SBIR and STTR Programs is sponsored by USDA NIFA. Offers competitively awarded grants to qualified small businesses to support high-quality research related to important scientific problems and opportunities in agriculture.

The lifecycle of grants and cooperative agreements consists of four phases: Pre-Award, Award, Post-Award, and Close Out. The National Institute of Food and Agriculture is committed to serving its stakeholders, Congress, and the public by using new technologies to advance greater openness.

The Data Gateway enables users to find funding data, metrics, and information about research, education, and Extension projects that have received grant awards from NIFA. This website houses a large volume of supporting materials. In this section, you can search the wide range of documents, videos, and other resources.

Veterinary Services Grant Program Technical Assistance Webinar NIFA staff will hold a Technical Assistance Webinar to discuss the Veterinary Services Grant Program (VSGP) Notice of Funding Opportunity. The National Institute of Food and Agriculture provides leadership and funding for programs that advance agriculture-related sciences.

Detailed instructions on how to apply can be found in the SBIR/STTR Requests for Applications, or NOFOs. Prospective applicants are encouraged to review the Phase I and Phase II NOFOs to gain a better understanding of the SBIR/STTR programs. Note: Although application periods for the NOFOs may be closed, the documents are still accessible for viewing and planning purposes.

Please also review the NIFA Grants Application Guide for general information about the grant application process as well as NIFA-specific instructions and requirements. In the event of a discrepancy between the SBIR/STTR NOFOs and the application guide, the NOFO instructions always supercede the application instructions in the guide. The Application Review Process NIFA is committed to ensuring a fair and confidential review process.

We evaluate applications using a confidential peer review system during both program phases. Writing A Strong SBIR/STTR Application Every year, we hold separate review panels for each of the topic areas listed in the NOFO. Reviewers are normally drawn from universities, industry, government and nonprofit research organizations.

For each topic area, a NIFA national program leader (NPL) is appointed as a topic manager. The NPL for each topic area recruits a panel chair, and in consultation with USDA and NIFA leadership, NIFA appoints a review panel. The panel chair ensures the review panel evaluates applications fairly.

Applications are reviewed both by members of the review panel and by ad hoc reviewers with specific expertise appropriate for each application. The panel discusses each application carefully and then ranks the applications. The panel rankings are used in determining which applications are funded.

Applications in Phase II are reviewed using the same review process as Phase I applications. These proposals are reviewed both for technical merit as well as commercialization potential. As commercialization potential is more important in Phase II and beyond, reviews of the commercialization plan will significantly impact funding decisions.

Considerable effort is made to ensure the review process is confidential. Reviewers are instructed to handle all applications in complete confidence, and each reviewer is provided written guidelines to follow. All reviewers are obligated to certify they will maintain confidentiality at the time they prepare a review and submit it through NIFA’s agency’s electronic Peer Review System (PRS).

Every effort is made to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest (COI). USDA has rules on COI that are followed during the review process. If a panel member has a COI on an application, they will not review the application and will be excused from the panel meeting when that particular application is being discussed.

Scientific/Technical Merit Degree to which Phase I objectives were met and feasibility demonstrated (Phase II only) Importance of problem to American agriculture or rural development Probability of commercial success Adequacy of research objectives Adequacy of research plan Qualifications of PI and other key personnel Qualifications of consultants Letters from consultants indicating their willingness to work on project are included as part of the proposal Adequacy of bibliographies for the PI, other key personnel and consultants Elements Common to Successful Proposals Well written, succinct and logical Thorough literature review Addresses an important problem Well designed and detailed experimental plan Proper statistical techniques for the research data collected If successful, would have good commercial potential Common Proposal Criticisms Poorly written and presented PI lacks necessary technical expertise Insufficient technical information Proposal is overly ambitious for the time frame proposed Inadequate bibliographical information Lacks letters from consultants Research already done by others Failure to indicate where project would go in Phase II Poor commercialization potential Doubtful economic prospects Inadequate detail in experimental plan and lack of proper statistical techniques Too much research done at university Need to engage consultants to add expertise in area where PI is deficient Page last updated: December 16, 2025 Supplemental and Alternative Crops Alaska Native-Serving and Native Hawaiian-Serving Institutions Education Competitive Grants Program Agricultural Genome to Phenome Initiative NIFA Invests $300K in Response to Ice Storm in the Upper Midwest NIFA Awards $2.

4M Through the Rural Health and Safety Education (RHSE) Program NIFA Awards $19. 8 Million Through the 2501 Program for Outreach and Assistance to Farmers and Ranchers Celebrating Extension Risk Management Education Program’s 25th Anniversary Strengthening Swine Safety: Federal and Industry Partners Take Action UGA's AgrAbility Delivers Adaptive Tools and Hope for Georgia Farmers Your feedback is important to us.