DT2- 91990026R0005 Final.pdf

DIRECT TO PHASE II

RFP Number: #91990026R0005

Issue Date: April 30, 2026

Closing Date: June 29, 2026

2:00 p.m., Eastern Time (ET)

U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences

SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH (SBIR) PROGRAM

PROGRAM SOLICITATION FOR FY 2026 REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

DIRECT TO PHASE II PRIORITY AREA (1)

Projects to Develop New Education Technology Products to Ready Existing Evidence-Based Innovations for Use at Scale in Education Settings, and to Plan for Commercialization

IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THIS SOLICITATION FOR OFFERORS CONSIDERING

A DIRECT TO PHASE II PROPOSAL

To be eligible for the Direct to Phase II solicitation, projects are required to adhere to the specifications below:

• Projects must focus on readying existing evidence-based innovations (e.g., products, programs, practices) for use at scale. Projects that focus on advancing innovations that are not evidence-based are not eligible for this program.

• The existing evidence-based innovation is required to have originally been conceptualized and developed by an academic researcher while at a university (or academic institution) or by a researcher at a non-profit education research organization.

• Innovations that were originally conceptualized and with development that was led by a small business or by an entrepreneurial developer outside of an academic institution or at a non-profit education research organization are not eligible for the Direct to Phase II program. Such projects may be appropriate for submission under ED/IES SBIR’s 2026 Phase IB solicitation #91990025R0004.

• One (or more) of the researchers who originally conceptualized and developed the innovation is required to be part of the team in the proposed ED/IES SBIR project, whether as an employee/owner of the small business or as a consultant to the small business that receives the SBIR award.

• Offerors are not permitted to submit the same or similar proposals under the 2026 Phase IA, IB, or Direct to Phase II solicitations. Any duplicate or similar proposals that are submitted under more than one of these 2026 solicitations will be rejected without review.

• Offerors are permitted to submit multiple proposals under either or both solicitations provided the proposals have different foci.

Offerors should fully review the whole of this solicitation for additional specifications.

https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/c1d3bae837664e0bb8bcdac754d37e97/view

2026 Direct to Phase II ED/IES SBIR Program Solicitation

Page | 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. DIRECT TO PHASE II SOLICITATION OVERVIEW 3

II. DIRECT TO PHASE II SOLICITATION DETAILS 4

III. PROPOSAL CONTENTS (SECTIONS A-N) 12

SECTION A: Cover Pages 13

SECTION B: Project Narrative (15-pages maximum) 21

SECTION C: Project Team and Company, Résumés, and Certifications 34

SECTION D: Direct to Phase II Budget 37

SECTION E: Letter of Agreement for School Participation in the Direct to Phase II R/R&D (Maximum 1 letter) 41

SECTION F: Letters of Support for Potential Pathways to Commercialize the New Proposed Education Technology Product (Maximum 5 letters for Direct to Phase II) 42

SECTION G: Documentation and Status of SBIR Phase I and Phase II Awards Since 2010 44

SECTION H: Disclosure of Similar or Related Awards or Proposals 48

SECTION I: Technical and Business Assistance Plan (TABA) (Maximum 1 page) 49

SECTION J: Required Certifications to Include in the Proposal 50

SECTION K: Foreign Influence Disclosure and Certification 57

SECTION L: Patent Information 66

SECTION M: Foreign Funding Information 67

SECTION N. COVERED INDIVIDUAL AFFILIATIONS 68

IV. INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSAL SUBMISSION 70

V. METHOD OF SELECTION AND EVALUATION CRITERIA 73

VI. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION 78

A. SBIR Program Information, Eligibility 78

B. Considerations for Offerors Who are Awarded Contracts 83

C. Definitions 94

D. Scientific and Technical Information Sources 98

E. Proposal Checklist 99

F. Navigating Solicitations in SAM.gov 101

VII. Contracts and Acquisition Management Clause 105

Page | 3

Two Additional 2026 ED/IES SBIR Solicitations

In addition to this Direct to Phase II solicitation, ED/IES SBIR has released two other solicitations, including Phase IA solicitation #91990026R0003 for the development of novel prototypes and Phase IB solicitation #919900260004 for the development of new components to add to existing education technology prototypes or products. These programs will provide awards of $250,000 for 9-month projects. The submission date for proposals under these solicitations is June 29, 2026, at 11 a.m. EST.

View this page for a link to the 2026 ED/IES SBIR solicitations on SAM.gov.

NOTE: Offerors are not permitted to submit the same or similar proposals under the 2026 Phase IA, IB, or Direct to Phase II solicitations. Any duplicate or similar proposals that are submitted under more than one of these 2026 solicitations will be rejected without review.

Offerors are permitted to submit multiple proposals under either or both solicitations provided the proposals have different foci.

I. DIRECT TO PHASE II SOLICITATION OVERVIEW

The U.S. Department of Education’s (ED) Small Business Innovation Research Program (SBIR), administered by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), provides awards for the research and development of new, commercially viable education technology products. The goal of the program is to grow a portfolio of research-based products that are widely deployed to address pressing needs across topic areas in education and special education.

The SBIR Policy Directive provides authorization to three agencies to make Direct to Phase II awards, including ED. As the name implies, Direct to Phase II awards bypass the requirement that offerors receive a Phase I award for projects to develop and test a prototype of a new education technology product. This ED/IES SBIR Direct to Phase II program solicitation #91990026R0005 invites eligible small businesses to submit a Direct to Phase II proposal for projects to ready existing evidence-based innovations (products, programs, or practices) for use at scale in education and to plan for commercialization. The projects funded through this solicitation ($1,000,000 contract over a period of two (2) years) are intended to result in the successful transition of existing evidence-based innovations to education through the distribution of scalable new education technology products that are sustainable over time.

Section II “Direct to Phase II Solicitation Details” below provides more information on the background and specifications for this Direct to Phase II solicitation.

ED/IES SBIR anticipates that up to a total of three (3) Direct to Phase II awards will be made in 2026 overall.

https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/9cc9c16c6e0447fbbb48e9d13408d060/view https://ies.ed.gov/funding/research/programs/small-business-innovation-research-sbir/solicitation-information https://sam.gov/ https://www.sbir.gov/about/policies https://sam.gov/workspace/contract/opp/f7bc41b0ac23463190194001232a6987/view

Page | 4

II. DIRECT TO PHASE II SOLICITATION DETAILS

A. Key Dates

April 30, 2026 Solicitation release date.

May 21, 2026 Deadline to submit questions in writing about this solicitation to Contract Specialist David.Yadeta@ed.gov and Contracting Officer David.Geary@ed.gov, is 5 p.m. Eastern Time (ET). All responses will be posted publicly as an amendment on SAM.gov several days after this date.

Visit the ED/IES SBIR Solicitation Information page to view frequently asked questions.

June 29, 2026 Proposal submission deadline is 2 p.m. EST. The submission timestamp is logged as the time received, not sent; there will be no exceptions to the deadline.

September 28, 2026 On or before this date, ED will email an official notification to all offerors with reviewer evaluations and list of potential awardees.

(This e-mail will be sent to the identified Project Director listed on the proposal).

October 5, 2026 ED anticipates this as the earliest possible award start date.

B. Background Information About Direct to Phase II Awards

The goal of this solicitation is to support small businesses in successful transitioning existing rigorously evaluated evidence-based innovations that were originally created by academic and non-profit researchers into scalable, sustainable education technology products.

In recent decades, funders in and outside of government have made a significant investment in the development of new innovations, including products, programs, or practices that have been created by researchers at universities (or other academic institutions) or non-profit education research organizations, and in evaluations of their efficacy. Examples of innovations include technology- or non-technology-based interventions, apps, assessments, tools, professional development materials or manuals, or educator-delivered approaches. Awards to researchers at universities and non-profit organizations have yielded an array of evidence demonstrating that use of the innovation improves outcomes when implemented in education or early intervention/special education settings. These findings may come from one or more well-designed and well-implemented randomized control experimental, single-case experimental, or quasi-experimental studies to evaluate the innovation, including controlled laboratory studies, researcher-implemented school pilots, or efficacy trials. Despite compelling research evidence for many innovations, few researcher-developed innovations have successfully transferred into mailto:David.Yadeta@ed.gov mailto:Dayna.Myers@ed.gov https://sam.gov/ https://ies.ed.gov/sbir/solicitations.asp

Page | 5 practice and are used at scale. This means that learners, educators, and administrators ultimately have not been able to benefit from many evidence-based innovations.

Barriers to wide-scale replication, adoption, and sustainability of researcher-developed and evidence-based innovations in education are well documented and include lack of: (a) access to the needed technology infrastructure for scalable deployment, (b) feasibility to implement at scale, appropriate market-fit, and (c) researchers’ capacity to commercialize the innovation.

Examples may include:

• Technology-based innovations that were built on outdated or obsolete back-end software systems,

• Innovations that rely on one-on-one researcher-delivered trainings, professional development, or coaching, making implementation at scale challenging, or

• Older innovations that lack sufficient current product-market fit with respect to interface or delivery system.

Planning for commercialization is an additional challenge for researcher-developed innovations to be used at scale in practice. Many researchers, whether at universities or non-profit education research organizations, lack the experience to support commercialization including capacity to license, market, distribute, sell, or maintain and update interventions. Researchers may not have the capacity to provide support to schools that would be willing to use the innovations, or to connect to local school systems or school administrators and teachers to provide information that the innovation is available.

A successful model to address these challenges effectively and efficiently is for university and non-profit education researchers to leverage partnerships with or launch small business technology firms, and/or to partner with industry organizations staffed with individuals who possess the technological and commercialization expertise to develop, distribute, and sustain updated and more robust versions of the existing evidence-based innovations established by the researcher(s).

This approach is the focus of the current Direct to Phase II solicitation. Some examples of this model are described in this Inside IES Research blog and below:

• University researchers initially created a non-technology delivered innovation to apply growth mindset to instruction and learning. However, the innovation’s scalability was limited because it relied on face-to-face teacher training and static paper-and-pencil learner activities. To develop a scalable model, a small business partnered with the researchers to create an education technology platform with automated training modules and animated lessons to deploy this instructional approach, permitting the existing innovation to be implemented at scale and to be more engaging and interactive for participants.

https://ies.ed.gov/blogs/research/post/ed-ies-sbir-advancing-research-to-practice-at-scale-in-education https://ies.ed.gov/blogs/research/post/a-growing-body-of-research-on-growth-mindset

Page | 6

• Researchers initially developed an online literacy program for early readers that personalized instruction through formative feedback to educators. However, the backend of the technology system could not process large amounts of learner data and implementation required significant researcher involvement and tailored adaptation across schools. To ready the innovation for use in schools at scale, a small business upgraded the underlying data architecture and created automated support and adaptation functionalities in consultation with the researchers.

• A university researcher created an evidence-based intervention that employed hand-held puppet characters to teach learners about different emotions, to promote social and emotional development. The intervention was delivered by individual trained educators and was therefore not a scalable model. The researcher launched a small business and in 2022 received a Direct to Phase II award from ED/IES SBIR to develop a new digital version of the intervention and to plan for commercialization.

This Direct to Phase II solicitation requests proposals for projects to include: (1) full-scale development of a new education technology product to ready an existing evidence-based innovation (originally developed by researchers at universities or non-profit education research organizations) for use at scale in education settings; (2) pilot research to demonstrate the promise of the new education technology product to be readied for use at scale; and (3) preparation for the commercialization of the new education technology product to be distributed at scale and sustained over time through revenue or some other funding source.

Because the focus of the Direct to Phase II project is to ready existing innovations already demonstrated to be evidence-based, projects supported through this solicitation will be funded without a prior Phase I award.

C. Priority Area

Projects to Develop New Education Technology Products to Ready Existing Evidence-Based Innovations for Use at Scale in Education, and to Plan for Commercialization

New education technology products to ready existing evidence-based innovations for use at scale in education are intended to improve learning or promote relevant outcomes in one of more of the following areas: early childhood learning and school readiness; English language arts; civics education and social studies; foreign language or English language learning; STEM (science, technology, engineering [including cyber security], math, data science); social and behavioral skills to support academic and other relevant school and career-related outcomes;

the arts; and technical or vocational career readiness skills.

https://ies.ed.gov/blogs/research/post/ies-supported-technology-to-be-used-in-hundreds-of-schools https://ies.ed.gov/use-work/awards/new-insights-technology-enhanced-social-and-emotional-learning-intervention?ID=5735

Page | 7

New education technology products for educator or administrator use (or other school personnel use) must be intended to either: (a) facilitate instruction; (b) improve the efficiency or accuracy of day-to-day administrative tasks or responsibilities; or (c) support decision-making on the selection, implementation, or evaluation of interventions including practices, programs, or policies.

Additional Specifications

• Products may be for use at any level from prekindergarten to Grade 16, or for adult education. Products for adult education programs must address basic or secondary reading, writing, or mathematics skills, or other skills needed for an occupational certificate or degree.

• Products for learners may be for use in education settings, which can include schools or remote locations to replace, supplement, or enable the delivery of curricula or instruction or that facilitate out- of-school learning opportunities (e.g., after-school or summer programs, distance learning programs, on-line programs, enrichment programs, self-directed learning).

• Products focusing on novel education technology products for learners may include elements engaging parents or caregivers for learners in pre-K to grade 12, provided the intended outcomes support learning or promote outcomes in one of the topic areas listed in the paragraph regarding “new education technology products to ready existing evidence-based innovations for use at scale in education” above.

• Proposals for novel education technology products in other areas not specified above will be considered based on the relevance and significance of the need in the field of education.

D. Requirements

Evidence-Base for the Existing Innovation

• There must be a strong evidence-base for the existing innovation that was originally conceptualized and developed by a researcher at a university (or other academic institution) or a non-profit education research organization.

• The proposal must include compelling research findings from one or more well-designed and well-implemented randomized control experimental or quasi-experimental study that support the efficacy of the innovation. The offeror is required to detail the design of the study and present the findings demonstrating that the existing innovation leads to

Page | 8 the intended outcomes. Data should also be demonstrating the usability, feasibility, and fidelity of implementation. Proposals must cite peer-reviewed published works supporting the evidence base for the outcomes.

Project Scope:

• Projects funded through this Direct to Phase II solicitation must preserve the nature and essential functionality of an existing evidence-based innovation, while adding a new technology component, or adapting or upgrading the technology to enable the new product to be used at scale.

• Proposed activities in response to this solicitation must involve technological development and commercialization planning of sufficient scope to justify the award and the amount of funding provided.

• The existing evidence-based innovation that was conceptualized and developed by a researcher may or may not currently be technology-based. For example, some proposed innovations may be adaptations of paper-based workbooks or interventions, instructional approaches delivered by educators, or a training delivered by coaches.

• The technological development proposed by offerors in response to this solicitation may take a variety of forms including projects to upgrade an innovation or to integrate the innovation with an already established product. Examples may include projects to:

o upgrade the backend structure of an existing technological innovation with modern software standards so that the new product can function or be usable at scale o develop an interactive website to enable or streamline professional development, and support feasible delivery and implementation of an existing evidence-based innovation o improve a component of the evidence-based innovation to achieve a product-to-market fit, such as converting a paper-based workbook to a technology-delivered intervention, redesigning a student user-interface, or developing an educator data dashboard to inform decision-making o combine or integrate an existing evidence-based innovation (which may be too narrow in scope by itself to allow for a commercially viable product that would be broadly adopted) with another product, such as merging an evidence-based assessment battery with an existing product

• The Direct to Phase II program is not intended to support projects with the main purpose of developing additional content to be added to or more fully populate an existing partially-completed intervention. For example, a proposal to develop four new

Page | 9 chapters to add an existing evidence-based online textbook to complete the full year of content is not an appropriate fit for this program.

• The primary purpose of the Direct to Phase II program is for technological development of a new education technology product to ready an existing evidence-based innovation for commercial use at scale. The budget is set at $1M. If the technological development and research activities are not commensurate with the award amount, then the Direct to Phase II program is likely not an appropriate fit for a proposal.

Eligibility:

• The existing education innovation must have originally been conceptualized and developed by a researcher or team of researchers at either a university (or other academic institution) or non-profit education research organization.

o Cases in which an academic researcher directed a project that included a sub-award to a for-profit firm to assist in the technological development of the innovation are also eligible under this solicitation.

• The proposing small businesses must fit the following eligibility requirements described in this solicitation.

• In all cases, a small business must lead the proposal (a requirement of the SBIR program).

• The Project Director must be an employee of the small business.

• One or more of the researchers that created the innovation is required to be a member of the team for the proposed SBIR project, either as an employee at the small business or as a consultant.

• Projects to ready existing evidence-based technology-based innovations for use at scale that were originally conceptualized and developed at a small business are not permitted through this competition. Under some circumstances, such projects may be appropriate for submission under ED/IES SBIR’s 2026 Phase IB solicitation #91990026R0004 to add a new component to an existing education technology prototype or product

• Offerors must clearly describe by whom and where the innovation was developed. If the academic researcher conceptualized the evidenced-based innovation and directed the project at a university or non-profit setting and then sub-contracted to a small business to support the technological development, the project would likely be eligible for the Direct to Phase II program. If the small business co-conceptualized the innovation with an academic researcher and the small business directed the technological development, the Direct to Phase II program would likely not be appropriate.

Page | 10

• The small business may follow different models for submission to the Direct to Phase II program:

• One possible model is that an existing small business partners with one or more of the university/non-profit researchers who developed the existing evidence-based product or practice. In such cases, the small business (the prime for the contract) would subcontract to the researchers to collaborate on the work of the project.

• Another possible model is that the academic or non-profit researcher who was the original creator of the innovation could launch their own small business. In such cases, the small business would add team members or sub-contract with experts in key project areas to support development, research, and commercialization.

• In all cases, the proposal must present a plan stipulating who among researchers, universities, or the small business will hold the intellectual property, and specify plans for what entity will commercialize the product. Such plans should be provided in the technical narrative of the proposal.

Rationale and Need for Additional Development to Support Scaling:

• Proposals must explain why the existing innovation is not yet ready for use at scale, and must provide results from concept testing through focus groups with a small number of intended users and decision makers (e.g., superintendents, district administrators, principals, educators, learners, parents) who have viewed plans and mock-ups, provided feedback, and believe the new education technology product would be usable, feasible, and meet current need(s).

Commercially Deployed Innovations:

• Existing evidence-based innovations that are or have been commercially deployed and available at a smaller scale (e.g., a few schools) are eligible to be the focus of a proposal under this solicitation. However, such proposals must justify why additional funding would be required to further ready the innovation to be used at a greater scale and indicate how the scope of the proposed new technological development and planning for commercialization is commensurate with the amount of funding requested.

• Evidenced-based innovations that are already commercially deployed at a larger scale (e.g., 50 schools or more, used by more than 5,000 students) outside of research studies, and that are generating significant revenue through the sale of the innovation are not eligible to submit a proposal through this program, as this program intends to support innovations that have not been implemented in schools at a large scale. Such

Page | 11

Proposals that do not clearly adhere to the above Direct to Phase II solicitation requirements will likely be triaged and will not proceed to a review by a full panel.

(See Section V. “Method of Selection and Evaluation Criteria” for more information on the Triage Round of the review.)

innovations may be more appropriately considered as candidates for the development of a new component to be added to their product through the 2026 Phase IB solicitation #91990026R0004.

Page | 12

III. PROPOSAL CONTENTS (SECTIONS A-N)

Content and Formatting Requirements

To ensure that the text of the proposal is well-organized for reviewers and that all offerors have the same amount of available space in which to describe their projects, offerors must adhere to the below page, font size, and format specifications for Section III. PROPOSAL CONTENTS (A – N)

• For the purpose of proposals submitted under this solicitation, a page is 8.5 inches x 11 inches, with 1-inch margins at the top, bottom, and both sides.

• Single space text in the project narrative, including titles, headings, footnotes, quotations, references, and captions, as well as all text in charts, tables, figures, and graphs.

• Type must conform to the following requirements:

o The height of the letters must not be smaller than 12 point using Microsoft Word.

o Type density, including characters and spaces, should be no more than 15 characters per inch (cpi).

o For proportional spacing, the average for any representative section of text should not exceed 15 cpi.

o Type size must yield no more than 6 lines of type within a vertical inch. Standard black type must be used for text.

o Offerors must check the type size using a standard device for measuring type size, rather than relying on the font selected for a particular word processing/printer combination.

• Figures, charts, graphs, tables, or screen shots (outside of what is requested in other sections) must be included within the 15-page limit for “SECTION B. Project Narrative.”

• Offerors are strongly encouraged to follow the outline with the exact sections and headers in the same order as presented in the Technical Narrative Section. Offerors are also advised to adhere to the guidelines for page length for each section.

• Proposals may not be resubmitted with or without revision after the submission deadline under this program solicitation.

Page | 13

Guidance for “SECTION A. COVER PAGES”

• All items in the “SECTION A. COVER PAGES” are required to be inserted as the opening pages of a Direct to Phase II proposal. To structure Part I of a proposal, offerors must follow the exact format as the items below. Offerors should cut and paste the below table directly into the body of the proposal.

• Proposals shall not include any other cover pages beyond what is specified below.

• Do not include page numbers on the Cover Pages. Numbering should begin with “1” on the first page of the “SECTION B. Project Narrative.”

SECTION A: Cover Pages

SOLICITATION Direct to Phase II: #91990026R0005

A) Cover Page Certification #1: Proposals in response to this Direct to Phase II solicitation are only permitted for projects that focus on readying existing evidence-based innovations for scale that were originally conceptualized and developed by researchers at universities (or academic institution) or researchers at non-profit education research organizations, NOT by a for-profit small business.

Was the evidence-based innovation originally conceptualized and developed by researchers at a university (or academic institutions) or researchers at non-profit education research organizations?

Choose an item.

B) Cover Page Certification #2: Offerors are not permitted to submit the same or similar proposals under the 2026 Phase IA, IB, or Direct to Phase II solicitations. Any duplicate or similar proposals that are submitted under more than one of these 2026 solicitations will be rejected without review.

Offerors are permitted to submit multiple proposals under either or both solicitations provided the proposals have different foci.

Choose an item.

Page | 14

Did this offeror submit a similar proposal under a 2026 ED/IES SBIR Phase I solicitation?

C) Direct to Phase II Project Title: Click or tap here to enter text.

D) Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) as registered on

SAM.gov: SAM.gov | Duns - Sam UEI

Note: the UEI is now required at the time of submission of the proposal. Proposals without a UEI will be rejected without review. If you do not already have a UEI registered on SAM.com please be advised, registration can take several weeks.

Click or tap here to enter text.

E) Name of Small Business to which the UEI is registered

Click or tap here to enter text.

F) If applicable, other company names operated under, including DBAs

Click or tap here to enter text.

G) Contact Person: For the representative authorized to represent the small business concern in negotiations, fill in the information below:

a. Contact Name:

Click or tap here to enter text.

b. Contact Title: Click or tap here to enter text.

c. Contact Phone (format 555-555-1212) Click or tap here to enter text.

d. Contact Email: Click or tap here to enter text.

H) Project Director: For the Project Director, fill in the information below:

a. Project Director Name:

Click or tap here to enter text.

b. Project Director Title: Click or tap here to enter text.

c. Project Director Phone (format 555-555-

1212) Click or tap here to enter text.

d. Project Director Email: Click or tap here to enter text.

I) HUBZone-owned SBC Certification:

Does the offeror qualify as a HUBZone-owned SBC and meet the definition as stated in this solicitation as defined by SBA?

The website listed below contains information about the SBA’s HUBZone program:

HUBZone program | U.S. Small Business Administration

Choose an item.

J) Woman-owned SBC Certification: Does the offeror qualify as a woman- owned SBC and meet the definition as stated in this program solicitation as defined by SBA?

Choose an item.

https://sam.gov/ https://sam.gov/content/duns-uei https://www.sba.gov/federal-contracting/contracting-assistance-programs/hubzone-program https://www.sba.gov/federal-contracting/contracting-assistance-programs/hubzone-program

Page | 15

The website listed below contains information about the SBA’s Woman-Owned program:

Women-Owned Small Business Federal Contract program | U.S. Small Business Administration

K) Socially and Economically Disadvantaged SBC Certification:

Does the offeror qualify as a socially and economically disadvantaged SBC and meet the definition as stated in this program solicitation as defined by SBA?

The website listed below contains information about the SBA’s Disadvantaged program:

Small Disadvantaged Business | U.S. Small Business Administration

Choose an item.

L) Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business Certification:

Does the offeror qualify as a Service-Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business as defined by SBA?

The website listed below contains information about the SBA’s Veteran program:

Veteran contracting assistance programs | U.S.

Small Business Administration

Choose an item.

M) Small Business Address: For the address of the small business, fill in the information below:

(Please do not enter address information in ALL

CAPS)

a. Street Address:

Click or tap here to enter text.

b. Address Line 2: Enter apartment, suite, or floor (optional).

Click or tap here to enter text.

c. City: Click or tap here to enter text.

d. State: Enter the state’s current postal abbreviation designated by the U.S. Postal Service.

The website listed below contains information about postal abbreviations for U.S. states and territories:

USPS State Abbreviations

Click or tap here to enter text.

e. ZIP Code (5 digits) Click or tap here to enter text.

N) Small Business Phone: (format 555-555-1212) Click or tap here to enter text.

O) Company Website URL: Click or tap here to enter text.

P) Video Demonstration in Support of the

Proposal: Must include a URL (Uniform Click or tap here to enter text.

https://www.sba.gov/federal-contracting/contracting-assistance-programs/women-owned-small-business-federal-contract-program https://www.sba.gov/federal-contracting/contracting-assistance-programs/women-owned-small-business-federal-contract-program https://www.sba.gov/federal-contracting/contracting-assistance-programs/8a-business-development-program https://www.sba.gov/federal-contracting/contracting-assistance-programs/8a-business-development-program https://www.sba.gov/federal-contracting/contracting-assistance-programs/veteran-contracting-assistance-programs#id-service-disabled-veteran-owned-small-business-program https://www.sba.gov/federal-contracting/contracting-assistance-programs/veteran-contracting-assistance-programs#id-service-disabled-veteran-owned-small-business-program https://about.usps.com/who-we-are/postal-history/state-abbreviations.htm

Page | 16

Resource Locator) link to a three-minute or shorter video demonstration of the proposed project.

INSERT YouTube URL to video demonstration here:

Video Demonstration Requirements

• Reviewers will be required to watch and evaluate the video as a component of the proposal.

Videos may be a maximum of 3 minutes. Reviewers will be instructed to stop watching a video at the end of minute 3.

Offerors must ensure that a reviewer will be able to click on a

“live” URL on YouTube to watch the video. URLs that are scanned and not clickable may not be able to be viewed by the reviewers.

• The video should (a) briefly describe the problem, (b) describe the existing evidence-based innovation originally conceptualized and developed by a researcher and (c) describe the proposed project to develop a new education technology product to ready the innovation for use at scale and to plan for commercialization.

• Offerors may view sample videos from the previous 2024 Direct to Phase II awardees within the project abstracts for those awards. See this page to locate the award abstracts and videos within the abstracts for those years.

• All video demonstrations must be posted to YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/) prior to the submission deadline and must remain available during the 90-day review period following submission. If the video demonstration is posted on a website other than YouTube, it is possible reviewers will not be able to watch the video. Videos can be posted as “public” or “private,” with private viewers only able to access the video with the URL link.

• Video demonstrations may not be updated after submission. If the posting date on YouTube for the video is later than the submission date on June 29, 2026, at 2 p.m. Eastern Time (ET), the video will be deemed ineligible for inclusion in the review process.

Q) For every member of the project team, fill in the below table.

• At a minimum, each project must list the following team members, including: a Project Director, a researcher (who originally conceptualized and developed the innovation), and a Contractor Security Liaison.

• See “Section C. Project Team and Company, Résumés, and Certifications” and the Security Requirements for Contractors Doing Business with the Department of Education for more information on contractor security https://ies.ed.gov/funding/research/programs/small-business-innovation-research-sbir/sbir-awards?&mcontenttype=Contract&lyearaward=2024&labstractprojtype=Direct%20to%20Phase%20II http://www.youtube.com/ https://www2.ed.gov/fund/contract/about/bsp.html https://www2.ed.gov/fund/contract/about/bsp.html https://www2.ed.gov/fund/contract/about/bsp.html

Page | 17 vetting processes and the role of the Contractor Security Liaison.

• Only one individual may serve as the Project Director. Co- Project Director are not permitted.

• The Contractor Security Liaison is permitted to serve in more than one role, and other roles may be added in the same box.

• The individual who is listed as the Project Director is not permitted to also be listed as the CSL.

• The Researcher who was involved in the creation of the innovation in an academic or non-profit setting is permitted to also serve in the role of the Project Director.

• As many lines as needed may be added, to reflect additional members of the project team and the Project Roles. While there is no requirement for a proposal to list the names or qualifications of a subcontractor organization or individuals in key project roles – providing the names and qualifications of individuals and organizations will assist reviewers in determining if the project personnel have the relevant expertise and appropriate effort to conduct the work proposed.

• 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.

• A determination will be made at the beginning of the contract by ED regarding which project teams members will be required to proceed through the data security moderate risk/public trust clearance process (to include non-U.S. citizen waivers as applicable). Project team members who have contact with students (whether in person or through remote interactions) or who have access to data or networks that include personally identifiable information will be required to undergo the data security moderate risk/public trust process prior to initiating such tasks on the contract. Refer to “Section C: Project Team and Company Résumés” for more details.

Page | 18

Name Professional Affiliation (list only one affiliation, whether at the small business or another organization, or as an independent consultant)

Project Role Email

Project Director (required)

Contractor Security Liaison (required)

Researcher who was involved in the creation of the innovation in an academic or non-profit setting (required)

(Add additional lines for more team members)

Page | 19

R) Certifications for Direct to Phase II Projects The answer is required to be “Yes” for all five certifications below, otherwise the proposal does not meet the required specifications under the Direct to Phase II solicitation.

Yes ☐ No ☐ The existing innovation was originally conceptualized and developed by a researcher at a university (or other academic institution) or a non-profit education research organization.

Yes ☐ No ☐ There is a strong evidence-base for the existing innovation.

Yes ☐ No ☐ The proposed project preserves the nature and essential functionality of an existing evidence-based innovation, while adding a new technology component, or adapting or upgrading the technology to enable the new product to be used at scale.

Yes ☐ No ☐ One or more researchers from the team that originally conceptualized and developed the innovation is listed as a member of the project team for the ED/IES SBIR project.

Yes ☐ No ☐ The existing evidenced-based innovations has not already been commercially deployed at a larger scale (e.g., 50 schools or more, used by more than 5,000 students) outside of research studies, and has not generated significant revenue through the sale of the innovation.

S) Project Abstract:

• Describe the evidence-based innovation that was initially conceptualized and developed by a researcher at a university (or academic institution) or non-profit education organization.

• Describe the new education technology product that would be developed to ready the existing evidence-based innovation for use at scale in education or early intervention/special education settings if an award is provided in the Direct to Phase II project from the ED/IES SBIR program (200 word maximum).

Page | 20

T) Signatures for the Authorized Representative and the Project Director

X

Authorized Signature

Provide the authorized signature for the representative authorized to represent the small business concern in negotiations in the above box.

Provide the authorized signature for the Project Director in the above box.

U) SBA Company Registry:

All offerors to the SBIR program are required to register at the SBA Company Registry (https://www.sbir.gov/) prior to proposal submission. Offerors are required to attach a .pdf FILE of the SBIR.gov SBC Registration Control ID Form as proof of registration in this section of the proposal. Proposals that do not include the .pdf file will be returned without review. See below an image of a blank SBIR.gov Registration Control ID Form that offerors will complete, save as a .pdf FILE, and include within the proposal.

https://www.sbir.gov/

Page | 21

Guidance for Section B. PROJECT NARRATIVE

• All contents that make up “SECTION B. Project Narrative” must total fifteen

(15) pages or less. Any content in this section beyond fifteen (15) pages will not be reviewed.

• Numbering should begin on the first page of the "SECTION B. Project Narrative” with “1” in the top right-hand corner.

• Offerors are required to follow the exact format specified in the items below to structure the proposal.

SECTION B: Project Narrative (15-pages maximum)

1. Significance

A. Problem Statement and Best Current Practices

(1) Describe the problem that the new education technology product will address, and how the proposed product uniquely addresses the problem relative to existing approaches in education settings.

• Cite the most recent data establishing the scope and nature of the problem, to support the significance of the proposal.

(2) Describe the existing evidence-based innovation that was initially created by a researcher at a university or at a non-profit education research organization.

• Specify the intended user(s) of the existing innovation, including the age group, grade levels and/or special populations.

• List and briefly describe the key components of the existing innovation. If a component of the existing innovation is technology-based, indicate the hardware on which it operates (e.g., desktop computer, tablet, smart phone).

• Indicate any universal design features and whether the existing innovation was designed to be replicated across settings, cultural contexts, or users, or if components can be adapted or changed depending on a particular setting, user needs, or cultural context.

• Indicate whether the existing innovation was designed to replace, supplement, or be integrated within existing education practice(s).

• Briefly list the outcomes that result from using the existing innovation.

(More detailed description of the research evidence demonstrating these outcomes should appear in “Existing Evidence-Based Innovation

Page | 22

Information & Justification of the Need for the New Education Technology Product” rather than in this section).

(3) Describe the new education technology product that would be developed with the Direct to Phase II award to ready the existing evidence-based innovation for use at scale in education or early intervention/special education settings.

• List each of the components of the existing innovation that will remain the same during the development of the new education technology product.

Describe the new component(s) of the new education technology product to be developed and/or the components that will be adapted/updated from the existing innovation.

• Briefly discuss how the product will engage universal design principles and address the needs of all potential users for which the product is intended.

Include whether and how the product addresses accessibility to users with various needs, consistent with new guidance under Title II of the American s with Disabilities Act (ADA) (e.g. a student with visual impairment using a screen reader to access a mobile science app or an administrator who is deaf using closed captions to navigate training modules in a web-based continuing education application). See relevant resources below.

o Fact Sheet: New Rule on the Accessibility of Web Content and Mobile

Apps Provided by State and Local Governments | ADA.gov o Federal Register: Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability;

Accessibility of Web Information and Services of State and Local Government Entities

• Describe how the new education technology product will ready the existing innovation to be used at scale.

o For existing evidence-based innovations originally created without the use of technology, explain how the core components of the innovation will be preserved in the new education technology product, and explain why further developing the existing innovation as a new education technology product will lead to successful scaling.

• Indicate how the new technology product will be designed or adapted to be delivered successfully across settings, users, and cultural contexts.

• Indicate the expected cost to schools overall and per learner to purchase the new education technology product, and the level of resources (e.g., time, schedules, equipment) needed to implement and use the product.

• Beyond what is provided in the description of the existing innovation in the section above, list additional outcomes, if any, that are intended to result https://www.ada.gov/resources/2024-03-08-web-rule/ https://www.ada.gov/resources/2024-03-08-web-rule/ https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/24/2024-07758/nondiscrimination-on-the-basis-of-disability-accessibility-of-web-information-and-services-of-state https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/24/2024-07758/nondiscrimination-on-the-basis-of-disability-accessibility-of-web-information-and-services-of-state https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2024/04/24/2024-07758/nondiscrimination-on-the-basis-of-disability-accessibility-of-web-information-and-services-of-state

Page | 23 from the use of the new education technology product by learners, educators, or administrators.

2. Existing Evidence-Based Innovation Information & Justification of the Need for the New Education Technology Product

This section describes the creation of and the prior research-base for the existing evidence-based innovation that is the focus of this proposal and provides information to justify the need for a new education technology product and plan to ready the innovation for use at scale in education settings.

A. Development of the Existing Innovation

Provide a concise summary of the development process for establishing and evaluating the existing innovation by researchers at a university or at a non-profit education research organization. Provide a timeline for when key milestones in the development and refinement of the innovation occurred.

B. Theoretical Support

Explain the theory of change underlying the research supporting the initial development of the existing evidence-based innovation and justify why the new education technology product is expected to produce the intended results. Include relevant references to the scientific literature.

C. Prior Research on the Existing Evidence-Based Innovation

Present the evidence for the efficacy of the existing innovation and demonstrate how the existing innovation leads to the intended outcomes to establish convincingly that the existing innovation is evidence-based. Include citations to peer-reviewed published works supporting the evidence base for the outcomes.

• Provide a summary of research on the usability, feasibility, and fidelity of implementation for the existing innovation. If applicable, present research on the validity of assessment components.

• Discuss research findings that demonstrate challenges with usability, feasibility, and/or fidelity of implementation at scale that justify the need to propose further development of the new education technology product.

• Include information on the sample size and characteristics, design, measures, procedures, and analyses for the above studies.

D. Research to Support the Proposed New Education Technology Product

Describe procedures and findings from user-concept or focus-group testing that was conducted in preparation for this proposal, in which a small group of intended end-users and school decision makers were presented plans or mock-ups for the

Page | 24 proposed new education technology product. Describe sample characteristics, what feedback was gathered, and whether the groups of individuals were supportive of the proposed new education technology product.

E. Previous Initiatives to Distribute the Existing Innovation

This section requests information on any prior initiatives by the researcher (or partners) to distribute the existing innovation to education settings (i.e., schools or districts) outside of research studies, whether for free or for a fee. Offerors should select “(1)” or “(2)” to respond to below, based on whether the innovation has already been distributed.

(1) If distribution has occurred outside of research studies, indicate the number of users (learners, educators, special educators or other instructional personnel, related service providers, family…