ERC Program-Level Evaluations - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

About This Presentation
Title:

ERC Program-Level Evaluations

Description:

ERC Program-Level Evaluations Studies Completed (www.erc-assoc.org/topics/6-nsf/policies.html) Designing the Next Generation of NSF Engineering Research Centers ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:88
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 15
Provided by: LynnP50
Learn more at: https://erc-assoc.org
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: ERC Program-Level Evaluations


1
ERC Program-Level Evaluations
  • Studies Completed (www.erc-assoc.org/topics/6-nsf/
    policies.html)
  • Designing the Next Generation of NSF Engineering
    Research Centers Insights from Worldwide
    Practice 2007 (Science Technology Policy
    Institute)
  • Innovations ERC-Generated Commercialized
    Products, Processes, and Startups 2007
    (SciTech Communications)
  • Strategic Planning in NSF-Funded ERCs 2007 (S.
    Currall et al.)
  • Undergraduate and Graduate Education Activities
    of Current ERCs 2006 (Win Aung with ERC
    Education Assessment Dissemination Task Group)
  • Impact on Industry of Interaction with ERCs,
    Repeat Study 2004, original 1996 (SRI
    International)
  • Economic Impacts on Georgia of Georgia Techs
    Packaging Research Center 2004 (SRI
    International for Georgia Research Alliance)
  • Impact of ERCs on Institutional and Cultural
    Change in Participating Institutions 2001 (SRI
    International)
  • Post-Graduation Status of ERC Education Programs
    2002 (A. Donnelly et al.)
  • Documenting Center Graduation Paths 2000 (SRI
    International)
  • Studies Underway
  • National and Regional Economic Impact of
    Mature/Graduated ERCs (SRI Intl)
  • Post-Graduation Status of NSF ERCs (SciTech
    Communications)

2
Designing the Next Generation of NSF Engineering
Research Centers Insights from Worldwide
Practice - 2007
  • Aim Identify practices at centers worldwide
    relevant to design of the Gen-4 ERCs. 50
    sites in 7 countries were visited.
  • Recommendations
  • Program should clarify relative importance of
    various ERC missions
  • Consider a more flexible system of both funding
    and life span
  • Direct some solicitations at strategic
    problem-focused research areas selected using
    diverse expert input, including industry
  • Consider awarding ERCs to institutions that are
    not university-based
  • Develop more flexible Intellectual Property
    Rights policies
  • Use creative practices and incentives to
    encourage commercialization
  • Support development of mutually beneficial
    partnerships and networks (true collaborative
    research) between ERCs and foreign institutions
  • Consider ERCs addressing topics of global
    importance (warming, energy, clean water,
    terrorism)

3
Innovations ERC-Generated Commercialized
Products, Processes, and Startups - 2007
  • Surveyed current graduated ERCs 27 responded.
    Total market value of products to date (reported
    and estimated) is in 10s of billions. As of
    mid-2007
  • ERCs have disclosed 1,430 inventions, had 524
    patents awarded, granted 1,886 licenses
  • Since 1985, ERCs have produced 113 spinoff firms
    with over 1,300 employees
  • Example CMU Data Storage Systems Center
    invention of NiAl underlayer made possible small,
    hi-capacity hard drives for laptops MP3 players
    (Market 100Bs worldwide)
  • Example Duke Emerging Cardiovascular
    Technologies invention of biphasic waveforms
    made possible portable improved defibrillators
    (Market gt10B)
  • Example Va Tech Center for Power Electronics
    Systems invented multiphase voltage regulator
    now in every computer with Intel processor (US
    leads multi-B industry)
  • Example USC Biomimetic MicroElectronic Systems
    ERC retinal prosthesis now in clinical testing
    will let blind see (World market will be in
    10Bs)

4
Innovations ERC-Generated Commercialized
Products, Processes, and Startups - 2007
  • Spinoff/startup companies
  • Examples
  • PerSeptive Biosystems (MIT BPEC, 1987)
    perfusion chromatography - 100M/yr sales, sold
    in 98 for 360M
  • DigitalPersona (Caltech CNSE, 1996) fingerprint
    ID/ password management - 20M/yr sales, 30M
    users worldwide
  • RF Solutions (Georgia Tech PRC, 1998) wireless
    LAN power amplifiers for notebooks - gt100M units
    shipped
  • Audyssey Labs (USC IMSC, 2002) audio signal
    processing optimization gt1M products shipped
  • Discera (U Michigan WIMS, 2001) CMOS MEMS
    resonator-based timing devices will dominate
    3.5B market
  • Healionics (U Washington UWEB) Biomaterials to
    enhance implanted device biocompatibility
    projected sales gt100M by 2012

5
Strategic Planning in NSF-Funded ERCs 2007
  • Through site visits, interviews, and surveys,
    studied use of the 3-plane diagram in strategic
    planning by 22 ERCs and the effect of strategic
    planning on research publication and technology
    commercialization
  • Conclusions
  • The 3-plane framework and formal strategic
    planning are vital tools for organizing ERC
    research
  • Most important determinant of success is
    comprehensiveness of the plan rather than
    commitment to one planning tool or process
  • The planning process is beneficial only for
    organizational goals that are explicitly
    discussed and prioritized in planning
  • Important attitudinal factors are commitment to
    the ERC, acceptance of planning as useful, and
    knowledge of planning
  • The planning process should be customized in a
    way that maximizes the quality of the strategic
    plan for each ERC

6
Impact on Industry of Interaction with ERCs,
Repeat Study 2004 (original 1996)
  • Surveyed industry members of 8 Gen-2 ERCs to
    assess ERC-industry interactions, benefits and
    value thereof to industry, and to compare these
    impacts with findings from the earlier 1996 study
  • Conclusions (also see following charts)
  • Basic patterns of benefits and impacts did not
    change greatly
  • Access to ideas, know-how, and graduates are the
    most valued
  • Licensing ERC software and technologies is the
    least valued
  • More Gen-2 ERCs reported seeing benefits in
    new/improved products processes
  • No basic changes in ERC program policies
    warranted, but continued flexibility for ERCs in
    adjusting to conditions is good
  • In future ERCs, relationships with small
    businesses, esp. start-ups, will become
    increasingly important

7
ERCs Provide Significant Benefit to Their Member
Firms
Percentage of ERC member firms reporting
significant benefits from membership in ERCs
(SRI International, Impact on Industry of
Interactions with Engineering Research Centers,
Dec 2004)
8
Performance of ERC Graduates With Non-ERC Hires
Comparisons by Member Firms
Percentage of industrial supervisors rating the
former ERC students/graduates hired by their
firms as Better Than or Much Better Than
equivalent hires without ERC experience. (Source
SRI, 2004)
9
Undergraduate and Graduate Education Activities
of Current ERCs 2006
  • Internal EEC study aimed at documenting and
    categorizing ERC education innovations, and
    assessing the relative educational achievements
    of various technology clusters of ERCs
  • Findings
  • Most notable is high output of new and modified
    courses
  • ERCs are highly successful in introducing systems
    focus and multidisciplinary content (gt60 of new
    courses have both)
  • Microelectronics/IT cluster (36 of total ERCs)
    produced 60 of new courses and 35 of modified
    courses
  • Activity within clusters is highly variable
    across centers
  • Multi-university ERCs clearly outproduce
    single-institution centers in new and modified
    courses

10
Economic Impacts on Georgia of Georgia Techs
Packaging Research Center 2004
  • Conducted by SRI International for Georgia
    Research Alliance
  • Findings
  • From 1994 to 2004, Georgia invested 32.5M in the
    PRC
  • Direct benefits to the Georgia economy totaled
    nearly 192M (jobs created, license fees
    royalties, sponsored research, consulting income,
    workshop short course fees)
  • Indirect ripple effect economic benefits
    totaled an addl 159M
  • Thus, total quantifiable return to Georgia
    economy was 351M, more than 101
  • NSF/ERC program invested 32.7M in same period
    (also 101)
  • PRCs industrial members collectively contributed
    60.7M
  • Several PRC spinoff companies were located
    outside Georgia
  • Overall, substantial leveraging of NSF investment

11
Impact of ERCs on Institutional and Cultural
Change in Their Home Institutions
  • Study of 17 ERCs operating for at least ten years
    in 2000, Class of 1985 through Class of 1990
  • Findings
  • Systems approach was embraced by the ERCs but had
    little broader impact on their Colleges of
    Engineering
  • Demonstrated the feasibility of large-scale
    collaborative, interdisciplinary research and
    education
  • Stimulated host institutions to promote
    interdisciplinary research at 16 of the 17 host
    institutions
  • Few ERC participants failed to attain tenure in
    many cases, ERC participation was perceived as an
    advantage

12
Post-Graduation Status of NSF Engineering
Research Center Education Programs 2002
  • Working group of NRCEN surveyed 16 existing
    graduated ERCs regarding the status of their
    education programs
  • Findings Conclusions
  • 70 of respondents reported that education
    programs continued, but nearly all reported much
    smaller scope budget
  • Those requiring direct Center funding were the
    first to go
  • Precollege, outreach undergraduate programs are
    most at risk
  • Industry funding for education is generally small
    and unreliable
  • Key factor is continuation of a dedicated
    education staff person
  • Also key is obtaining institutional
    (College-wide) support
  • Must secure education program funding from
    diverse sources government (incl. State),
    industry, university, foundations, etc.

13
Documenting Center Graduation Paths 2000
  • 16 ERCs nearing graduation or recently graduated
    were studied to describe their transition to
    self-sufficiency, their success in achieving it,
    and the impact on their ERC-ness
  • Findings
  • Most centers survive financially post-NSF, but on
    a smaller scale and without many of the ERC
    culture features
  • 2006 follow-up found funding ranging from 0.5M
    to 26.9M
  • Part of all of the core, fundamental research
    focus is lost in a shift to shorter-term,
    applications-oriented research
  • The education program shrinks, esp. for outreach
    undergrads
  • Sustainability as an ERC post-graduation is not
    realistic for most
  • Factors favoring ERC-like survival are strong
    institutional support, motivated faculty, and
    commitment to ERC principles
  • Strong industrial support runs counter to
    ERC-like survival
  • For most centers, continued ERC-ness requires
    continued NSF support in some fashion (see next
    slide for suggested options)

14
Documenting Center Graduation Paths 2000
  • Suggested options for providing continued NSF
    support to graduated ERCs, to aid in maintaining
    ERC characteristics
  • Let ERCs recompete without having to reinvent
    themselves
  • Continue fully funding the strongest ERCs as
    national assets post-graduation, without
    recompetition
  • Support the vulnerable core research and
    infrastructure at viable graduated ERCs as long
    as review justifies it
  • Provide small annual funding for all graduated
    ERCs to continue inputs into ERC database and
    attendance at annual meetings
  • Provide recognition and some support to grad ERCs
    to maintain their self-identity as an ERC and the
    NSF imprimatur
  • From 2006 follow-up survey (by V. Mujumdar)
    Suggested policies to yield more
    long-term-survivable ERCs
  • More industrially relevant research
  • Less emphasis on publishing for academics
  • Allow more flexibility in strategic planning
  • Provide baseline support to active graduated
    centers
  • Fewer mandatory programs
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com