Senior scientist biotech

Principal Investigator (SBIR/STTR), X-ray Neuromodulation & Bone Stimulatio We are a neurotechnology venture studio preparing two federal SBIR/STTR submissions and we need a scientific Principal Investigator whose publication record independently establishes credibility with the review panel. The two programs: **1. X-ray neuromodulation.** Deep-tissue stimulation using X-ray-activated scintillating materials — X-ray excited luminescence coupled to optogenetic or photothermal effectors, enabling wireless modulation without implanted leads or optical fibers. **2. X-ray / radiation-mediated bone stimulation.** Modulation of osteogenesis and bone remodeling via controlled radiation exposure and downstream mechanotransduction and osteoblast/osteoclast signaling pathways. ### What the engagement is This is a 10-hour paid engagement to prepare your credentials and support the submission: - A tailored CV and NIH Biographical Sketch (5-page format, SciENcv) aligned to the specific solicitation and aims - A signed letter of commitment specifying your role, effort, and institutional affiliation - Two 45-minute working calls to review the Specific Aims page and Research Strategy for scientific accuracy, feasibility, and reviewer objections - Written comments on the draft Research Strategy (2–3 pages of margin-level critique, not a rewrite) - Confirmation of any institutional, conflict-of-interest, or effort-commitment constraints on your side We write the application. You are not drafting the grant. You are lending genuine scientific leadership, sharpening the science, and confirming you will actually run the work. ### What happens if we are awarded If the application is funded, you serve as PI on the award and perform the research as a compensated member of the project team — either as a Darrow employee at negotiated salary and effort, or, if you hold a faculty appointment, through a subaward to your institution under an STTR structure. We will paper this before submission so there is no ambiguity. We do not want a name on a cover page; we want the person who will do the work. To be explicit: the $1,500 is payment for the 10 hours regardless of outcome. There is no success fee or award-contingent bonus — federal cost principles do not permit that, and we do not structure engagements that way. ### Who we are looking for You are a strong fit if your published record maps directly onto one of the two programs. Representative backgrounds: *X-ray neuromodulation:* PhD or MD/PhD in medical physics, radiation oncology physics, biomedical engineering, neuroengineering, or materials science, with first-author or senior-author publications in scintillator nanoparticle design, X-ray excited optical luminescence, X-ray-mediated optogenetics, wireless deep-brain stimulation, or radioluminescent phosphors for biological applications. *Bone stimulation:* PhD, MD, or DVM in bone biology, orthopedic research, radiation biology, or musculoskeletal physiology, with publications on radiation effects on bone, osteogenesis and fracture healing, bone mechanotransduction, or electrical/physical bone growth stimulation. Required in either case: - A peer-reviewed publication record a study section will recognize as authoritative in the specific aim area — this is the single most important criterion - Prior experience as PI, Co-I, or key personnel on an NIH, DoD, NSF, or comparable federal award - Willingness to be named as PI, with the effort commitment that implies (typically 1.8–3 calendar months in Phase I) - U.S.-based, and able to perform the work in the United States - Available for two scheduled calls and to turn documents in 3–5 business days Nice to have: existing eRA Commons ID and active SciENcv profile; prior SBIR/STTR Phase I or II experience; FDA regulatory exposure for a device or combination product; access to a wet lab, imaging core, or irradiator. ### Screening questions 1. Paste the three publications from your record that map most directly to X-ray-mediated stimulation or radiation effects on bone. For each, state your author position and the specific finding that is relevant. 2. Have you served as PI or Co-I on a federal award? Name the agency, mechanism, and approximate period. You do not need to disclose dollar amounts. 3. Do you currently hold a faculty or institutional appointment? If yes, name the institution and state whether your institution permits you to serve as PI on a small-business subaward or STTR. 4. Do you have an active eRA Commons ID? 5. Are there any restrictions on your ability to commit 1.8–3 calendar months of effort in the next 12–18 months? 6. Would you actually want to run this research if funded, or are you looking only for the 10-hour engagement? Either answer is acceptable; we need to know which. ### How to apply Attach your current CV or a link to your Google Scholar or ORCID profile. Skip the cover-letter template. Three sentences on why your specific record fits one of the two programs is more useful to us than a page of general qualifications. --- ## Structural risks to resolve before you post **PI employment eligibility is the binding constraint, not the resume.** For NIH SBIR, the PI must be primarily employed (more than half time) by the small business at the time of award and for the duration of the project. A tenured professor cannot satisfy this. STTR removes the constraint — the PI may be primarily employed by the partnering research institution, which must perform at least 30% of the work while the small business performs at least 40%. If your ideal candidate is faculty, the program must be structured as an STTR from the start, and you need an executed allocation-of-rights agreement. DoD component rules differ from NIH and should be confirmed against the specific solicitation before you commit to a structure. Recommend deciding SBIR vs. STTR per program before you interview anyone, because it determines who is even eligible. **Contingent compensation.** Fees contingent on obtaining a federal award are unallowable and, depending on framing, can look like a contingent-fee arrangement for procuring government business. The post above is drafted to pay flat for 10 hours with no award-linked bonus. Keep it that way. **Nominal-PI exposure.** Naming a PI who will not meaningfully direct the work is a misrepresentation in the application and a false-claims exposure after award. Question 6 exists to surface this. Document the intended post-award role in a short side letter before submission. **Foreign performance and ITAR/EAR.** X-ray neuromodulation hardware and any DoD-funded work carries export-control exposure. Screen for foreign institutional affiliations and dual appointments during the interview, not after selection. Also confirm the candidate does not carry a Foreign Talent Recruitment Program conflict under CHIPS and Science Act §10632. **Preliminary data.** A credentialed PI raises the Investigator score. It does not raise Approach. If the preliminary data for either program is thin, hiring a name will not carry the application under a sub-30 target. Recommend assessing preliminary data adequacy in parallel with this search. **Puerto Rico / HUBZone.** If either submission is intended to claim HUBZone or a small-disadvantaged-business preference, confirm certification status is current before the PI's location introduces a place-of-performance complication. ---