slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
2011 Commercialization Grant Competitions Information for Applicants PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
2011 Commercialization Grant Competitions Information for Applicants

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 21

2011 Commercialization Grant Competitions Information for Applicants - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

2011 Commercialization Grant Competitions Information for Applicants. LSDF’s Mission. The Life Sciences Discovery Fund was created by the Washington state legislature in 2005 to support life sciences research to: improve health and health care stimulate economic development

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about '2011 Commercialization Grant Competitions Information for Applicants' - ada

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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
lsdf s mission
LSDF’s Mission
  • The Life Sciences Discovery Fund was created by the Washington state legislature in 2005 to support life sciences research to:
    • improve health and health care
    • stimulate economic development
    • keep Washington’s life sciences sector competitive
commercialization grants
Commercialization Grants
  • Support R&D to enhance technology commercialization
      • Applied research and development, not basic or discovery research
  • Support highly targeted activities within the ‘valley of death’
  • Studies help validate the commercial merit of promising new technologies
    • Markedly enhance the probability that new technologies and concepts will be developed into products and services
    • Reduce the risk of commercialization of new ideas and technologies
  • Two granting rounds announced for 2011
  • Up to $750K in grants to be awarded in each round
    • Individual awards up to $150K in total costs
    • Work to be completed in one year
  • Proposals must demonstrate a commitment on behalf of the applicant organization to commercialize the technology under development
process and goals
Process and Goals
  • Competitive process uses expert reviewers with awardees chosen by LSDF Board of Trustees
    • Three levels of review: pre-proposal + business and scientific/technical review of proposal
  • Investor’s perspective
  • Return on investment = health-related returns + economic returns + Washington state competitiveness
roi how will this research benefit washington state
ROI: How Will this Research Benefit Washington State?
    • Health:
    • Improve diagnosis, treatment, prevention, and management of significant health and health care problems in Washington state?
    • Increase efficiencies in health care and health-care systems?
  • Economic:
    • Enhance commercialization of research outcomes?
    • Start new companies with the prospect for new job creation?
    • Attract follow-on grant/investment funding?
    • Decrease state expenditures for health care?
  • Competitiveness
    • Keeping Washington’s life sciences sector vital
important elements
Important Elements


  • Washington non-profit organizations (public or private)


  • Specific and measurable according to a timeline
  • Progress reports

Indirect Costs

  • Reimbursable
corporate involvement
Corporate Involvement
  • Grants are made to nonprofit and governmental entities, but not for-profit entities
  • LSDF encourages nonprofit/for-profit collaborations
  • Under some circumstances, LSDF funds can be subcontracted from the grant recipient to a for-profit
    • There must be clear benefit to the nonprofit and the goals of the project under any subcontract
corporate involvement1
Corporate Involvement
  • Examples of “clear benefit” to the nonprofit partner:
    • Work has the potential to enhance an existing license
    • For-profit entity has unique expertise or technology or is providing deliverable goods or services that enable the research to be accomplished
    • High probability that jointly owned intellectual property will result
    • Grantee will receive financial returns from future sales
  • Testing of a company’s product without return to the PI’s organization would generally not be viewed as showing “clear benefit”
  • LSDF has partnered with the Institute of Translational Health Sciences (part of the NIH CTSA award to UW) to provide “mentoring” assistance
  • PIs invited to consult with ITHS preclinical development specialists in advance of pre-proposal and proposal submissions
    • Feedback on preclinical and clinical development plans
    • Information on the business case/medical need underlying the proposal
    • Identification of research and clinical collaborators
    • Access to MBA summer fellowship students
what s new for 2011
What’s New for 2011?
  • What activities will take place to develop the “business case” during the grant period?
  • How will development of the business case be coordinated with the scientific/technical work?
    • Identification of the “commercialization coordinator”
  • “Commercialization partners” must be endorsed by owner of underlying IP
proposal cycle pre proposal
Proposal Cycle – Pre-proposal
  • Pre-proposal submission
    • Reviewed by LSDF-convened commercialization panel
    • PI + “commercialization partner” meet with review panel
    • Q&A format – constructive advice provided by panel
      • Written comments follow
    • “Encouraged” vs. “Not Encouraged” for full proposal submission
    • Full proposals may be submitted regardless of rating
proposal cycle full proposal
Proposal Cycle – Full Proposal
  • Full proposal submission
    • Reviewed for scientific/technical merit by AAAS-convened panel; for commercial merit by LSDF-convened commercialization panel
    • PI (+ commercialization partner) to be available by telephone to entertain questions during panel meeting
    • Commercialization panel makes final recommendations to LSDF board
      • “Highly Recommended”, “Recommended”, or “Not Recommended” for funding
proposal cycle board evaluation
Proposal Cycle – Board Evaluation
  • LSDF Board of Trustees evaluation and award decisions
    • Expert reviews are critical to the Board’s evaluation
    • Awards selected and announced during a public meeting of the Board
proposal cycle post announcement
Proposal Cycle – Post-announcement
  • Post-award announcement
    • All submitters get written comments of AAAS and commercialization panels
    • Grant initiation meeting
    • Awards subject to negotiation of grant agreement, including milestones and timelines for completion of the work
    • Resubmissions encouraged
grants awarded to date
Grants Awarded to Date
  • Four competitions completed to date
    • 83 pre-proposals evaluated (23 + 29 + 18 + 13)
    • 39 full proposals received (7 + 10 + 12 + 10)
    • 10 proposals funded (2 + 1 + 4 + 3): 26% funding rate
examples of funded projects
Examples of Funded Projects
  • Award examples
    • First clinical testing of a new instrument for early detection of shock
    • Animal testing of a new material to prevent catheter-associated infections
    • Test of whether a novel biologic can reduce vascular calcification in an animal model
    • Clinical study of a pressure transducer for lumbar puncture
    • Preclinical safety testing of a new MRI contrast agent
    • Enhancement of a DNA sequencing technology for T cell profiling
    • Prototyping of a device for detecting early tooth decay
    • Immunoassay enhancement using smart polymers
    • Prototyping of a new cerebrospinal fluid drainage system
    • Clinical testing of a system to capture and detect pathogens in exhaled breath
lessons learned top reasons proposals fail
Lessons Learned -Top Reasons Proposals Fail
  • Proposed work is too early to be thinking about commercialization
  • Business case is weak – no commercialization partner
    • Market size, competition, etc.
  • Inadequate description of the new product or service
  • Relevance to Washington is not clear
  • Outcomes not specified or measurable – Does the study reduce risk?
  • Intellectual property plan is unrealistic, inadequate or absent
  • Benefit to applicant organization not evident
for more information
For More Information