Plenary Panel I: NSF I/UCRC Program 30 Years of Partnership: Past Successes

1. Plenary Panel I:NSF I/UCRC Program 30 Years of Partnership: Past Successes

2. Session Overview • Background, Model and Defining Success • Denis O. Gray, Ph.D. • Web Handling Research Center: From Start-up to Self-Sufficiency • Karl N. Reid, Ph.D. • Technology Breakthroughs • Craig Scott, Ph.D.

3. Birth of the IUCRC Model • Experimental R&D Incentives Program (1973) • 5 Programs • Cooperative Research Centers Experiment • 14 “experimental development projects” • 3 cooperative research grantees: 5 years • MIT Polymer Processing Center • University-based industrial research consortium (circa, 1949) • Evaluation: • “Demonstrated an ability to attract sustained industrial support and proved to be profitable scientifically and administratively” (Burger, 1979)

4. Birth of the IUCRC Program • IUCRC Program Deployed, 1979/80 • Program is ~ 25 years old!! • IUCRC Model • Government cost-sharing: time-limited, modest • Government technical assistance • System of ongoing, locally relevant, on-site evaluation • Network of Centers Center A Center B Center C

5. Forecast Uncertain! “A principal question is estimating how manysuccessful university-based centers can be created based on the MIT model. Professor Suh’s success at MIT may be so unique that few individuals and institutions can emulate it without descending into research mediocrity and administrative nightmares” (Baer, 1980)

6. How many “successful” centers? • IUCRC Program • 100+ • Universities: • NC States,Ohio States, Georgia Tech, etc. • Alfred’s, Missouri Rolla’s, UNC Charlottes, etc. • Technological Foci • Advanced Manufacturing • Nano/Micro Fabrication • Materials Science • Chemical Processing • Agriculture • Aeronautics • Civil Infrastructure • Advanced Electronics & Computing • Biotechnology • Energy & Environment • Management & Social Sciences

7. Defining “Successful” • Financial What has NSF’s $87 million/25 year investment produced? • Government Leveraging 13-to-1 Leveraging $87 Million  $1.1 Billion

8. Defining “Successful” • Financial • Support for University • About 9,000 faculty-years of research support • About 12,000 grad student-years of research support • Firm Leveraging • 37-to-1 or $1.25 million research agenda • Firm Cost Avoidance • One-third of members avoid about $300,000 in R&D costs each year (Gray & Steenhuis, 2003)

9. Defining “Successful” • Knowledge Production • 18,000 publications in open literature • Best Journals • 30,000 conference papers • Numerous awards: “Best Paper”, “Best Invention”, “Entrepreneur”

10. Defining “Successful” • Enhanced Graduate Training • Producing a new generation of “industrially savvy” scientists and engineers • 4,000+ theses and dissertations • 2,500 scientists and engineers • IUCRC graduates rated training significantly superior to their departmental peers (Scott) • No erosion of academic freedom (Behrens & Gray, 2002)

11. Defining “Successful” • Technology Transfer • Follow-on funding • Started 5-7,000 projects based on center research • Estimated value $1.4 billion • Technology Breakthroughs • Impact on National Resources • Catalyst for start-up companies • Research in Emerging Areas • Technology Transfer Society’s “Justin Morril Award” for Institutional Excellence in Technology Transfer

12. Key Ingredients • Built on an experimentally proven model • Commitment to “continuous improvement” • Network of centers that share best practices • Evaluation system • Modest funding levels • Attracts faculty PIs who are “true believers” • Insures center will pay attention to those who pay the bills – industry not NSF • Eases the transition to self-sufficiency • Optimal level???? • Stable and committed program management

13. Summary How many “successful” university-based centers can be built on the “MIT model?” • Financial leveraging • Knowledge Production • Enhanced Graduate Training • Technology Transfer One hundred and ten and counting….