Commission Meeting July 25, 2012 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Commission Meeting July 25, 2012 PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 602793-NGQ5O



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Commission Meeting July 25, 2012

Description:

Title: WPP 2010 Sponsor Briefing Author: Paul Jackson Last modified by: Ike Ike Created Date: 4/20/2009 4:07:58 PM Document presentation format: On-screen Show (4:3) – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:101
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 48
Provided by: PaulJa3
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Commission Meeting July 25, 2012


1
Commission Meeting July 25, 2012
2
Innovation Platform Program
  • Fiscal Year 2012

3
  • Purpose
  • To link the development and innovation
    capabilities and capacities of
  • an already established Innovation Platform and
    all its resources at an
  • Ohio college or university or not-for-profit
    research institution to
  • specific late stage development and innovation
    needs of Ohio
  • companies
  • Innovation Platform an already existing
    capacity that incorporates
  • unique technology capabilities and
    strengths, talent, equipment,
  • facilities, engaged industry partners, a
    track record of research
  • commercialization and innovation,
    intellectual property, and other
  • resources in a particular technology area
    that collectively can serve as
  • a vehicle for significant, industry-defined
    and directed opportunities
  • through the development and
    commercialization of new products and
  • innovations

4
  • FY2012 Proposals
  • 37 proposals submitted
  • 35 proposals passed Developments administrative
    review
  • Proposals based in one or more 8 technology
    areas
  • - Advanced Materials (13) -
    Aeropropulsion Power Management (3)
  • - Fuel Cells Energy Storage (7) -
    Medical Technology (14)
  • - Software Applications for business -
    Sensing Automation Technologies (6)
  • and healthcare (3) - Solar
    Photovoltaics (3)
  • - Situational Awareness and
  • Surveillance Systems (3)

5
  • Program Basics
  • Lead Applicants Ohio colleges or universities
    or an Ohio not-for-profit public or private
    research institution. Proposals must include
    collaboration with at least two or more Ohio
    for-profit companies.
  • Funding 18 million available (FY12) Award
    range of 1 3 million
  • External Evaluator National Academies of
    Science (NAS)

6
Review of Proposals to Ohios Third Frontier
Program, 2012-2013 Innovation Platform Program
(IPP) 2012
The National Academies July 25, 2012
7
The National Academies
  • The National Academies bring together committees
    of experts in all areas of scientific and
    technological endeavors. These experts serve on a
    volunteer basis to address critical national
    issues.
  • The National Research Council, which operates
    under the auspices of the National Academies, is
    committed to providing elected leaders, policy
    makers, and the public with expert advice based
    on sound scientific evidence.

8
Committee Membership
  • Committee of 23 includes
  • Working engineers, scientists, academics,
    investors, and businessmen and women
  • 3 are elected members of the National Academy of
    Engineering (NAE)
  • 2 are elected members of the National Academy of
    Science (NAS)
  • 3 financial analysts
  • 5 Presidents or CEOs, 1 Vice President, and 1
    Executive Director of private (for profit)
    companies
  • Geographically diverse members are from all over
    the United States
  • 17 previously served on NRC Committees to review
    proposals for Ohio

9
IPP Evaluation Criteria
  • Performance Goals
  • Will the project have an impact on Ohio in three
    or more of the following areas?
  • job creation
  • personal wealth
  • new sales of products
  • company creation or attraction
  • follow-on investment
  • talent recruitment and
  • enhanced Ohio, national, and/or international
    recognition
  • Experience and Qualifications
  • Is leadership demonstrated in all critical phases
    of the proposal?
  • Does the applicant team have the relevant
    experience to perform the work involved?
  • Technical Merit Plan
  • Can the technical challenges be met?
  • Are novel concepts, approaches or methods
    employed?
  • Commercialization Strategy
  • Does the team understand the total resource
    requirements for achieving market entry?
  • What is the specific value proposition of the
    proposed approach?
  • Has the Innovation Platform already achieved at
    least proof of principle?
  • How closely matched is the project with the
    existing or emerging supply chains capabilities?

10
IPP Evaluation Criteria
  • Budget Cost Share
  • Budget
  • Is the budget justified and adequate?
  • Cost Share
  • Is the cost share necessary and reasonable?
  • Does the cost share represent a specific new
    commitment, and is it in the form of cash?
  • Is the cost share being used directly in support
    of the Innovation Platform?
  • Is the cost share firmly committed, with no
    contingencies or conditions, from known sources
    and available to the Innovation Platform at the
    time of Proposal submittal?
  • Does the proposal contain sufficiently detailed
    commitment letters, including an explanation of
    cost share commitment?

11
Evaluation of Proposals
TMP Technical Merit and Plan
CS Commercialization Strategy
PG Performance Goals
EQ Experience and Qualifications
BCS Budget and Cost Share
E Exceeds Requirements of the RFP
M Meets Requirements of the RFP
D Does Not Meet Requirements of the RFP
12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
  • Recommended
  • Proposals

15
  • Goal
  • Seeks to develop and commercialize new
    ophthalmologic instrumentation, new surgical
    instruments, new contrast dyes, and automated
    software packages that will enhance
    high-resolution optical coherence tomography
    (OCT) systems.
  • Strengths
  • Innovative
  • Highly Desired
  • Previous Success
  • Extensive leadership and experience

Budget Requested Total Budget 2,999,709
6,489,271 40 to subcontracts
16
  • Market Size
  • Device is aimed to become standard screening
    procedure for all corneal refractive surgery and
    corneal stabilization therapy candidates.
  • Currently, the vast majority of OCT imaging is
    performed on retinal patients. This population
    represents approximately 2 million patients in
    the US that can receive an OCT exam up to 4 times
    a year. Opening OCT to the anterior segment
    market adds an additional 11 million cornea and
    refractive patients to the potential market for
    OCT
  • Other Economic Objectives
  • 10 Technology licenses to Ohio-based companies.
  • 5 M in licensing income based on
    Center-developed technologies
  • Formation of 5 new companies

17
  • Goal
  • Resolve existing technical issues of the
    polymer-liquid crystal interface, which in turn
    will push core products to the next level of
    commercial success within 3 to 5 years to achieve
    a growth of more than 100 percent.
  • Strengths
  • Clear Path to near term impact
  • Significant long-term potential
  • Collaborators will benefit from essentially the
    same research without direct competition

Budget Requested Total Budget 3,000,000 6,00
0,000 70 to subcontracts
18
  • Market Size
  • Total available markets for key KDI product lines
    are large. The writing tablet market is projected
    to be 145M for 2014. Based on current customer
    pull and response, KDI expects 5 to 10
    penetration in the accessible market for the HRSE
    Boogie Board RIP. Similarly AMI is expected to
    demonstrate a 30 increase in market over the
    next two years.
  • Other Economic Objectives
  • 10M in follow-on investment
  • Continued Enhanced Recognition
  • 10M in new sales by 2013-2014

19
  • Goal
  • Build on the market introduction of integrated
    positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic
    resonance imaging (MRI) by Philips Cleveland to
    achieve rapid market growth and global adoption
    of PET/MRI-related products/services in the
    global healthcare community.
  • Strengths
  • Well established capabilities and capacities
  • PET/MRI system has superior imaging quality
    relative to comparative systems
  • Strong technical foundation
  • High potential for successful commercialization

Budget Requested Total Budget 3,000,000 6,026
,690 5 to subcontracts
20
  • Market Size
  • Philips the within reach market size will be
    at least 1 billion
  • Cardinal 2.3B by 2018
  • Other Economic Objectives
  • 46 M in new sales/revenue by 3 years, 113M by 5
    years
  • Attraction of 3 companies by 3 years, 10 by 8
    years
  • Follow-on investment of 13M by 3 years, 22M by
    5 years

21
  • Goal
  • Through Additive Manufacturing, develop specific
    composites for applications primarily directed at
    the aerospace industry in Ohio.
  • Strengths
  • Cost-competitive and potentially much lower in
    cost compared to conventional injection molding
  • High level of interest from many potential
    industrial end-users
  • Will have a substantial positive economic impact
    on the state of Ohio

Budget Requested Total Budget 2,999,050 6,370
,563 60 to subcontracts
22
  • Market Size
  • The current market size is 1.3B and is expected
    to grow to 5B by 2020 as the production of
    end-use parts accelerates.
  • The size of this market, inclusive of all energy
    storage technologies, has been anticipated by an
    earlier Frost Sullivan report as growing at a
    25 compounded rate to reach 6 Billion by 2020.
  • Other Economic Objectives
  • 50M in sales after 5 years
  • 1M/ year in new sponsored research
  • Potential Expansion of RPM into Daytons
    Aerospace Hub

23
  • Goal
  • Leverage the existing capabilities of the
    Cellular Therapies Integrated Service, to
    establish a facility that will support
    accelerated commercialization from basic
    research to clinical trials and commercialization
    on an affordable, contract basis to researchers
    and biotechnology companies.
  • Strengths
  • Will assist in developing protocols for producing
    and releasing cellular therapy materials for
    clinical trials that meet FDA expectations
  • Team has the potential to become a major
    contributor in the evolution of this technology
    and its commercialization

Budget Requested Total Budget 2,403,875 4,
807,751 20 to subcontracts
24
  • Market Size
  • The Cell Therapy industry CTI alone (as opposed
    to regenerative medicine, which includes small
    and large molecules, devices and cells) had
    global sales of 410 million in 2008, and is
    predicted to grow to 2.7 billion by 2012 and
    5.1 billion by 2014
  • Other Economic Objectives
  • 1M in new sales by end of year 5
  • Formation of 4-6 new companies by year 5
  • 4M in follow-on investment by year 5

25
  • Goal
  • Develop software and other tools to improve
    surgical accuracy in total shoulder and hip
    arthroplasty. This proposal includes the
    development of products designed to facilitate
    pre-surgical planning and improve accuracy of
    component placement during surgery
  • Strengths
  • Significant progress already made towards
    objectives
  • Potential to reduce the cost of orthopaedic
    surgery and dramatically improve patient outcomes
  • Reasonable and well-outlined technical plan and
    timeline

Budget Requested Total Budget 2,763,444
5,564,019 50 to subcontracts
26
  • Market Size
  • Other Economic Objectives
  • 15M in new sales by year 3, 50M by year 5

27
Final Remarks
  • Total state funds requested by the 6 proposals
    17,166,078
  • The remaining 29 proposals, when ranked against
    the RFPs criteria and requirements, scored
    significantly lower than the recommended 6
  • Thank You!
  • The National Academies would like to thank the
    State of Ohio for placing its trust in our
    process and in our outstanding volunteer
    committee members.

28
  • Questions?

29
  • Interviewees
  • Not Recommended

30
  • Goal
  • OSU-CAR is proposing to expand their platform to
    support a broader penetration of Distributed
    Energy Storage Systems through deployment and
    demonstration of modular battery systems and
    associated power management and software
    integration products.
  • Strengths
  • Well thought-out technical plan
  • Solid cost share

Budget Requested Total Budget 2,750,000
5,529,283 36 to subcontracts
31
  • Market Size
  • BPLG estimates the total market size to be 46,
    303,359 in 2012 and 130,407,516 in 2017.
    Estimated Revenues from BPLs solution are
    3,000,000 by 2017.
  • Other Economic Objectives
  • First year revenues 1M by 2016, revenues
    projected to be over 100M
  • Committee Concerns
  • Lead applicant lacks familiarity in industrial
    and distributed power generation
  • automotive requirements are significantly
    different than utility and community-scale needs,
    and the proposal fails to make a convincing case
    that the team can handle the difference
  • Proposal lacks specific commercialization and
    go-to-market strategies
  • Proposal does not sufficiently detail the value
    proposition of the products or the present
    competition
  • Adoption of smart grid and community-scale
    systems likely to exceed the 3 to 5 year
    timeframe

32
  • Goal
  • Build on an existing capability to make available
    an open architecture hardware-in-the-loop SA
    platform, where companies developing SA products
    can have their technologies evaluated, certified,
    and integrated into fully operational systems in
    order to increase consumer confidence and
    interest.
  • Strengths
  • Builds on a strong set of academic, industry, and
    Air Force assets
  • Strong cost share

Budget Requested Total
Budget 2,763,444 5,564,019 60 to subcontracts
33
  • Market Size
  • Air Traffic Control (ATC) equipment market
    projected to reach 3.9 billion by the year 2017.
  • The UAV electro-optical/infrared sensors system
    market will grow from 813 million in fiscal year
    2011 to nearly 1.7 billion in fiscal year 2020.
  • Bio- and chemical sensors market is expected to
    experience high growth to be worth 13 billion by
    the end of 2011, and estimates suggest it will
    reach 21 billion by 2016.
  • Other Economic Objectives
  • Over 4M/year in new sales in 3 years, nearly 9M
    in 5 years
  • Around 4M in follow-on investment in 5 years
  • Committee Concerns
  • No discussion of UAV regulations or other issues
    associated with urban deployment of UAVs
  • Serious risk of failure for non-technical,
    non-commercial reasons (public reaction) , and
    economic impacts will require customers--other
    cities--to overcome public resistance to
    deployment
  • It is not clear in the proposal that the Air
    Force technology and data to be used in this
    system would remain accessible in a
    commercialization venture, as opposed to a
    military deployment

34
  • Goal
  • Develop and conduct commercialization clinical
    trials to support FDA approval and marketing of
    two Neuromodulation /Neurostimulation devices
    based on the existing platform. One application
    will restore hand and arm functions to patients
    with upper extremity paralysis due to spinal cord
    injury or stroke. The other application will
    provide relief of phantom limb pain in post
    amputation patients.
  • Strengths
  • Novel and well-planned technical approach
  • Clear solution to unmet medical needs

Budget Requested Total Budget 2,763,444 5
,564,019 90 to subcontracts
35
  • Market Size
  • Restoration of Upper Extremity Motor Function
    265k patients with spinal cord injury proposal
    estimates revenue of 6M during the first year on
    the market, growing to 24M by the third year of
    sales.
  • Treatment of Chronic Pain following Limb
    Amputation 1.7M patients with amputated limbs,
    95 with chronic pain, proposal estimates revenue
    of 28M during the first year on the market,
    increasing to 70M during the second year on the
    market.
  • Other Economic Objectives
  • Revenue/year by year 3 6M, in year 5 24M
  • 5M in sponsored follow-on research in the next 5
    years
  • Committee Concerns
  • Proposal fails to disclose the receipt of and
    performance resulting from several related prior
    OTF awards

36
  • Goal
  • Ohio University proposes to use its
    Electrochemical Innovation Platform to transition
    two technologies to commercial products (1) a
    metal recycling process for used battery cathodes
    to recover metals for use in new lithium ion
    batteries (in collaboration with BASF
    Corporation), and (2) develop a low-cost,
    high-accuracy urea sensor for diesel emission
    control (in collaboration with E3 Clean
    Technologies)
  • Strengths
  • Metal recycling could significantly reduce the
    cost of materials used in lithium-ion battery
    cathodes
  • BASF and Ohio University are highly qualified and
    experienced

Budget Requested Total Budget 2,763,444 5,56
4,019 17 to subcontracts
37
  • Market Size
  • Metal Recycling
  • Consumer electronics market size 5 to 10B per
    year. The cathode is 50 of the cost of the
    battery cell hence, cathodes occupy 1B per
    year of the consumer electronics battery market.
    Additionally, Decreasing the cost of the cathode
    would result in a 2 to 3B market opportunity
    for cathode materials in the automotive market.
  • Urea Sensor
  • Today, the market size is approximately 700,000
    units per year. This is expected to grow to
    2,000,000 units by 2016. At 30/sensor, this
    translates to a 60M market.
  • Other Economic Objectives
  • Over 100M in new product sales by year 5
  • New jobs pay nearly double the local prevailing
    wage
  • Committee Concerns
  • Projects are essentially separate, result
    untenable management plan
  • No OEMs are presently onboard with the
    commercialization plan of the UREA sensor
  • Insufficient details supplied on the metals
    recycling process and alternate pathways

38
  • Goal
  • To establish an Innovation Platform for Solar
    Photovoltaics (IPSPV) at the University of
    Toledo, which will support the near-term
    commercialization goals of four Ohio-based
    companies. In each case, the collaborators have a
    product that requires additional PV research in
    order to accelerate market entry and sales growth
  • Strengths
  • Technical tasks are achievable
  • Team has extensive experience

Budget Requested Total Budget 2,763,444 5
,564,019 50 to subcontracts
39
  • Market Size
  • WK The US electricity market was 400B in 2009.
    Costs of electricity are going up at rate of 7
    per year, accelerating the time to grid parity
    cross over for PV. The US Electricity market had
    1000 GW of capacity in 2006.
  • Isofoton the HCPV market is currently 0.5 of
    the worldwide PV Market. The PV market has grown
    at about 40 year on year for last 15 years with
    26 GW installed in 2011. So the size of the
    market in 2001 was roughly 120 MW. Isofoton
    expects the HCPV market will grow at about
    40/yr., which translates to a size of 168 MW in
    2012, 235 in 2013, 329 in 2014, 461 in 2015, 646
    in 2016
  • Other Economic Objectives
  • Over 135M in total revenue by year 3, over 300M
    in year 5
  • Other details listed as trade secrets
  • Committee Concerns
  • Questionable past performance on OTF awards by WK
  • Recent layoffs and decision to re-tool operations
    at WK raise serious worries regarding succesful
    completion of the project
  • Overall solar market may not be receptive to the
    new products described in the proposal

40
  • Goal
  • The team will characterize, grow, pattern, and
    otherwise process compound semiconductor samples
    and give advice and recommendations regarding the
    design of a proposed cryogenic electro-optic
    probe station. Two of the projectsthe
    development of new infrared-detector arrays and
    the growth of bulk gallium nitride (GaN)clearly
    advance the state of the art and can be
    accomplished in the 3-year timeframe.
  • Strengths
  • The project makes good use of the different
    strengths and capabilities of the participants
  • Extensive experience with semiconductor device
    materials

Budget Requested Total Budget 2,763,444
5,564,019 26 to subcontracts
41
  • Market Size
  • CE For IRTAS there is 20M/year market size for
    the next 3-4 years. For Microcam, 20M/year in
    sales are anticipated for the next 3-4 years.
  • Momentive world-wide, possibly over 400M by
    late 2013
  • Lake Shore A recent 2010 report on the IR
    imaging market says it expects that the overall
    thermal market will be more than 1.1 million
    units in 2016 (3.4 B in value).
  • Other Economic Objectives
  • Revenues from new products at least 66M/year by
    year 5
  • Become an international center of
    semiconductor-based sensor technologies
  • Committee Concerns
  • Commercialization strategy is flawed using the
    supplied numbers, it is impossible for the 4?
    GaN wafer project to show a profit in the
    foreseeable future.
  • Distinct impression that the project is designed
    more to provide opportunities for NWL than to
    create jobs or economic impact in Ohio
  • General lack of overlap between the MPM project
    and the rest of the group

42
  • Goals
  • Collaborating with OEMS, this proposal will
    leverage CWRUs expertise to assist companies
    with development and commercialization of new
    products
  • (1) with QED, to develop new radiofrequency (RF)
    breast-coil-biopsy-plate systems dedicated to the
    significant reduction of false positives and
    false negatives in breast cancer diagnostics
  • (2) with Philips Medical Systems, Inc., to
    develop RF spine coils for both excitation and
    detection of proton signals for ultra-high-field
    scanners and
  • (3) with Hyper Tech Research, Inc., to develop
    MgB2 designs of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
    systems utilizing higher-temperature
    superconducting main magnets in order to reduce
    the need for liquid helium.
  • Strengths
  • OPTIMISEs industrial partners include all five
    leading OEMs
  • Excellent experience in the field

Budget Requested Total Budget 2,763,444
5,564,019 70 to subcontracts
43
  • Market Size
  • QED total world potential market for the
    products can be estimated at 45M by 2015
  • Philips The current annual market remains flat
    at around 6 or 7 systems per year. Growth will
    come however as 7T demonstrates diagnostic
    advantage relative to 3T and achieves regulatory
    clearance
  • HT Overall market for magnets in this space will
    be approximately 250 million in the U.S.
  • Other Economic Objectives
  • Over 20M in revenues/year by year 5
  • General expectation of Benefits to Personal
    Wealth, Follow-on Investment, Recruitment of
    Talent and Enhanced Global Recognition
  • Committee Concerns
  • The proposal does not convincingly detail an
    established platform for the intended projects

44
Committee Membership
  • Committee members were recruited based on
    technical expertise as well as experience with
    business practices, technology transfer, venture
    capital, and economic development.
  • Bias and Conflict of Interest
  • Potential members reviewed full list of
    participating institutions and collaborators
    before nomination
  • After nomination, each member completed bias and
    conflict forms which were reviewed by NRC staff
    and discussed by the committee

45
Committee Membership
T. S. Sudarshan, Chair CEO and President,
Materials Modification, Inc. Viola L.
Acoff Head and Professor, Dept. of
Metallurgical and Materials Engineering, Univ.
of Alabama Catherine G. Ambrose Associate
Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery, Univ. of
Texas David E. Aspnes (NAS) Distinguished
University Professor, Dept. of Physics, North
Carolina State Univ. Carol Cherkis Life
Sciences Industry Consultant, NewCap
Partners David E. Crow (NAE) Senior VP, Pratt
and Whitney (ret) and professor emeritus of
mechanical engineering at the Univ. of
Connecticut
  • Paul A. Erickson Associate Professor,
    Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, UC Davis
  • Bruce Gitter
  • Senior principle scientist and manager of
    nuclear medicine imaging, Covance Laboratories,
    Inc.
  • Jahan K. Jewayni Independent Wealth Management
    Consultant
  • Matt Jones
  • Partner, Nth Power
  • Mohammad A. Karim Vice President for
    Research Old Dominion University
  • Chester Kolodziej
  • Executive Director, Freedom Field Renewable
    Energy, Inc

46
Committee Membership
Laura Mazzola Vice President of Global Health
Products, Wave 80 Biosciences Trent
Molter Associate Research Professor and
Business Development Officer, Center for Clean
Energy Engineering, Univ. of Connecticut C.
Bradley Moore (NAS) Professor of Chemistry
Emeritus at Univ. of California, Berkeley Nabil
Nasr Director, Center for Integrated
Manufacturing Studies, Rochester Institute of
Technology Arthur L. Patterson President and
CEO, CMC, LLC Shalini Prasad Professor of
bioengineering at Univ. of Texas, Dallas
  • Lloyd M. Robeson (NAE)
  • Professor of Materials Science and
    Engineering, Lehigh Univ. and Principle
    Research Associate, Air Products and Chemicals
    (ret)
  • Subhash C. Singhal (NAE)
  • Independent Consultant and Battelle Fellow
    Emeritus, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
  • Norman A. Wereley
  • Professor and Associate Chair of Aerospace
    Engineering, Univ. of Maryland
  • Jim Wheeler
  • Senior Vice President of Economic
    Competitiveness Policy and Research, Thomas P.
    Miller and Associates
  • Raul E. Zavaleta
  • CEO, Indigo BioSystems, Inc.

47
Committee Process
  • First meeting April 19-20, 2012
  • ODOD Presentation on IPP
  • Extensive discussion on all proposals
  • Through consensus, selected 13 proposals for
    future interviews
  • Between meetings, committee members continued
    in-depth evaluation of the 13 interviewees,
    including examination of their financial and
    technical viability
  • Second meeting May 30-June 1, 2012
  • Held 13 interviews
  • Each 50 minute session was conducted in true
    interview format
  • After Interviews, held a final dialogue with ODOD
    staff
  • Prior performance of interviewees on prior OTF
    grants
  • Requirements and objectives of the IPP
  • Through consensus, committee determined which
    proposals best satisfied the requirements of the
    RFP and their respective rank-order
About PowerShow.com