SBIR topics come in two shapes. A directed topic names a specific capability the government needs and asks you to solve it. An open topic invites you to bring your own idea and argue that some part of the government should care. They are scored differently, they suit different companies, and choosing the wrong one is a common reason a strong technology loses.
What separates them
| Directed topic | Open topic | |
|---|---|---|
| Problem defined by | The agency | You |
| Customer | Named or implied | You must identify one |
| Main risk | Not matching the requirement | No one inside wants it |
| Best for | Technology aimed at a stated gap | Existing dual-use products |
Not every agency offers open topics, and those that do run them intermittently. Availability, format and even the name change between agencies and between cycles, so confirm in the current solicitation. Some agencies also run hybrids — a broadly worded topic area that behaves like an open call but still lists a few must-meet constraints — and those should be treated as directed topics when you write.
How each is scored
A directed topic is scored substantially on responsiveness. Reviewers hold your proposal against the requirements the topic listed, and a requirement you did not address reads as a gap whether or not you could have met it. Technical merit still matters, but merit against their problem, not yours in general.
An open topic shifts the burden. Because you defined the problem, you have to prove it is real for the government: which office has it, what they do today, why that is inadequate, and what changes operationally if you succeed. Vague market language sinks these proposals. A named end user who has already spoken with you is the strongest evidence you can bring. Our overview of how review panels score proposals explains what reviewers are weighing in either case.
The dual-use expectation
Open topics generally assume dual use — a product with a genuine commercial market that the government can also buy. That is not a box to check at the end. It shapes the whole proposal: you are arguing that federal money accelerates something that will exist commercially anyway, which is a stronger position than asking to be funded into existence. Directed topics can be dual-use too, but a purely government-specific answer is acceptable there in a way it usually is not in an open topic.
Practically: if you already ship something and want a federal customer, an open topic is the natural door. If your technology is early and you want the government to fund the science, a directed topic that matches it is the better bet. Either way the commercialization argument carries real weight, and it deserves the treatment described in our piece on the SBIR commercialization plan. If a university partner is central to the work, check whether STTR fits better, and browse the rest of the SBIR and STTR library for the surrounding mechanics.
Projects House helps founders decide which door their technology should walk through and builds the hardware behind either answer. Get in touch through the contact form.