From the emails and received calls, we know that several of the
bigger winners to whom this email was originally directed about two weeks ago
heard our urgent call for your help and support - copy below. Many of you
responded - but when you tried to use your credit cards on our Call to Action
site to make the much needed contribution to this extensive reauthorization
campaign you hit all sorts of problems with the message that 'your card is
denied'. Others among you saw the Problem Notice we posted on the
site when we became aware of the problem and did not attempt to make
contribution.
Finally, our very large, nationally known service provider managed
to fix the problem last night - a complex problem which turned out to be of
their creation but which had entirely eliminated from our account any ability
to take any type of credit card.
We are now back on-line. If you are still inclined to
contribute into this effort, we really would appreciate it. As you can
imagine, no income for several weeks while we have continued to work on the job to
hand really bites.
https://www.inknowvation.com/Call_To_Action_SBIR_2008/Contribute.html
Campaign solidly underway:
Member interaction: While the SBTC has focused
attention primarily in DC, we have continued to use our tools and resources for
two primary purposes.
- to do detailed analyses of what has been happening in SBIR - by-state,
by-agency, by- company characteristics etc; what is currently happening; and
what we project will happen if HR 5819 is allowed to remain as the basis for
SBIR reauthorization in this Congress.
- organizing extensive in-district education of Members. With particular
focus on the many smaller and less SBIR successful states in which -
ironically - many of those Members supporting the BIO-NVCA position are
located, we have been engaging awardees in the area, setting up site-visits to
those firms with a good story to tell and facilitating 'town-meeting' group
sessions with Members and staff involving several local players.
Member position: In a separate effort, we are
also working on taking complete inventory of Members so that a useful listing
can be compiled of the position of each on the HR 5819 issue. Obviously,
how we advise awardees to interact with their Members differs depending on
whether they are strongly for (or against) current key issues and/or are not yet made
up their minds.
Phase III funding: Though still a work in
progress, we have also been working with the staff of particular Members to
craft the development of a new type of Phase III transition funding vehicle that
could pull out a significant number of the larger, late-stage projects which now
account for the majority of the VC-backed company awards. Providing a
seamless transition to an alternative funding pool could effectively release
significant SBIR resources to support the diversity of projects and companies
which have, until recently, been the hallmark of program effectiveness.
In my judgment, it is likely that the problem of non-availability
of Demonstration Funding -- the second 'D' in the innovation process after
Research & 'D'evelopment -- which was a (the) major trigger for BIO in their effort to try
to capture the SBIR program.
- They were entirely correct in their analysis that their members' projects were
hitting this problem of transition funding that was far larger in dollar
requirements than the earlier work.
- They were incorrect in their assumption that this
is a problem peculiar to the biotech and medical space and that in-place SBIR support
would solve that problem.
Many of you are experiencing precisely the same issues
that your technology is frequently not ready for prime time at the end of Phase II
(or multiples of). This is an issue of consequence that should/must be part of the
reauthorization effort.
____________
Time to step up:
Most of you to whom this mail is directed - the long-time involved, bigger
SBIR winners - already know that the authorization legislation for this very
important technology and business development program will run out on September
30, 2008. More recently a few may also have become aware that, for the past
three years or so, the Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO) and National
Venture Capital Association (NVCA) have been seriously - and with increasing
success - campaigning among Members in both the House and the Senate to achieve
profound and far-reaching changes in SBIR eligibility to enable full program
involvement by a much broader cross-section of VC funded firms.
A deceptively simple and compelling argument was (and is) being made to
that end -- carefully peddled through an orchestrated media effort and lots of
personal interaction with key Members -- that early-stage biotech research firms
are being arbitrarily shut out of effective SBIR participation in NIH.
The fact that their story does not stand up well to scrutiny and carefully
disguises what is actually happening has not been discussed. Between the
fact
- that they effectively managed to muzzle almost any opposing comment and
- that most of those who would be directly (and adversely) affected by the
results of their effort had no idea what was going on
BIO-NVCA has been in almost complete control of the SBIR reauthoization
discussion to date and, unless there is effective counter-argument heard, will
almost certainly determine what the next generation of SBIR will look
like.
Let it be very clear: this very well-crafted, and even better-funded effort
could radically change the structure and direction of the SBIR program in all
the larger agencies. This is not an NIH specific concern as many
apparently think. Unquestionably the BIO-NVCA sustained campaign has
already seriously impeded the effort to get to reauthorization early in this
Congress so as to avoid the debacle of 2000 when, as you will recall, the
enabling legislation ran out and when some very creative efforts were required
to keep things functional until the required passage was finally achieved in the
closing minutes of that Congress.
With few Members this time having heard any opposing arguments and, with
all due respect, a largely intermittent debate in which the agenda has always
been that set by BIO-NVCA, by this Spring they had convinced many in the
Congress and in the media of the rightness of their cause. They had
achieved a very powerful position from which to enable their capture of SBIR
almost entirely only for firms which fit the VC profile - firms addressing very
large markets and the prospect of a near-term liquidity event.
The culmination of this carefully crafted effort was the achievement on
April 23, 2008 of an overwhelming majority in the House for H.R. 5819 - a
bill that, if replicated in the Senate, would radically change what SBIR is
about and will almost certainly affect you.
Money talks:
The major financial commitments and other resources on which
BIO-NVCA have been able to draw down - estimated at well in excess of
$10-12M to date - has been a hugely important factor in what they have
accomplished. As has always been the case through the years, those
carrying the SBIR flag in the political space have been almost invariably doing
what they could on a wing and a prayer.
This situation cannot be allowed to
stand! There has to be financial commitment from within
the community to support the major efforts now underway to counter what
BIO-NVCA have achieved.
It is entirely understandable that younger and smaller firms
somehow think that the SBIR political effort "just happens" and/or that
someone else is paying for what needs to be done. As bigger winners, you
(should) know better.
https://www.inknowvation.com/Call_To_Action_SBIR_2008/Contribute.html
If you've already contributed to the Small Business Technology Council,
that's great! For a long time, SBTC has been almost the only dissenting
voice and they continue to fight for SBIR and on your behalf. They need
and deserve your support,
Given the tools we have to hand, we're coming at things quite differently -
the same basic thrust but with a different slant and presentation. But my
information is that SBTC is having the same experience that we are - an almost
complete unwillingness by the SBIR Community to contribute into support of the
effort and an almost naive understanding of what is involved to have any real
impact on this serious situation.
In our case, hundreds of awardees have been responding to our Call to
Action emails to over 6500 current SBIR awardees informing them - clearly
for most for the very first time - that SBIR is in trouble. They have
been
- coming in large numbers to the specially constructed site
- emailing and calling here looking for more information and personal
explanation of what this is all about, what they should do and why
- requesting - and being given - the custom data for their state about the
extent and form on SBIR-STTR activity to support their discussions with
Members
- downloading documents and getting themselves to some better understanding
of what all this is about
- and, per our instructions, beginning to get media coverage - press and
electronic.
We know that hundreds of firms who have never previously spoken up have
been making very effective Member contact -
- on April 22-23 urging opposition to H.R.5819 and
- since then to their Senators to counter the damage that H,R, 5819 will
surely do.
We have copies of the emails they are sending and receiving back and
accounts of the calls and the visits. We know that
- many are setting up visits with their Members and/or their staffs when
they are home in the District
- that, with our help, groups of awardees are finding each other locally and
trying to make a difference.
In short, a useful and appropriate campaign is now underway - tentative but
working .... and beginning to make a difference.
Yet - with only rare exception - when asked it if they are willing to
contribute to the cause, the answer is a total non-response or a resounding no.
As so often before, we are covering the cost out of personal and company
resources.
When the wheels fell off:
Like many of you, not until late March 2008 did I become aware that the
wheels had almost completely fallen off the SBIR Reauthorization effort; that
the future of SBIR as a diverse program supporting all types of firms from
start-up through mature, and across every field of technology endeavor was in
serious trouble.
As many of you may know, I have been on the SBIR political front-line from
the very earliest days - having helped to craft the original SBIR legislative
effort - and have been part of every political engagement since to include
reauthorization (in 1986 and 1992) and a range of efforts in particular agencies
and elsewhere to to undermine the program.
In part because this type of effort is so extraordinarily demanding of time
and resources - and almost always on our own nickle - I had pulled back in
recent years. This time, however, with the challenge so profound and the
very future of SBIR in jeopardy, I have had to get back into the fray.
Our very powerful and comprehensive databases, developed and managed
entirely with this company's funds, put us in the perhaps unique position of
being able
- to counter the BIO-NVCA position with solidly grounded data - now there's
a novelty
- to analyze what is going on, with useful capacity to suggest what to do
about it
- to shift the focus of discussion away from their very limited agenda to
one which addresses the major economic impact of SBIR
- and, not trivially, to get the word out those firms which are currently
SBIR involved - some 6500 firms nationwide.
There is a strong personal commitment here to the importance and value of
the SBIR program. At a time of economic stress, perhaps never more that
now does this country needs what the SBIR community can do. We will stay
the course - but we should not be being expected to do this alone
--
Ann Eskesen
Innovation Development Institute
45 Beach Bluff Avenue
Suite 300
Swampscott, MA 01907-1542
_____
Voice:
(781) 595-2920
Fax: (781) 593-4660
Email:
ann.eskesen@inknowvation.com
Web:
http://www.inknowvation.com