technology product.