1 / 64

NIH meets STTR Small Business Technology Transfer

NIH meets STTR Small Business Technology Transfer. Creating, testing, and commercializing a toolkit for school wellness policy implementation and obesity prevention in middle schools. STTR Project Team. Alice Ammerman DrPH, RD, Professor, Nutrition, Director HPDP, retired baseball Team Mom

sorcha
Download Presentation

NIH meets STTR Small Business Technology Transfer

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. NIH meets STTR Small Business Technology Transfer Creating, testing, and commercializing a toolkit for school wellness policy implementation and obesity prevention in middle schools

  2. STTR Project Team • Alice Ammerman DrPH, RD, Professor, Nutrition, Director HPDP, retired baseball Team Mom • Brian Burnham, CEO, Cirque Productions, Chapel Hill, NC, outdoor adventurist, scout leader, middle school baseball coach • Patrick Akos, Associate Professor, School of Education, middle school counseling • David Cavallo, doctoral student, nutrition, background in economics and entrepreneurship • John Ujvari, Small Business Technology and Development Center, part of the 1700 MLK economic development epicenter • Teacher advisory committee, other business partners etc.

  3. Remember when we used to have to fatten the kids up first?

  4. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1985 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14%

  5. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1986 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14%

  6. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1987 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14%

  7. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1988 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14%

  8. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1989 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14%

  9. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1990 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14%

  10. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1991 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

  11. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1992 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

  12. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1993 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

  13. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1994 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

  14. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1995 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

  15. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1996 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19%

  16. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1997 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% ≥20%

  17. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1998 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% ≥20%

  18. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 1999 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% ≥20%

  19. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2000 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% ≥20%

  20. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2001 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% ≥25%

  21. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2002 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% ≥25%

  22. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2003 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% ≥25%

  23. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2004 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% ≥25%

  24. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2005 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% 25%–29% ≥30%

  25. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2006 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% 25%–29% ≥30%

  26. Obesity Trends* Among U.S. AdultsBRFSS, 2007 (*BMI ≥30, or ~ 30 lbs. overweight for 5’ 4” person) No Data <10% 10%–14% 15%–19% 20%–24% 25%–29% ≥30%

  27. "Unless effective population-level interventions to reduce obesity are developed, the steady rise in life expectancy observed in the modern era may soon come to an end and the youth of today may, on average, live less healthy and possibly even shorter lives than their parents.... The optimism of scientists and of policymaking bodies about the future course of life expectancy should be tempered by a realistic acknowledgment that major threats to the health and longevity of younger generations today are already visible." - New England Journal of Medicine

  28. School Wellness Policies federally mandated • All schools receiving USDA reimbursement for free and reduced priced lunches • Limited enforcement/teeth…but may change with new legislation in ‘09 • Few tools to assist with implementation

  29. Our idea… • Develop a web-based toolkit for middle schools (most effort to date in elementary) • Make it fun for the kids and easy/useful for the teachers (fit with required standard course of study) • Appeal to small businesses as future employers and good community citizens to underwrite the cost for local schools

  30. Rationale for choosing the STTR Approach • Need for reach and sustainability which commercialization can offer • Unique source of set-aside funding • Funds production of the intervention materials which many grants don’t • Something a little different…

  31. So just what are these SBIRs and STTRs?? Straight from the NIH SBIR-STTR website: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/Funding/sbir.htm with an assist from John Ujvari, Small Business and Technology Development Center

  32. Research Opportunities Reserved for Small Business SMALL BUSINESS INNOVATION RESEARCH (SBIR) PROGRAM SMALL BUSINESS TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER (STTR) PROGRAM

  33. SBIR / STTR Program Mission Supporting scientific excellence and technological innovation through the investment of federal research funds in critical American priorities to build a strong national economy… onesmallbusinessatatime.

  34. Program Descriptions • Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Set-aside program for small business concerns to engage in federal R&D -- with potential for commercialization. • Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) Set-aside program to facilitate cooperative R&D between small business concerns and U.S. research institutions -- with potential for commercialization. 2.5% 0.3%

  35. WHY STTR???? Small Business Research and Development Enhancement Act of 1992 • Stimulate and foster scientific and technological innovation through cooperative research and development carried out betweensmall business concerns andresearch institutions • Foster technology transfer between small business concerns and research institutions

  36. 2001 STTR REAUTHORIZATION • Reauthorized through FY2009 • Set-aside increased from 0.15% to 0.30% in FY 2004 • Phase II award levels increased from $500,000 to $750,000 in FY 2004 • Participating agencies to implement similar outreach efforts as SBIR

  37. SBIR/STTR: 3-Phase Program PHASE I • Feasibility Study • $165K (NIH) and 6-month (SBIR) or 12-month (STTR) Award • PHASE II • Full Research/R&D • $750K and 2-year Award (SBIR/STTR) • PHASE III • Commercialization Stage • Use of non-SBIR/STTR Funds

  38. STTR PROGRAM ELIGIBILITY CHECKPOINTS • Applicantis Small Business ConcernSubsidiaries are NOT eligible for STTR program • Formal Cooperative R&D Effort • Minimum 40% by small business • Minimum 30% by U.S. research institution • U.S. Research Institution • College or University; other non-profit research organization; Federal R&D center • Intellectual Property Agreement • Allocation of Rights in IP and Rights to Carry out Follow-on R&D and Commercialization

  39. TOTAL ~ $2.2 + B FY 2005 SBIR / STTR Participating Agencies • DOD SBIR/STTR • HHS SBIR/STTR • NASA SBIR/STTR • DOE SBIR/STTR • NSF SBIR/STTR • DHS SBIR • USDA SBIR • DOC SBIR • ED SBIR • EPA SBIR • DOT SBIR

  40. About 6-9 months Standard Phase I Process Solicitation Topics • Agencies describe R&D topics in solicitations. • Small Business Concerns prepare • short (usually 25-page)proposals. • Unsolicited proposals not accepted. Proposal Submission Evaluation • Agencies evaluate based on technical • merit, firm’s qualifications, and • commercial potential / societal benefit. Ph I award • Agenciesmake Phase I awards.

  41. SBIR AND STTR PROGRAMSCRITICAL DIFFERENCES • Research Partner SBIR:Permits research institution partners [Outsource ~ 33% Phase I and 50% Phase II R&D] STTR:Requiresresearch institution partners (e.g., universities) [40% small business concerns (for-profit) and 30% U.S. research institution (non-profit)] AWARD ALWAYS MADE TO SMALL BUSINESS

  42. SBIR AND STTR PROGRAMSCRITICAL DIFFERENCES • Principal Investigator SBIR: Primary (>50%) employment must be with small business concern STTR: Primary employment not stipulated [PI can be from research institution and/or from small business concern*] *DISCUSS WITH AGENCIES

  43. UNIVERSITY-BUSINESS PARTNERSHIP OPPORTUNITIES • Own small firms (assign someone else PI) • Principal Investigator (with official permission from university) • Senior Personnel on SBIR/STTR • Consultants on SBIR/STTR • Subcontracts on SBIR/STTR • University facilities provide analytical and other service support

  44. UNIVERSITY AND INDUSTRY:Two diverse cultures Industry Researchers are from MARS University Researchers are from Venus

  45. UNIVERSITY AND INDUSTRY:Two diverse cultures University culture • Research, discover, educate and train future workforce • Pace is slower - aligned to academic cycle • Mission = basic and applied research • Technology transfer activities are companion to applied research mission • Fertile ground for economic development

  46. UNIVERSITY AND INDUSTRY:Two diverse cultures Industry culture • Missiontoward research / R&D / commercialization • Quick-paced • Solve problems - develop new products  profit • Maintain control of science to explore full potential of discovery (initially) • Economic impact: Jobs, societal benefit

  47. FLEXIBILITY and UNDERSTANDING IP ISSUES is KEY! CULTURAL DIVERSITY That was then… This is now… University - Industry Partnerships Critical dimension of the new “Knowledge-based Economy” • Universities are establishing creative and entrepreneurial environments for the commercialization of university intellectual property • Universities and Industry learning to work together

  48. Entrepreneurial Research Institution Key Ingredients • Develop common goals between faculty-initiated business and mission of research institution • Create environment that enables innovation and entrepreneurship • Protect IP assets of university • Establish policies to manage, reduce or eliminate conflict of interest (COI)

  49. Our Proposal Components • Formative work • Kids, Teachers, Businesses • Toolkit Components • Social marketing: to get buy-in from key stakeholders • Tracker: physical activity, soft drinks, fast food trips • Screener: personal assessment; home and school environmental scans; eg) TV in the bedroom, sports equipment for recess • Pilot study of impact on diet and physical activity behaviors of middle school kids

More Related