Startups working to improve community health, especially among historically underserved populations, could tap into millions in federal funding through a special NIH grant program that wants to hear their pitches.
That was the message during a recent webinar hosted by NewYorkBIO in partnership with Cure, featuring program staff for the NIH's "Innovations for Healthy Living" initiative.
The funding is part of a broader federal effort offering early-stage grants to companies developing commercial products that can make a measurable impact, said Michael Banyas, a NIH program manager, during the event.
“This program is created for small business companies, entrepreneurs and innovators to help create products and services, to help support the NIH mission,” Banyas said. "What the small business program does is helps accelerate discoveries from bench to bedside.”
The opportunity falls under the Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) program, which distributes approximately $1.4 billion annually across all NIH institutes. For the "Innovations for Healthy Living" initiative, about $10 million is expected to be available, with applications due by June 10, Banyan said. Unlike venture capital investment, this funding doesn't require giving up equity — companies retain full ownership while accessing crucial early-stage capital.
Eligibility requirements are straightforward: Applicants must be for-profit businesses with fewer than 500 employees, must conduct all work within the United States, and must be at least 50 percent individually owned and operated.
The funding structure follows two main phases. Phase One provides $300,000 for approximately nine months to answer "small research questions" that validate concepts. Phase Two offers $2 million over two to three years to commercialize products. Companies can apply for multiple Phase One grants simultaneously, allowing strategic planning across different research questions.
SBIR Innovations for Healthy Living program funding based on peer-review
Applications undergo rigorous peer review based on five criteria, with low scores being most desirable. Reviewers evaluate the significance of the problem, innovation of the approach, qualifications of the investigator team, appropriateness of the institutional environment the company is working and testing in, and the overall approach to the research question.
“Many times, we get applications that are trying to do too much,” Banyas said. “You really need to have a specific, answerable question and design an experiment or a trial that will answer that question in a clear and convincing way.”
According to Banyas, many applications lose credibility with review panels by failing to assemble the right team.
"If you're doing a dietary app or service and don't have anyone with dietary science on there, then the reviewers will be skeptical about your team's competencies to test the scientific question," he said.
He recommended applicants use the required one-page abstract strategically. Preparing a concise 350-word abstract that clearly states the research question and intervention upfront helps reviewers understand the project quickly.
“The first few lines should be, what is your research question and your intervention? What's the problem you're trying to identify?” he said. “It's always best just to come right out of the gate and say, ‘this is the problem.’”
Finally, he encouraged startups to reach out to NIH program officers early, and to treat that conversation as a chance to improve the proposal. While only half of the applications will be discussed by the reviewers, all applicants get feedback.
"If you have a concept that might not fit, but you're interested in talking to a program manager for an institute, please reach out to us," he said. “We'd love to connect.”
To learn more about the SBIR grant, visit https://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-MD-24-006.html.