[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 57 (Thursday, March 25, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14476-14478]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-6606]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY
NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL
Commercialization of University Research Request for Information
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In September 2009, President Obama released his national
innovation strategy, which is designed to promote sustainable growth
and the creation of quality jobs. Two key parts of this strategy are to
increase support for both the fundamental research at our nation's
universities and the effective commercialization of promising
technologies.
The Federal government supports university-based research for a
variety of reasons. Expanding the frontiers of human knowledge is a
worthy objective in its own right. Basic research that is not motivated
by any particular application can have a transformative impact. As
President Obama noted in his National Academy speech, ``It was basic
research in the photoelectric field that would one day lead to solar
panels. It was basic research in physics that would eventually produce
the CAT scan. The calculations of today's GPS satellites are based on
the equations that Einstein put to paper more than a century ago.''
Yet it is often transferring viable research discoveries to the
marketplace that can pose the greatest challenge to innovators and
entrepreneurs. As a result, the Administration is interested in working
with all stakeholders (including universities, companies, Federal
research labs, entrepreneurs, investors, and non-profits) to identify
ways in which we can increase the economic impact of Federal investment
in university R&D and the innovations being fostered in Federal and
private proof of concept centers (POCCs). This RFI is designed to
collect input from the public on ideas for promoting the
commercialization of Federally funded research. The first section of
the RFI seeks public comments on how best to encourage
commercialization of university research. The second section of the RFI
seeks public comments on whether POCCs can be a means of stimulating
the commercialization of early-stage technologies by bridging the
``valley of death.''
Background: Federally-funded research has contributed to economic
growth, job creation and improvements in our quality of life. In the
information and communications sector, for example, university-based
research has played a key role in the development of technologies such
as the Internet, electronic design automation, mass storage, speech
recognition, parallel computing, computer graphics, and workstations.
In the life sciences, university research has led to new tools to
diagnose, prevent and treat diseases.
With respect to POCCs, innovative technologies developed at POCCs
arise primarily from not-for profit research institutions such as
hospitals and foundations as well as from Federal laboratories and the
private sector. The Federal Government funds much of this early-stage
research and also provides funding and incentives to entrepreneurial
businesses to bring new technologies to the marketplace. For example,
the NSF Engineering Research Centers Program provides core funds to
move fundamental research through proof-of-concept testing and
additional incentive funds to speed the translation of research further
into the realm of project development in partnership with start-ups and
other small businesses. State and local governments also provide
resources to promote new business development. Despite these resources,
too many technologies fail to cross the ``valley of death'' of product
development between the research laboratory and commercialization by
the private sector.
The Administration has already taken a number of steps to promote
and encourage the commercialization of federally funded research:
The President's FY11 budget proposes to double the
National Science Foundation's Partnership for Innovation program. This
will allow the NSF to provide grants that will increase the engagement
of faculty and students across all disciplines in the innovation and
entrepreneurship process; increase the impact of the most promising
university innovations through commercialization, industry alliances,
and start-up formation, and develop a regional community that supports
the ``innovation ecosystem'' around universities.
On February 24, 2010, led by Commerce Secretary Gary
Locke, the Administration organized a forum to explore issues related
to commercialization of university research.
Dr. Francis Collins, Director of the National Institutes
of Health, has indicated that translational medicine is one of his top
five priorities. For example, NIH is making it easier for academic
researchers to move from fundamental research to the creation of assays
that can be used to screen hundreds of thousands of candidates for drug
development.
Seven agencies are providing almost $130 million to
support an Energy Regional Innovation Cluster in energy efficient
building systems design. In addition to funding research, this will
provide support for business development, public infrastructure,
education, and workforce development.
The National Economic Council and the Office of Science and
Technology Policy will use the input from this RFI to shape the
Administration's future policy on the commercialization of federally
funded research.
RFI Guidelines: Responses to this RFI should be submitted by 11:59
p.m. Eastern Time on April 26, 2010. Responses to this RFI must be
delivered electronically as an attachment to an e-mail sent to [email protected] with the subject line ``Commercialization of
University Research.'' Responses to this notice are not offers and
cannot be accepted by the Government to form a binding contract or
issue a grant. Information obtained as a result of this RFI may be used
by the government for program planning on a non-attribution basis. Do
not include any information that might be considered proprietary or
confidential.
[[Page 14477]]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Any questions about the content of
this RFI should be sent to [email protected] with the subject
line ``RFI Questions.''
RFI Response Instructions: The White House Office of Science and
Technology Policy and the National Economic Council are interested in
responses that address one or more of the following topics:
Part I: With Respect to University Research, Promising Practices and
Successful Models
What are some promising practices and successful models for
fostering commercialization and diffusion of university research? What
is the evidence that these approaches are successful? How could these
promising practices be more widely adopted? Examples include, but are
not limited to:
Business plan competitions
Coursework, training programs, and experiential learning
that give faculty and students the skills they need to become
entrepreneurs
Programs that encourage multidisciplinary collaboration
between faculty and students in different disciplines, such as science,
engineering, business, and medicine
Technology transfer and sponsored project offices that can
negotiate agreements with companies in a timely fashion, and that have
a mandate to maximize the impact of their university's research as
opposed to maximizing licensing income
``Templates'' for agreements on issues such as
intellectual property, sponsored research, material transfer
agreements, and visiting industry fellows that can reduce the time and
cost required to commercialize university research and form university-
industry partnerships
Models for promoting open innovation and an intellectual
property ``commons''
University-industry collaborations that increase
investment in pre-competitive research and development that is beyond
the time horizon of any single firm
University participation in regional economic development
initiatives and efforts to strengthen ``clusters''
Supportive university policies such as ``industrial
leave'' that allows faculty members to work for a new or existing
company to commercialize their research
Bootstrapping Innovation Ecosystems
Some universities participate in regional innovation ``ecosystems''
with dense concentrations of venture and angel investors, experienced
entrepreneurs and managers, and a mix of large and small firms. These
universities also have faculty who have been involved in
commercialization of research and entrepreneurship, and can serve as
mentors and role models to faculty or students. How can universities
and their external partners expand their ability to commercialize
research in the absence of these favorable conditions?
Metrics for Success
What are appropriate metrics for evaluating the success or failure
of initiatives to promote commercialization of university research?
Changes in Public Policy and Funding
What changes in public policy and research funding should the Obama
Administration consider that would promote commercialization of
university research? How could existing programs be modified or
augmented to encourage commercialization of university research?
Part II: With Respect to POCCs
Underlying Conditions and Infrastructure
What underlying conditions are necessary to enhance the
success of a POCC?
[cir] How can regions with less significant angel and VC
investment cultures support POCCs and start-up business activity? Can
current POCC successes transfer to other regions and universities?
[cir] How important is active participation by strong local
business community in a POCC? Describe how you integrate them into the
POCC ecosystem?
How can Federal agencies, research institutions, Federal
researchers, and the private sector work together to foster more
successful POCCs that accelerate commercialization into the
marketplace?
How can we leverage NSF's and industry's investment in
Engineering Research Centers and Industry/University Cooperative
Research Centers to speed the development and commercialization of new
technology that has already reached the proof-of-concept stage?
In addition to Federal resources, what existing state,
regional or local government funded resources or programs supplement
the POCCs in bridging the ``valley of death''?
[cir] Describe any alternative sources of private funding/
financing that might be available such as not for profit entities or
charitable foundations.
Successful Practices
What are examples of successful practices?
What are the key ingredients responsible for this success?
Is there any evidence that indicates POCCs are an
effective mechanism to foster local or regional economic development
and job creation (e.g. research related to the needs of particular
clusters, participating in regional networks, making shared facilities
available to local firms, addressing the need for skilled labor in
particular sectors)?
What lessons can be learned from other successful models
such as technology-based economic development organizations that
support POCCs?
Describe educational programs associated with POCCs that
better prepare students to work in entrepreneurial environments?
To what extent do interdisciplinary services (legal,
accounting, business plan training) contribute to POCCs successes?
At POCCs, what lessons have been learned regarding:
Leadership and team composition, project selection, optimum scale of
effort, importance of brick-and-mortar facilities, geographic scope of
participation, and multi-agency involvement?
Success Metrics
How do you define the success of a POCC?
[cir] What are the relevant inputs, outputs, outcomes, and impacts
for success metrics?
[cir] What is the time period needed to measure success as applied
to different types of technologies?
Would the appropriate success metrics for a POCC
affiliated with a university be different than one affiliated with a
Federal research lab?
Other Questions
For those institutions with POCCs, how would you describe
what you do and how you do it?
How can research and development assets supported by the
Federal Government be leveraged to support POCCs, such as a multi-
agency, multi-disciplinary database of supported research?
How could such assistance also bolster State and local
government programs?
What other administrative policies/practices should the
Administration consider modifying, adopting or
[[Page 14478]]
implementing to enhance the success prospects of POCCs, including
streamlining reporting requirements?
James Kohlenberger,
Chief of Staff, Office of Science and Technology Policy.
Diana Farrell,
Deputy Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, National
Economic Council.
[FR Doc. 2010-6606 Filed 3-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P