1. 1 Federal Lab Technology Transfer, Annual Reporting, and Gauging Performance Mark Boroush Senior Policy Analyst, Office of Technology Policy, Technology Administration, U.S.Department of Commerce FLC Mid Atlantic Annual Meeting September 20, 2006

2. M. Boroush FLC Mid Atlantic Annual Meeting September 20, 2006 U.S. Department of Commerce Technology Administration, Office of Technology Policy2 Annual Tech Transfer Reporting by the Federal Labs under the Tech Transfer Commercialization Act of 2000 Well, yes … It’s a statutory task now! Well, yes … It’s a statutory task now! TTC Act of 2000, PL 106-404, signed November 2000 TTC Act of 2000, PL 106-404, signed November 2000 ● Annual agency report on utilization; to OMB; 15 USC 3710 (f)(1) ● Sec. of Commerce Summary Report (federal wide); to the President, Congress, others; 15 USC 3710 (g)(2) Information on activity statistics, downstream outcomes, agency plans for T2 Information on activity statistics, downstream outcomes, agency plans for T2 Recognized in OMB’s annual budget preparation guidance, Circular A-11, since July 2003 Recognized in OMB’s annual budget preparation guidance, Circular A-11, since July 2003 ● Part 2, Section 25.5, Table 1, “Has Technology Transfers” First cycle of this reporting in CY 2002, referring to T2 activities in FY 2001. Yearly since then. First cycle of this reporting in CY 2002, referring to T2 activities in FY 2001. Yearly since then.

3. M. Boroush FLC Mid Atlantic Annual Meeting September 20, 2006 U.S. Department of Commerce Technology Administration, Office of Technology Policy3 Some Recent Reports http://www.technology.gov/reports/TechTrans/2004_Sum.pdfhttp://www.ars.usda.gov/SP2UserFiles/Place/00000000/OTTGeneral/commercereport05.pdf

4. M. Boroush FLC Mid Atlantic Annual Meeting September 20, 2006 U.S. Department of Commerce Technology Administration, Office of Technology Policy4 Where Did This Reporting Mandate Come From? Modernization of the “Biennial Reports” under the Stevenson-Wydler Act Modernization of the “Biennial Reports” under the Stevenson-Wydler Act An outgrowth also of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) in later 1990s An outgrowth also of the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) in later 1990s Congressional/senior policymakers’ interest in knowing that federal R&D results (including the federal labs) are having benefits through tech transfer Congressional/senior policymakers’ interest in knowing that federal R&D results (including the federal labs) are having benefits through tech transfer Efforts by the Interagency Working Group on Tech Transfer, in late 2001 and onward, to establish and maintain a rational process for the agencies to conduct this reporting Efforts by the Interagency Working Group on Tech Transfer, in late 2001 and onward, to establish and maintain a rational process for the agencies to conduct this reporting

5. M. Boroush FLC Mid Atlantic Annual Meeting September 20, 2006 U.S. Department of Commerce Technology Administration, Office of Technology Policy5 Information in the Annual Reports

6. M. Boroush FLC Mid Atlantic Annual Meeting September 20, 2006 U.S. Department of Commerce Technology Administration, Office of Technology Policy6 Transition to Part II

7. M. Boroush FLC Mid Atlantic Annual Meeting September 20, 2006 U.S. Department of Commerce Technology Administration, Office of Technology Policy7 What Has Been Achieved to Date? Most of the affected federal agencies now respond regularly and reasonably completely Most of the affected federal agencies now respond regularly and reasonably completely Substantial time series of mostly consistent T2 activity statistics has been accumulated Substantial time series of mostly consistent T2 activity statistics has been accumulated Also an increasingly sizable body of success stories on downstream outcomes Also an increasingly sizable body of success stories on downstream outcomes Much improved communication of how agency federal lab T2 contributes to agency mission and fits with agency R&D and tech development plans Much improved communication of how agency federal lab T2 contributes to agency mission and fits with agency R&D and tech development plans In the better agencies, the annual reporting is used to strengthen the mgt/accountability of agency T2 activities In the better agencies, the annual reporting is used to strengthen the mgt/accountability of agency T2 activities Some attention by Congress and other policymakers Some attention by Congress and other policymakers

8. M. Boroush FLC Mid Atlantic Annual Meeting September 20, 2006 U.S. Department of Commerce Technology Administration, Office of Technology Policy8 Present Context for the Federal Lab T2 Reporting Continuing interest of policymakers in the nature of the benefits flowing from federal R&D results Continuing interest of policymakers in the nature of the benefits flowing from federal R&D results Renewed concern for U.S. innovation capabilities Renewed concern for U.S. innovation capabilities ● Increased attention likely on how well the various elements of the national innovation infrastructure fit together and produce results White House Science Advisor’s call (April 2005) for more systematic knowledge of the returns from public investment in federal R&D White House Science Advisor’s call (April 2005) for more systematic knowledge of the returns from public investment in federal R&D ● OSTP’s “Science of Science” Task Force ● NSF’s emerging “Science Metrics Initiative” (FY 07 on) OECD’s continuing work on performance metrics for R&D and innovation OECD’s continuing work on performance metrics for R&D and innovation ● Including International “Blue Sky Indicators” conference in Ottawa in late September ● U.S. long a major supporter of this statistical/analytical work New Dept. of Commerce Advisory Committee on Innovation Metrics New Dept. of Commerce Advisory Committee on Innovation Metrics

9. M. Boroush FLC Mid Atlantic Annual Meeting September 20, 2006 U.S. Department of Commerce Technology Administration, Office of Technology Policy9 Need to be Clear about What We Have and Don’t Have T2 Activity Levels -- We’ve got plenty of this now! Patents, invention disclosures, licenses, CRADAs, royalty revenue, technical dissemination, and so on. -- But we well know these are not measures of outcomes. Downstream Outcomes from T2 -- Considerable body of “success stories” now collected (a result of the TTCA reporting). Few agencies seem short of supply! Map of T2 roles in Agency Mission and Strategy -- TTCA reporting has provided a vehicle for this. Most agencies are using the opportunity (including making accessible on Web). -- Important story to tell. Agencies differ in what they are trying to accomplish; not well understood. Basis for accountability. Identification & Dissemination of Best Practices -- Continuing flow of “best practice” information across the practitioner community. Professional associations (FLC, AUTM, LES, others) and Web dissemination have played roles in this. Measures of T2 Program Effectiveness & Productivity -- Still too little of this. Most ORTAs continue to have a hard time with the “what bang for buck?” question. -- Key area in need of progress. For a host of reasons: better management, budget justification, benchmarking, accountability.

10. M. Boroush FLC Mid Atlantic Annual Meeting September 20, 2006 U.S. Department of Commerce Technology Administration, Office of Technology Policy10 Estimate of the Future Annual T2 reporting requirement is a management opportunity, well beyond “checking the box.” Annual T2 reporting requirement is a management opportunity, well beyond “checking the box.” Couple of inequalities we already know about: T2 “activity” doesn’t equal T2 “outcomes,” similarly, “activity” doesn’t equal “performance.” Couple of inequalities we already know about: T2 “activity” doesn’t equal T2 “outcomes,” similarly, “activity” doesn’t equal “performance.” ● In a tougher competition for a share of resources, there will be a need to say more about “performance.” Renewed interest broadly in better metrics for R&D and innovation may yield some methodological help. Renewed interest broadly in better metrics for R&D and innovation may yield some methodological help. ● Although, collecting systematic data about the real downstream outcomes of federal lab T2 will remain a challenge (for various reasons) ● Also, hard to gauge performance without being clear what the agency specifically is trying to accomplish through its T2 enterprise. Important for T2 practitioners to get involved in helping these evaluation advances happen. Important for T2 practitioners to get involved in helping these evaluation advances happen.