Good afternoon. Hello please mute your phone thank you. Good afternoon I'm Krishan
Aurora, I'm the program director here at the Center for Research Capacity
Building at National Institute of Medical Sciences at National Institutes
of Health, so welcome to this free application Webinar for this
funding announcement or update RFA-GM - 1 8 - 0 0 1 Regional Technology Transfer
Accelerator Hubs for IDeA States. This funding announcement was published last
month on October 20th this is a new initiative that is designed to promote
biomedical entrepreneurship overall the goal of this initiative is to develop
and nurture current and future biomedical enterpreneurs who can
translate the basic discoveries and address the advances to marketplace to
improve and enhance the human life. During this webinar
NIGMS and Center for Scientific Review Staff will explain the goals and
objective the initiative and also other application requirements and also answer
your questions.The regular presenters are listed on this slide the order of
presentation will be, the first part will be presented by the program staff myself
and Dr. Joe Gindhart that will followed by a review, peer review and
considered consideration but after Alan Richon at the Center for Scientific
Review, then we followed by Christie Leake who's a team leader at the Graph Element
Office at NIGMS
Starting with the program part, the intent of this initiative is to score one
shared regional technology transfer accelerator hub in each of the four IDeA
regions that will serve as a network of institution in the in that region these
obstacles served as the regional consortia to provide expertise to
develop the infrastructure and promote and enterpreneurial culture and the
IDeAl institution in that region just to remind you that as they're at work
23 States and Puerto Rico IDeA eligible states. That is 24 into the
entities they have been classified a group into four regions, which has
labeled as Western region, Central region Northeast region and Southeast region.
for example, the Western region includes seven states which are: Montana, Idaho,
Wyoming, Nevada, New Mexico, Alaska and Hawaii. So,
so, each agent has five to five states or seven states depend upon their location.
The purpose of these hubs will be to develop, implement and test a
comprehensive program to promote entrepreneurship technology transfer,
intellectual property, managing business, small business finance and other
business skills that are needed to move basic discoveries and technology out of
the lab and into the marketplace. The goal will be also to generate education
and training tools that will include curricula, text webinar and modules from
the developing, development and testing of the research accelerated models. These
hubs will facilitate networking and team formation between our universities and
small businesses, sharing and transferring information
best practices and guidelines.
The target applicant for these hubs application they will be a small
business company SBC that could be located anywhere in the US where, from IDeA state
are known IDeA state and just that SBC will be required to partner with
academic institution in the IDeAl state to create this regional Network a
successful up should be an inclusive network engaging all the states in that
region the next slide shows this this in scheme wise that this very small
business company that could be located anywhere in the US IDeA are no IDeA
state which will partner with one academic institution instead state one
and that will be partnering with other institutions in that in that in the in
the state in that region to create a city to the network these hubs will have
a mechanism which is a bit as TDR small business technology transfer research
mechanism UT two mechanism this will mechanism either is a is it a
cooperative agreement mechanism and it's a fast-track mechanism that means that
if you involve both the phases of STTR program STTR phase one which will
require up to one year ordered by Phase two which will part two years after this
mechanism is cooperative agreement mechanism that means that the program's
staff from NIH we will have substantial involvement in the program
activities, once they are program funded staff will assist guide coordinate or
participate in the project activities, as needed and as appropriate in terms of
funding these hubs per phase one up to five hundred thousand dollars total cost
per year is allowed and Phase two is up to one point five million dollars total
cost per years.
this slide shows the important dates for this application the one to be
highlighted is the in that which is in that the application due date which are
due on January 5th 2018, and the site also lists the dates for the scientific
merit review when the application will be reviewed
they will pools have enough reviews or one is the initial peer review which is
sometime in March 2018 and as we followed by the Advisory Council review
by at NIGMS will be it will be happening in May 2018 II so the Meritorus
applications they will be funded by September 2018 the letter of intent due
date is listed here is December 5th by that date this state which is one month
prior to the figure should receive dates prospective applicants are encouraged to
submit a letter of intent that includes the information listed on this slide
into the title of the proposed activity name, address and telephone number,,of the
program directors or a principal investigator name or the other key
personnel participating institution and number and title of this funding
opportunity information that is contained in the letter intent allows
staff to estimate the potential review workload and plan that review. The next
part will be presented by Dr. Joe Gindhart. Hi everyone, thanks for joining us. Before
I get started, I just want to make two quick announcements, first, please make
sure that your, your microphone is muted we can always unmute later but we hear
some sounds coming through and then secondly these slides
will be made available but a lot of this information is already found in the
funding announcement so I'll, I'll get started now. The
characteristics of the regional accelerator hubs that is what are we
looking for why did we write this funding announcement we're looking for
teams that have strong leadership we want teams that are collaborative hubs
that strengthen existing resources and fill in gaps in the innovation
environment if you will that these, these hubs should provide training in both
hard and soft skills for faculty and for students at the institutions in the
participating of yeah that are participating in the program the hub
should try to work with existing state and local resources and then finally
there should be a plan for sustainability. This is a three year
program, how are you going to keep this going after, after the the NIH goes away?
Some of the, [okay next slide], so to go into this in a little more depth, we
want to use you, to use the funding that is provided in this one, in this
announcement to leverage with existing NIGMS and NIH funded programs such as
COBRE and INBRE and the IDeA-CTR program and IDeA states, REACH and NCAI centers
which are innovation hubs that are funded in other parts of the NIH CTSAs
and Cancer Centers and then also to, to try to build partnerships with Small
Business Development Centers in the State, Local Government, Economic
Development and Administration Offices and others as appropriate for where you
are. [next slide] So the institutional commitment and regional support, the
problem, that the, please mute your phone Thanks.
The institutional commitment and regional support that we'd like to see
are things like adequate laboratory space, perhaps seed money for pilot
projects at institutions, although this is an optional component we'll get into
this in a little more detail later to change the entrepreneurial environment
at research institutions, by allowing faculty release time for
business development of commercialization activities and
recognition in terms of things like using innovativeation in
entrepreneurial activities as a criterion for tenure and promotion. We
want to see the creation of undergraduate graduate courses in
biomedical technology research, development and entrepreneurship and
then finally see commitment from local or regional sources and that could
either be in kind or just you know letters of support. How are they going to
help you? As far as the leadership team, the big, the big take home from this is,
can the investigator do the work? Do they have a track record of success? And does,
the, does the research plan itself and commercialization plan provide a level
of confidence that if awarded, that the the grant would help us, help us, help you
achieve your goals. [next one] So the what's the, the structure of these
hubs, so the hub feeds a governance team and that consists of the PI and the, the
leadership from the IDeA partner institutions and then there's a series
of committees and just this, this, is described in much more detail in the
funding announcement itself but there's an administrative committee that's
composed of the principal investigator leaders in the small business concerned,
staff an internal advisory committee, that is composed of the the P I and
small business concern staff and, and, and members from other institutions in the
IDeA innovation hub, then of course you need some help from the outside world so
there'd be an external Advisory Committee of local experts, and then
finally a program steering committee, which is a subset of members of all of
these other committees with NIH staff involvement. Okay and then connects like
so some of the hub activities. This is just a sampling of some of the
things that you could do during the course of the award you we would like to
see development of educational and training materials skills development
mentoring and coaching internships consulting and advising of
investigators that have IDeAs that, that could be commercialized to help people
learn how to prepare an SBIR/STTR applications so SBIR grants have a phase
one of award, and a phase two award, these would be phase zero activities. If you
want to think about it that way once again changing the culture a little
bit to create an entrepreneurial culture in which these sorts of activities are
not, not treated either neutrally or negatively but positively and then once
again to bolster the tech transfer and commercialization offices in the region
and then you know, we'd like to see your ideas to it, so what can you bring to the
table? what are your neat ideas? we'd like to know more about that and then [let's
see next slide] [cough], so excuse me, so the some of the what are the milestones of
success for this, for this funding announcement, we would like to see you
know, you could measure things like the numbers of, the number of faculty who are
participating in this the development of curriculum and skills development
materials a number of patents number of licensing agreements increase in tech
transfer from from time zero to two at some point during the course of the
awards, you could, we could look at the number of startups focused on
biotechnology that were launched from this award. In some of these I should
note that some of these milestones couldn't be measured, you know in year
one of the award or year two or these might be things that we could measure
five years out, let's see and then you know so the long long term goal is to
increase biotech related jobs and economic activity and IDeA states.
Alright okay, so what's the application going to look like, so Alan will speak
about this in a little bit, I think, about the specific games page of course and then
there's a research strategy which is 12 pages long and that has what you would
expect, there's sections on leadership and governance collaborations and
partnerships, skills development, writ large plans for sustainability ,program
evaluation and then once again there's more information about this in, in the
RFA itself about pilot projects and then the commercialization plan, we didn't
leave the information out of this slide the commercialization plan is the same,
that you would find in a regular STTR application so if you have some
familiarity with that, you can, you can look into it and then let's see. So
finally, a part one of it one of the components of institutional commitment
could be these pilot projects which are as we'd like to emphasize again an
optional element of the hub, you can't use federal funding to support this
activity, so we are sympathetic to the notion that, some consortium may
have more funds to do pilot projects than others but that will not be a score
driving, a score driving issue, the pilot projects are intended to demonstrate the
feasibility and group of concept studies for innovative products biomarkers or
diagnostics the pilot projects would not be proposed in the application itself so
if you were intending to do pilot projects during the course of the
project you would talk in the application about how you would solicit
applications or pilot projects and how a pilot projects would be selected but not
like what the specific projects are themselves and okay so I think with that
I'll turn it back to Krishan. Yes, because as Joe mentioned, that you know
the application has a number of components and those are, these hubs will
be partnering and collaborating with number of institutions in the IDeA
States and also the number of other entities who are local or state resources so
it will be important to include letter of support that will highlight that, there
should highlight, how these hubs will leverage existing resources and also
avoid duplicating the efforts in there and there, won't have activities and some
other resources may be available at a state level, local level, that could be
used by the hub, so there's no need to duplicate those same resources or
activities, so in terms of the natural support, could be from the letters from
the atomic partners or consultants, contactors a collaborator as appropriate
which are needed and for the hub to meet some goals and objective of the proposed
project also the level of support from the senior leadership and the active
partner institution will be also critical and they should those letters
will outline the resources and the facilities that will be committed by the
institution to support and sustain the detail throughout the period of
funding and beyond and also this letter of support would be
also included, from the program that will be participating leveraging the
resources from the IDeAs portal activity like COBRA, INBRE, IDeAs CTR other
Centers, REACH fundraiser reach our NCI Cancer Centers, so those other should be
included with the application also that is indicating the support our resources
are available from the state, our local government agencies, other groups such as
business development organization, that could be partnering in the of activities
they care, they should, we also include,
so as I mentioned earlier, that there is a faster application, we have both phase
1 and phase 2 and to transition from phase 1 to phase 2 that will be
administrative review by the NIGMS program step and this is specific
milestone and criteria which the hub has to meet for entering from phase 1 to
phase, phase 2. So these are listed on this slide but they are taken straight
from the funding opportunity announcement which include, that there
should be functional communities as you measure that there are number of
communities fighting each other propose of the additional community internal
Advisory Committee programs at the External Advisory
Committee, they should have been all established and number the sub structure
governance and leadership plan secondly the other contractual arrangements
between the Business partners in the IDeA region are the Memorandum of
Understanding should have been established in the phase, in the phase 1
phase, for face-to-face in one stage, also during the phase one state, there is a need for
assessment on the infrastructure for further academic partners and how they
are going to be address the implementation, implementation plan.
This should also formulate the goal is to this research repair capacity and
infrastructure to promote biomedical enterpreneurship
at this institution in that region also xantham know that because it is
educational program to mentor and consult a consulting the faculty was
innovative and who want to translate the basic discoveries to marketplace so in
terms of the what kind of skills that they need to learn and whatever their
learning needs are there what is available in the local ecosystem the
resources part is relevant content and also what are the plans for developing
additional content for education and workshops webinar etcetera so that
criteria should also be met in the face from fear of us are moving from
pays to also doing a phase one the hub should develop a prototype in terms of
training and education resources for faculty most of fellows graduate
students and undergraduate students also to a establish a system for delivering
the webinar webinar organizers of webinar and visiting the academic
institution for an outrage so that material should be also met from were
transitioning from phase 1 to phase 2
the goal is to support food retail hubs which are shown here again on the
receivers map highlighting the four regions for example this is shown on the
western region the hub which will be partnering with all these seven states
in that region similarly for the next standard leader the hub could be located
anywhere in the state and then they will be partnering with the five states in
the sense of vision the next one is luggage is the southeast region again
thus that will be partly with the southeast States
and the fourth one is invisible Northeast region and that we'll be
partnering with five states in the North disappear and it's also expected that
these food hubs will be interacting among the temple for shading and
leveraging the resources that will be created through these other activities
so as you'd want to know dr. Allen rochonc
the scientific review officer say thank you good afternoon I put this funny I
have been running SBIR reviews for about nine years at NIH and so this is kind of
blend butter for us we look forward to work one what happens when your
application comes you can spend time putting it together you upload it the
the USAJOBS or grants.gov website and it will go to the division of receipt for
referral from there will be sent to me because I am assigned to the content
review officer for this particular RFA and once it gets into my hands then I'll
be putting together a panel I think you probably like to know what are the
various parts next um I will act as the federal official who's responsible
process that means I have legal responsibility for making sure that all
rules regulations best practices and so on are followed I will also perform
administrative review of the applications to make sure they're
complete and make sure that they are accurate comply with the requirements I
will then find reviewers once we get them together and I'll talk about that a
bit I will manage how to study sections run and then take those results prepare
summary statements and send them both to you and to program excellent please I'll
be working closely with the study section chair who is a senior level
scientist probably somebody that has their foot in two worlds this will be
someone that who's dealt with technology transfer in their past lives
and in small companies but in large companies worked in academics and so on
that person is going to be responsible for actually conducting the meeting
guiding the discussion making sure that all points are heard making sure that
all opinions are heard and they're just managing the overall process in addition
time the next one please we will have any essay or extra mural or assistance
this is the person that will be making sure that program officials can hear the
meeting that the telephones are running well managers travel that we have that
particular aspect of it and then shares the administrative responsibilities so
and then finally the panel what we look for is expertise that matches the
content of the application so in this case we are going to need scientists
that have expertise in a wide variety of areas people that are mature ie
they've been in the career for a while they've seen a lot of things in the
course of their careers they have a breadth of perspective they will be
impartial and we try as best possible to get academics and Industry experts we
want at least 25 to 50 percent the from small businesses or from tech transfer
we also make sure that we have women and minority scientists there geographically
distributed and especially for this one we will be finding people that have
commercialization and Technology experience both in academic centers as
well as the industrial institutions I don't know if you're aware that large
Pharma has entire divisions entire groups that are responsible for bringing
technology into the organization from small businesses from academic centers
and so on those are the kinds of people were looking for because they'll be able
to have an informed opinion on what makes a successful Center next slide
please each application that we get will get
three or more reviewers and the reviewers will have access to the
applications five to six weeks in advance during that five or six weeks
they constantly get bombarded by me reminding them that they've got
responsibilities to make sure that these things are done we try and have the
applications and their comments on it uploaded to the system week before the
actual meeting so that everyone has a chance to read the comments and get an
informed opinion on each application and the reviewers will be responsible for
providing an overall impact score and will tell you about what that means in
just a bit as well as criterion scores on the various review criteria sections
they will provide a written critique so each person that submits an application
gets a view of their application from three different independent reviewers
next slide please the criteria that we're talking about
are pretty standard in all small business applications and it's basically
how significant is the work who's the team that's going to carry it out what
level of innovations do they bring to the table and how they're trying to
approach the problem how are they actually approaching the problem and do
they have the environment to do it who basically what we're saying is tell us
if what your IDeAs is tell us why you think it's a good IDeA tell us why you
think you're the person that can carry this off tell us how you're going to do
it using the best technology that's out there and put it together in innovative
ways tell us what you're going to do is to encounter problems what things you're
going to try and work around how well you're going to plan it and tell us how
the environment that you're putting together is going to help to accomplish
the objective and that all boils down to the overall impact if you read the RFA
it's to assess the likelihood that Club is going to function as a way of
bringing technology out of the region and then do it in such a way that
innovations get developed and distributed to the u.s. through your
particular institution each of those five criteria gets a score from 1 to 9
one being best 9 being worst and the overall impact is also 1 to 9 when all
of these scores come in reviewer scores the average and then
many applications will be rank ordered and that will be the discussion work so
we'll start with the best scoring application and work our way through to
the one that doesn't score as well
depending on how many we get we will cut off at a 50% level I doubt that we're
going to hit that level with this particular RFA in our standard small
business application panels we have somewhere between 60 and 100 application
and it gets really tough to try and talk about every one of them so that's how we
make the cutoff and the next one please okay in addition to those five areas
with this RFA there are other areas that will be considered as score driving and
they will contribute to a score for either significance or approach but they
won't be scored individually and that is going to be how well is the impact of
the hub described and the organization of the hub described what skills and
educational programs do you bring into the system how are you going to develop
those how are you developing the tech the capability to bring technology
transfer to the region how well do you manage projects how well do you meant or
what consulting arrangements are using to make how are you going to advise
people what kinds of programs are you going to put in place to make sure that
these things are done that is going to form the core of a lot of the
discussions frankly next please in addition um this is a fast track and
that means that it has to have two distinct phases in Phase one you're
basically setting the stage for the work that you're going to do in stage two so
we need to know front of your viewers need to know from you what are you doing
in phase one and how are you going to measure whether you're successful or not
now those milestones should be clear they should be appropriate to what
you're trying to do and they should be quantifiable and measurable so you know
nothing really washy like wishy-washy like well we're going to try and do a
seminar to tell us how many what kinds of things
going to approach the more specific would be the better the reviewers are
gonna respond to it and so once you have met those goals you can put together a
report that's sensitive program they'll evaluate how well you've done and then
you go into phase 2 that's where the actual guts of the work gets done so we
need to see the transition and keep in mind when these things for fast track's
come in to small business study sections reviewers are really tough when they
don't see a distinct phase 1 and phase 2 so that's just a warning ahead of time
next please commercialization you have 12 pages to
describe what you're doing you've got 12 pages to describe how you're going to
roll it out as a self-sustaining product what we like to see in the review panels
are who are the people that are going to do this and do they have patience to
manage it do they have a commercialization strategy so they've
got some way to measure how they're going to get it out there they have some
way to make sure that it becomes self-sustaining they have follow-on
plans that say this is how we're going to fund it from years three f2n very
important are letters of support so from small businesses from academic centers
from investors from wherever you can find any strong letters of support that
will show that your plan is meeting with the needs of the community at large will
help to enhance your commercialization strategy next one please
there are I doubt that we're going to be seeing these things but if you are
planning any human subject studies and that could be things like surveys it
could be things like taking a seminar and getting feedback from the
participants those types of things are human subjects of studies and so be sure
that you look at what the protections required are those are in all the NIH
documents when you do that you need to include representative sampling of the
people in your region so women minorities children
that's anyone under the age of 18 now um vertebrate animals I don't think
we're going to be doing any squirrel case studies here so I don't think
that's a group that's appropriate but basically if there are four things that
you need to cover I don't think we'll they'll do any
biohazards but those are kind of the standard pieces on every type of
application that comes in to small business if it's not applicable fine but
if you're planning on doing it please check with the NIH documentation see
what you can simply next there are other things that we asked reviewers to look
at they do not affect scores they're non scoring issues any time that you're
doing a large-scale application if you're going to be generating data if
you're going to be generating new organisms new bottle organisms if you're
going to collect only data if you're going to involve foreign organizations
we need to understand what you're doing with those so be sure that you cover
those select agents there's a list up in 1:08 website I doubt you're going to be
using any Ebola or things like that that's what those cover and key
biological and chemical resources is if you are going to start working in lab
and you're planning on doing cell cultures for example make sure you tell
us that you have saved themselves and that they are what you think they are
and then budget is the final piece we asked reviewers simply to tell us is the
budget reasonable for the work that you propose they're not going to get into
the minutia budget that's programs issue they've we just advise program that yes
the budget batch is kind of the scope of the work that is being proposed okay
next as I said it's a 1 through 9 in general we look at anything scores a 1 2
3 as having a high impact 4 to 6 as a medium impact and 7 to 9 is a low it
back and you can see that there just appreciate next please after review me
one of the things that I think is the least understood by applicants is what
happens and unless you've gone through a study section it's kind of a black box
the chair will pull three primary reviewers and ask them to
state their preliminary overall impact scores now those are going to be the
ones that they put down on their application and then maybe slightly
modified by what they've read that their colleagues have said as well reviewer 1
will spend the most time they will introduce the application to the panel
say what's good and bad about it say where the strengths lie say what the
overall objective is and since most of these are similar types of activities
those objectives are pretty much going to be the same I had I had to guess
reviewers two and three will then offer any points that weren't covered by
reviewer 1 and at the end of that the discussion is opens the entire map given
that there will probably be complementary expertise I have a feeling
we're going to have very active discussions during this the whole panel
is welcome to ask questions make comments raise issues that conversation
will go on until all the topics are exhausted and after it's finished the
chair will ask the primary reviewers to take to state easily their final overall
impact scores and those are the scores that will be reported to program and to
you once those scores are given everyone on the panel is asked to score similarly
so it's a little federal range so it's a 1/3 that will be the range the panel
then will score within that range unless they hear something that they think they
substantively disagree and it could be based on their research in the area it
could be any number of things that reviewers are free to vote outside that
range we just ask that whatever the reason they're doing it has been
discussed and if it hasn't then we reopen the discussion and we bring that
point forward every piece of information needs to be considered for every
application to arrive at the final score so if we have 20 people on the panel
there would be 20 scores unless a month in conflict and they'll be out of the
room during this discussion so those those scores will then added together
averaged and multiplied by 10 and that will be your final overall impact score
okay next one please once the meeting is finished it's my responsibility to take
all of the said during those discussion and boil it down to a paragraph or two
hits the highlights that will be the resume of the discussion it will be
attached to the three critiques I then go through and clean up all the applique
all the summary statements make sure there's no bad grammar make sure that
there's no inaccuracy if there's things missing I will contact reviewers that
issue those critiques and say hey I need more information here that usually takes
about two to four weeks after the meeting the final overall impact score
and then all of those will be sent to program and to you
and next okay thank you other next presenter is a Chris Gilly hi everybody
I'll be going over some budget considerations for car registrations and
eligibility for this fo way so there are several required registrations for the
main applicant which is the small business concern please make sure to do
these in advance several of you take several weeks to set up you want to make
sure you have those in place well before the due date of January 5th so you need
to have your Duns number your system for award management your SBA company
registry an era Commons account grants.gov access as well as ensure that
all of your P is your PDP is have the era Commons account so this there is
actually quite a bit of eligibility that's around grants for SBIR STTR
awards all this information is well outlined in the FAA as well as several
websites so just please pay attention to that eligibility criteria to make sure
you're eligible to apply for this funding opportunity in addition there
are for the STTR portion of this award the PD or PID
may be employed with a small business or a single partnering nonprofit research
institution as long as she or he has a formal appointment with or a commitment
to the applicant small business concern and for this FY multiple PD API
Arrangements is allowed that's less so because this is an STTR the small
business concern will partner with one main research institution as well as
several others so for of a phase 1 and the phase 2 at least 40% of the research
or analytic effort must be performed by the small business concern and at least
30 percent of the research or in a little effort
must be performed by the single partner in research institution the remaining
30% may be attributed to either the SPC primary research institution or
additional third-party organizations I mentioned earlier the contractual
arrangements or memory and understanding must be established between the SPC and
a partner in institutions as part of the phase 1 scope Shawn briefly mentioned
the budget budgets of up to $500,000 our total costs per year for phase 1 awards
may be requested and then for the phase 2 budget up to 1.5 million dollar total
cost per year may be requested please pay attention that this is a total cost
cap on these awards not direct cost and for a brief mention of the FN Averys for
the small business concerns please one applicant you do not have a negotiated
F&A rates should have both an estimated rate not to exceed 40% of the total
direct cost and a reasonable fee not to exceed 7 percent of the total cost which
includes the direct and indirect for each phase of the project is available
to the small business in turn this is intended to be a regional profit factor
available for for-profit organizations
so for budget considerations specific to this fo a each PDP I must minimum of 10
percent effort to the project fund should be requested for the hub PDS and
pis and other hub staff as appropriate to attend the annual in person program
steering committee meeting in Bethesda Maryland fund should be requested for
the operations of the external Advisory Committee and there's a long list of
other allowable costs as described in the FOI that should get clear to the
applicant this slide I often put up for potential grantees of potential
applicants as things to keep in mind when putting together an application
these specific costs are things that often jump out from my office aggressive
management office the general thought is to make sure that all of your costs are
well described and well justified and make sure that they are appropriate to
the proposal that you're submitting additionally if you have more questions
about how a cost the NIH grants policy statement is a great tool to use there's
a section for selected items of cost as well as there's a section of the uniform
guidance selected items the cost that will be helpful as well
Thank You Christy so finally to wrap up the just to some reminders the final
reminders for the program as you those prospective applicants start either
preparing this application I'd like to emphasize to read and follow all that
destruction in the funding opportunity announcement and make sure that all the
new criteria are addressed and also some of the features that I mentioned for the
up that is small business concern that could be located anywhere in the US
women IDeA state or in an non IDeA state SBC must partner with academic
institution in IDeA states to create an inclusive regional Technology Transfer
accelerator hub and you can include consultants experts advisors coach
mentors from IDeA are known IDeAs state as you deem appropriate to Musa polls
and objective of this funding announcement an application a so must
include with a fast-track mechanism must explore milestone that will be achieved
for transitioning from phase 1 to phase 2 as I just like to remind you that the
potential members as you know that a external Advisory Committee is a
required Committee for this program or these hubs the potential members of this
ESC should not be named and should not be contacted prior to the review of an
application but you may discuss in the application what type of expert is the
individual will have that will be looking part that you can discuss the
expertise in the application or not name or contact the EAC lambdas and all vse
members so finally a goal of this initiative is to create these regions in
each of the four IDeA regions that will be interacting among themselves within
the institution as a state and it will be creating a education programs to
develop the skills mentoring coaching consulting to those at innovative
faculty at this institution and to create this enhance this
enterpreneur ecosystem that will provide education connections and support to
develop in terms of commercialization capacity that can facilitate the
translation of discoveries and advances from lab to market place to meet the
societal needs so the data will stop here now and we focus our questions
hello I have a couple questions from you nummy yes
oh okay great thank you thank you for the information stay very very helpful
very useful the 12-page research strategy and the 12 page commercial plan
is that the requirement for the phase 1 and the phase 2 combined or is that are
quite requirement for each section phase 1 and phase 2 individually
you will have 12 pages to describe your research for both phase one and Phase
two and then twelve pages as commercialization niche
commercialization plan it's an entire document okay
great thank you and it sounds like the expectation is to develop a prototype of
courses in during the phase one portion of the research plan and six six months
generally for Phase one as we know that's a tall order to develop a
prototype of a curriculum in six months am i understanding that requirement
correctly
this one is part two of one yet so you have for 12 months
Oh one year okay thank you that makes more sense to me thank you very much
yeah I agree six months would be a short timeline and on finding the University
hub partner or the the research institution one on the diagram if
universities are competing for the opportunity to be the hub in a region
it's good a challenge I think to find one University willing to be the hub and
then the rest serving as supportive offshoots of that hub had that challenge
been discussed in the with the team that's developed the topic or the RFA so
so I think you know if you think about it in the context that the small
business concerned is 40% 40% of the budget the first institution the main
institution would have a minimum of 30 percent of the budget and that would be
the core of activity of activities and then they would reach out those two
groups working together would reach out to institutions and the other IDeA
states so it's of course that the arrow goes both ways that there will be some
contribution from the from the the satellite institutions if you will to
the to the the SPC and if the main institution but we think that there's
incentives for institutions to want to serve as the main being part of the hub
I don't know Prashanti I thought also actors actors I don't know that this is
for the IDeA program that we have been funding last 15 years be encouraged I
was networking a collaboration among this situation within the region and
among the regions so I think they would like to kind of know participate you
know in this initiative and the partners within the
hub within the Hobbit
you
my question
does that answer your question we have another question can we ask it sure
could you say what the definition of an academic institution is for the purposes
of this specifically does it need to be a degree granting institution or one
which has meets other requirements such as advising students and adding a large
flow of tech transfer the traditional definition has been an academic
institution a nonprofit organization or there's one other piece there that
escapes me at the moment but it's not just a degree granting institution
now whether program wanted C's to be specifically academic I don't believe I
saw that in the RFA no if you're--if institutions have eligible to apply for
an STTR grant or to participate in stitute and an S qtr grant they should
be able to apply to this as well I'm thinking specifically of a National
Laboratory well that's a good one we'll have to look for that thank you
you should reach out to us in Tibet in a couple of days or even email us tonight
and Dhaval will follow up a bullet of you thank you okay thanks
I'm curious as to what you're thinking in terms of the small business concern
are you thinking of a small company are you thinking of a business incubator or
an accelerator or what is your sort of thinking on those lines
well it would have to be Krishan and I talked about this a couple days ago it
would have it would have to be a for-profit organization okay that's our
body's harming can you I'm sorry repeat the question answer on that who has to
be a for-profit institution so the club sorry so the question is what type of
organization could be the business concern does it would it be a company or
could it be you know sort of a business tech innovation hub or a some business
development organization and the the criterion for the small business grant
is that would it would have to be a for-profit organization okay thank you
okay and I think rashon now is going to read a couple of the questions that was
that we've gotten online
let me read it crucial yeah okay so the first question that we got by by WebEx
is do the institutions representing each state need to be the homes of existing
Embree or Cobre programs I know it would have to be the home part I interview
public program but they could be partnering it over and the some of the
resources that have been funded to an IDeA program they can be leveraged at
this from the institutions that are funded to the IDeA envy program and then
there's a question is there an expectation that an academic institution
collaborating with an SPC on this hub grant will have an existing track record
of success with NIH grants eg rl1 and other NIH grants mentioned in the
presentation I think that you know there there is the if you look at the criteria
for investigator of the review criteria that could play into it a little bit but
it certainly isn't the whole story that we're looking for organizations that
have the skills and the expertise to to to do this project regardless of their
their prior track record you should know that year year after year about a third
of the small business grants that the NIH grants are to organizations that
have never had an NIH grant before the next question that medicine is a ten
more than one institution by institution duties which is a lot more MPI's
obviously multiple pis so the answer is that no it would have to be one main
small business concern that would be the prime institution the whole point of
that the there'd be one small business that then partners with one research
institution so there should just be one main FCC
multiple PI's are allowed it's up to you how you set up your multiple PI
management plan the next question is a 10-month mode and monopolization odd
individuals participating more than one proposal submission within the region
are worth a salute to the disqualification of the applications if
there are two I mean to small business companies they are trying to create a
hub in the same region and they could barter with that the same institution
but with a different company so we can have received two applications that way
from two different SBC partnering with the same institution yeah and we got
into the you know it gets into the question of what counts as overlap and
in NIH grant and you know Ellen might be able to speak some of this but can you
imagine that if one small business concern wrote two grants both for
innovation hubs in the southeast I think maybe you would consider that overlap
yes but what if they wrote a innovation hub for the north the same small
business concern wrote an application for an innovation hub in the Northeast
versus the central rienne the central region maybe that wouldn't be overlap I
don't know what do you think cor will consider that overlap with a so same
type of activity ootek in those in different areas okay
so the same remedy that's good I guess from the same one SPC connector to
partner B the Budokan region and some into different application right so
that's multiple applications from an IDeA region
Karen's a human institution participate whether that two different small
business concerns in the two different necklaces so do you mean say let's just
not the let's just say that the University of Kentucky has two
applications one with two different companies the company two
different companies put the same institution and the company submitting
the application let get those to commend Institute you be on both okay that's a
tough I don't know the answer I was like yeah yeah I digged entity other people's
I got a fun one yeah yeah yeah so so we think that so the question was I don't
know if you heard it um so could an individual institution partner or
sending multiple applications and I don't think that the funding
announcement precludes that but once again it gets into some of the issues of
overlap if the if the main partner institution is proposing the same
activities in two different with two different companies that could be turned
into an overlap issue perhaps yeah I think it's a question of the small
business concern is the one that's going to be the main focus and then the tech
transfer out of the academic centers that one's a little more muddy if you
will so the small business concern proposing the same thing in different
regions that's okay but the Associated academic centers with the commercial
organization I don't know I'd have to I'm gonna have to check on that okay so
yeah that's another thing at home yeah
I just have another question just to kind of triple-check the small business
concern I think what I heard is that it has to be a for-profit entity and
because I'm thinking that's you know a tax status
you know for-profit or not-for-profit so is that really the hard definition of it
there's a there's a long list of eligibility information in the fo a the
number one point for that is that is organized for-profit with a place of
business located in the United States which primarily operates within the
United States so yes it has to be a for-profit okay thank you
the next question is is the Administrative Code to be composed of
both SBC offices and partnering institutions representatives or that
could also I think that that actually would is that the internal advisory
committee or is that the the administrative penderson at it yes it so
that so the question was again is the administrative core to be composed of
both SBC officers and partnering institution representatives yes next
question is may current NIH commercialization support contractor
participate or would this be considered a conflict of interest that's probably a
conflict of interest for anything I'll check that to make sure because if you
can check on this one and get back to you
that's good let's go down some more yeah I think I see okay
and then there's what is the scope of biomedical disciplines that are
considered to be important for this scheme is there a focus on a particular
area but the short answer is the the particular area of interest would be
research sets within the NIH mission
that's pretty broad yes by recording the question is release recording be
available later yes this will be available two days after the webinar
so we will post it on the IDeA website
can a non-profit known research institutions be Co PRA I am not actually
sure of that question a COPI I I don't know that a non-profit non research
institution would be part of the hub it doesn't seem like you know that the
small business concern the research institution in the IDeAs state and then
other research institutions in that IDeA state are what we're looking for is part
of the network a non-profit non research institution doesn't seem like it would
fit in this although a little in the context of a thousand anciano in the
context of a co-investigator someone they could have a subcontract with well
I think you asked the question and the reviewers would be looking for how does
this organization contribute to spraying technology to the US and if there's a
way that they do that then potentially it would work but you know I can't
understand how a non-profit non research institution is going to see the same
spread technology and then there's a comment it may give
the wrong impression if the same company competes and wins more than one Center I
think we decided that because of overlap issues that that wouldn't happen that
that a company could only give one of these right right
well the next question is I was very confused if one company can sum it to
two different regions assuming that the people within that company are different
so that there is no overlap it's still the same confidence it's the same
company and conceptually it's very similar applications come from companies
not individuals
when you look at curricula is there any bias to certain existing materials like
ICOR for the SBC creation of IP it will be important for commercialization.
So, yes you're right, ICOR is one example of a way to do this there are other
examples of ways to do this, so you know you my advise would be to use your best
judgement. There's no bias one direction at the end. The next question, is must a
applicant have a participating institution in each state or is there
flexibility on this? It should be an inclusive regional network so all the
states have been involved in that Network so at least one institution
should be part of the hub from each state. Is there a significant benefit of
being able to have cash matching commitment from a state government or
from commercial partners participating in the IDeA hub? That's a good question, it
it's difficult for us to get into the minds of what the reviewers are thinking
but, you should look at the review criteria that there is no, there is no
cost-sharing requirement but there are a number of criteria that go
into determining what the strength of the strength of the application are and
so that would be my advice is to go back and look at the review criteria. I was
surprised to hear that lab space was an indication of commitment, there are no
wet lab activities relevant to this FOA please clarify. I think that, okay so
that your your right, to that does sound odd, out of context but we're talking
about partnering, there are institutions that are more research intensive
than others in IDeA States and one of the action that
there were there were situations where people needed, needed space to do
activities that they couldn't do at their home institution, could they get,
could they do those experiments on another campus, for example?
Are there any space for any activities they proposed? Yeah, you're not
trying to limit what an applicant can suggest, um if they have an IDeA that
involves generating intellectual property in a lab, then that option
should be there. I don't think it's a requirement, I don't think there are any
hard requirements on any of these, it's just, it's an option.
Is it better to include partner institutions with tech transfer
capabilities or should we try to include institutions that need more assistance
in this area? I would look at it as it's a blend of the strengths. If your
institution is strong and tech transfer and then you have other institutions
that have IDeAs the way to get them out and that would be one scenario. Another
would be, you've got great IDeAs with no tech transfer, so what do you do with it? So
it's a blend. I agree, I agree that you know, what is the
way that you can, you know, it's a balance what is your, what are your current
activities that would be part of your strengths but then what is the impact of
the activities to how do you, what's, what's the slope of the curve
from, from now to you know, three or four years from now of improvement of the
infrastructure in your, in your region? So regarding the Commercialization plan,
is that focused on sustainability of the effort, commercialization of products
from the beneficiaries of the training or mentoring or commercialization /
sales of the training materials themselves? It's all of these. It includes of them, all of these. [laughter]
all of these yes, yes, yes, yes.
Is there preference between a participating, one more question, it is not really a question,
it's more of a statement. Is there a preference between a participating
public or a private university? No, Preference. What help is NIH giving
referring to your cooperative point made early in this presentation, can we expect
NIH to dictate certain methods or processes? This part comes after the
award is made, you know. In terms of cooperative mechanism you know, once
the awards is made and the hub's are funded then NIH will have substantial input
in terms of the planning and overseeing the activity of the hub. Is participation and support by
multiple institutions from each state encouraged? Yes. What if one state only
has a few institutions that have come together and do not want to partner
because they are proposing their own hub, how should we get support from that
state, if none of the institutions want to partner, but we have support from all
of the other states?
It seems a tricky part. That's the first year, we need to deal
with it this happen in IDeA state where it can't compete. They need to come together. Yeah, part of
the goal of this is getting people to work together and I think that sort of a
bad sign, if at the application stage these things are coming to the
surface. NIH has done several hubs from genomics to data sharing to
chemistry and screening and I think all of those dealt with the same types of
issues and they get resolved. The next question. Any incentives to include MSI?
Do you mean Minority Serving Institutions, then yes, of course. So I
think that's a similar question for any incentives for any underrepresented
groups? Oh I don't know what you mean by
incentive, but that, key part of the NIH and NIGMS mission is to
broaden the diversity of the biomedical workforce. So this, is this FOA intended
to one, create a single regional tech transfer office to facilitate the
regional transfer of technology through the office of research to accommodate
for what has been identified by NIH by NIH IDeA 2014 workshop on SBIR/STTR
existing week local tech transfer offices or two to support a network of
local tech transfer offices and their affiliated existing accelerators to work
together collaboratively to provide resources with a small business concern
as lead? Those are two different models for doing it, I think you just
have to weigh your options based on the conditions on the ground, where you are.
In case NIH has funded similar programs before, could you please give examples of
the kinds of industry partners that would be the best fit for NIH IDeA hub?
Probably the ones that match the technology that you're working on and it
doesn't make sense if your particular areas are strong in cancer research, for
example, that you would be interested in doing environmental impacts sets. You
know it just depends on what what you see is the strength of your area and
what you have in terms of industrial partners that are around you? Yeah and we
really can't dictate that. No, no one thing you could do is go into
NIH reporter and search for small business grants that are doing the sorts
of things that you're interested in doing. That, that's one way that you
can identify organizations or companies I should say, that have been successful
in getting grants in this sort of stuff and you could all always reach out to
them. What would be desired roles for local tech transfer offices if
any in this regional technology transfer accelerator hub for IDeA state? Yeah, I
mean if there are local, if there are local tech transfer organizations that
have expertise that would benefit this, this project, then they have a role to
play and they can partner with the hub and share IDeAs and resources and
provider expertise as the case may be.
They can contribute to regional seminars, they can contribute to
business development activities, there are a whole range of things.
There is Stretten application and if you can include those
as a partners, you know, the local the technology transfer offices
the proposal.
Are there are there any other questions?
I'm gonna, not question, if it, at this time. I mean at this time, if you can send us your questions
by email we'll try to address those questions and
we'll make available the recording of this webinar and the slides on the IDeA
website within two days, after two days.
Was going to ask the FOA, I see the notice of intent to publish the FOA on the
internet, I found that, but the actual FOA is that out? Yes, it was published
October 20th, so the number is RFA - GM - 1 8 - 0 0 1, RFA - GM - 1 8 - 0 01.
Beautiful. You could also, has a link you know, like go right there yeah, just Google it.
That's what I do, you will see it right away. Oh yeah, awesome.
Thank you all for joining the webinar and all the best. Thank you.
Thank you very much.
For more infomation >> States running out of money for Children's Health Insurance Program - Duration: 2:50. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét