• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Bidders' Conference Presentation
 

Bidders' Conference Presentation

on

  • 532 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
532
Views on SlideShare
532
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Good morning and welcome. Introductions – John Griffin, Director, Technology Division Mike McKay, Manager, TBAO, Technology Division
  • Read bullets.
  • Read bullet. OTF is focused on building on our strengths in technology and innovation to create high-wage jobs, new growth companies, and globally competitive products.
  • Read bullets.
  • Read bullets.
  • To accomplish the goals of the Third Frontier, we’ve developed a comprehensive set of 12 programs for FY 2010 that are each focused on addressing different aspects of technology research, development, commercialization, and access to capital. All of our funds are awarded as competitive grants. Each program is offered on an annual cycle. Proposals are evaluated by outside reviewers with whom we’ve contracted to make recommendations to the Third Frontier Commission. Program awards are made by the Third Frontier Commission, which is comprised of three state officials and six regional business representatives.
  • So we’re currently in our seventh year of the program and it’s living up to its commitment and is delivering results. Here’s just a few of the highlights.
  • All of the Third Frontier programs share a common goal – that is to promote TBED in Ohio by funding activities that move the technology from ideas to market. That goal has required us to design our programs, and to evaluate our proposals, within the context of a Framework that helps us optimize technology commercialization activities and investment decisions. The primary component of the Framework is an understanding of the five phases of technology commercialization, which are represented by the circles – Imagining, Incubating, Demonstrating, Market Entry, and Growth & Sustainability. The ovals between the phases represent what we call the Transition – or acquiring the resources to perform the activities that will move you to the next phase. The 13 programs that we administer through the Ohio Third Frontier are designed to optimize technology development and commercialization activities between the Incubating phase, through the Demonstrating phase, and into Market Entry. These are often the phases in which the major technical roadblocks and market roadblocks tend to show up. This is often referred to as the “Valley of Death” and more often than not, is the end of the road for commercialization initiatives. This is our sweet-spot and where we believe the state can play an important role. (Stop here) And then we measure a project’s progress through a system of metrics that we work with the grantee to develop.
  • This year we’ve added a new dimension to all of the TF Cluster Development programs – something we’re calling Exceptional Opportunity Funding. The idea here is that if you believe that you have an exceptional opportunity, that with an expanded scope represents an exceptional economic development opportunity for Ohio, that fits the intent of the program, but requires significantly higher funding than the RFP allows, then you can submit a white paper that describes the opportunity, how the additional funding would be used, and clearly justifies why this is an exceptional economic development opportunity for the state. The white paper would be in addition to a full proposal that you would have to submit for your core project. And, your core project must be able to stand on its own and not depend on the exceptional opportunity white paper to be successful.
  • The white paper should be not more than 5 pages, plus supplemental budget forms and a schedule of activities. It also has to include the title of your core proposal and the proposal number that you were assigned by us. You can request no less than $1 million for the Exceptional Opportunity effort, but we didn’t place a ceiling on how much you can request. However, the 1:1 cost share requirement applies to this request as well. If your core proposal ranks high enough by the external evaluators to be recommended for funding, then it would be at that point at which your white paper will be evaluated. And the OTFC will likely request additional due diligence, including submitting a full proposal for the additional funding.  Final decisions on supplemental awards will occur at the end of the FY 2010 program year. And all white papers that we receive throughout the year, from all of our various TF programs, will be presented to the TFC at that time for their consideration.
  • Without fail, we find common budget form issues when we conduct the administrative review on the proposals. The errors are made by both first time Applicants and previous Third Frontier Grantees and include things such as: The totals for the State funds and the Cost Share funds, across the various forms, not being equal, and State funds to collaborators and Cost Share from collaborators not being reflected on Budget Form 2 in the subgrant/subcontract line-item. To try to help you reduce the errors we see, here is what each Budget Form is designed to reflect: READ SLIDE TEXT…
  • The next few slides are an attempt to capture some things that we’ve seen over the years that folks have included in their proposals that really didn’t help them, and in many cases actually hurt them. So I’ve titled it “Things To Avoid”. Read slide – In many cases, there are companies that we’ve already funded through TF that may augment your efforts. Make sure that you’re aware of the environment of activity that’s going on in Ohio and if it makes sense to include someone on your project that we’ve funded before that can add value to your effort, you should reach out to them. 2) On the other hand, it doesn’t make sense to involve previous OTF grantees if they don’t add value to your effort. 3) Read slide – Make sure that the people you’re asking to be involved in your project are really who and what you need. Sometimes folks like to dazzle our evaluators with extensive teams and individuals who are not actively involved in the project. That’s not helpful to you and our evaluators will see right through it. 4) Read slide – Make sure that your letters of support are meaningful.
  • A few things with regard to cost share: Read bullet – I think this is pretty self-explanatory. What you propose as cost share has to be real, verifiable, and auditable. Read bullet – Be sure to include in your budget narrative an explanation of your cost share. Read bullet – Be sure to include a letter of commitment from each of your collaborators, that is anyone who is providing cost share to the project or receiving any funds from the project. Bait & Switch – Don’t write your proposal or your budget with the intention of changing it later. This is not so much something to avoid as it is something you need to be aware of, and that is the cost share that you propose is what we’re going to hold you to. So if for some reason one of your collaborators can’t come through with their cost share commitment, you’re still on the hook for that cost share.
  • With regard to commercialization and the market aspect of your proposal: Don’t over or under estimate your position in the Commercialization Framework. Read bullet – We’re looking for projects in which the technology is already fairly well developed and can reach the market in the relatively near-term. Read bullet – We’ve seen some proposals where they state that there’s no competition for what they’re doing, and others where they simply don’t acknowledge the competition – whether it’s another company or another technology. Our evaluators understand the playing field and they want to be sure that you do as well, so be sure to acknowledge that you understand who and what you’re up against. Read bullet – Again, we’re looking for projects that are pretty well-developed and relatively close to market, so it would be to your advantage to involve end users, suppliers and manufacturers in your project. Read bullet – Again, to reiterate, the goal here is getting your technology to the market, so your project should be industry driven and ideally should include industry leaders. We’re not funding you to do research for the sake of doing research. Read bullet – Be sure that what you include in your proposal is something that’s tailored for this project. Read bullet – We’ve all seen the hockey stick growth curves and the huge sales and employment projections. In many cases those projections fall well-short of what’s expected. So be honest about the impacts of your project and what you think can be achieved.
  • And on Administrative issues – these are basically tips on what to do to avoid having your proposal thrown out by our staff before it even gets read by the evaluators.: Don’t be late submitting your proposal. Proposals are due at 2:00 PM on December 7. It’s your responsibility to make sure that it arrives in our office by that date and time. Don’t ignore the page limitations that are outlined in the RFP. The page limits are there for a reason, and we count the pages before we send the proposals to the evaluators. Anything over the page limit in a particular section gets removed by our staff. Don’t include more than 5 key personnel on your project. Anything over five will be removed. Don’t claim your entire proposal as propriety information and don’t mark every line of the proposal as containing trade secret information. That’s not acceptable. Don’t attach any appendices to the back of your proposal. That will also be removed by our staff before your proposal gets delivered to the evaluators. And finally, don’t ask for more money that what the RFP allows for each proposal. if you really want us to dismiss your proposal right off the bat These may seem like minor issues, but we review hundreds of proposals every year and I can tell you that we see these types of mistakes and lack of attention to detail over and over again. And frankly, if we see lack of attention to the minor details, it’s pretty likely that we’ll also see lack of attention to the more important details of a $1 million project. Have someone read your proposal before you submit it. Have two people read it. Have your spouse read it. We know that the person that prepares the budget forms may not be the same person that prepares the cover page or writes the Commercialization Strategy. Make sure that everything is consistent and ties together.

Bidders' Conference Presentation Bidders' Conference Presentation Presentation Transcript

  • Advanced Materials Program and Sensors Program FY 2010 Bidders Conference October 22, 2009
  • Agenda
    • Welcome and Introductions
    • Ohio Third Frontier
    • Commercialization Framework
    •  Ohio Third Frontier Advanced Materials Program (OTFAMP)  Ohio Third Frontier Sensors Program (OTFSP)
    • Q & A
  • Ohio Third Frontier
    • Background
    • The Ohio Third Frontier was initiated in February 2002 and, with a commitment of $1.35 billion, is the state's largest-ever economic development initiative
    • Ohio’s investment has leveraged $4.1 billion in additional investments from the private sector and federal government
    • Program investments have helped to create 598 new companies, more than 8,500 new jobs, and more than 48,000 direct and indirect jobs
  • Ohio Third Frontier
    • Vision
    • To establish, in targeted areas of technology, regional and statewide clusters of excellence that sustain our global competitive advantage in company and product formation, job creation and economic growth.
  • Ohio Third Frontier
    • Objectives
    • Guided by a focus on Ohio research and industrial strengths:
        • Increase the quantity of high quality research that has commercial relevance to Ohio companies;
        • Expand access and availability of investment capital to create, grow and attract technology-based enterprises;
        • Grow and nurture entrepreneurial management talent supported by organized systems of services and networking;
        • Address the technical needs of existing companies pursuing new products and production processes;
        • Contribute to the expansion of a technologically proficient workforce.
    • Focus Areas
    • Based on a 2002 study by Battelle and revised by the Ohio Third Frontier Commission in 2008, the Ohio Third Frontier embraces five technology focus areas:
    • Biomedical
    • Advanced/Alternative Energy
    • Instruments, Controls, Electronics
    • Advanced Materials
    • Advanced Propulsion
    Ohio Third Frontier
      • Research Commercialization Programs
      • - Wright Projects Program RFP open
      • - R & D Center Attraction (New) RFP open
      • Entrepreneurial Programs
      • - ESP Success / Pre-Seed Follow-on Funds (Modified) RFP TBR
      • Cluster Development Programs
      •  - Advanced Materials Program (New) RFP open
      •  - Sensors Program (New) RFP open
      • - Advanced Energy Program RFP closed
      • - Fuel Cell Program RFP closed
      • - Photovoltaic Program (New) RFP closed
      • - Medical Imaging Program (New) RFP TBR
      • - Biomedical Program (New) RFP TBR
      • - Targeted Industry Attraction Grants
      • Human Capital Programs
      • - Third Frontier Internship Program
      • TBR = To Be Released
    Ohio Third Frontier FY2010 Programs
  • Ohio Third Frontier Investment Highlights
    • Statewide Entrepreneurial Signature Program (ESP) established and organized around 6 regional networks
    • 46 pre-seed and seed funds capitalized
    • 13 Wright Centers of Innovation (including one Mega-Center) established
    • Endowments for 26 Ohio Research Scholars
    • More than 80 advanced energy projects supporting the growth of the fuel cell and photovoltaic clusters
    • 3,000 STEM interns placed in over 700 companies
  • Commercialization Framework OTF Cluster Programs
  • Ohio Third Frontier Advanced Materials Program & Sensors Program Fiscal Year 2010
  • Program Goal
    • To accelerate the development and growth of the advanced materials and
    • sensors industries in Ohio and their supply chains by direct financial support
    • to organizations seeking to:
      • Advanced Materials - Commercialize new products, manufacturing
      • processes or technologies; adapt or modify existing materials or
      • components in order to address one or more issues, including cost, size,
      • weight, strength, resistance to the environment, and durability of
      • advanced materials; address technical and commercialization barriers; or
      • demonstrate market readiness
      • Sensors – Investigate near-term specific commercial objectives with
      • respect to products, processes, or services; commercialize new products,
      • manufacturing processes or technologies; adapt or modify existing
      • components or systems that can reduce the cost and improve the
      • functionality of sensors; address technical and commercialization
      • barriers; or demonstrate market readiness
  • Program Objectives
    • To help Ohio companies achieve cost and performance standards that ultimate end-users of advanced materials or sensors technologies define as necessary for successful commercial applications;
    • To support development of advanced materials or sensors technologies that will result in the opportunity for significant employment in Ohio within 3 to 5 years of completing the project;
    • To help Ohio companies secure additional financial resources needed to commercialize their advanced materials or sensors related products, processes, components, and systems; and
    • To move advanced materials or sensors related products, manufacturing processes, components, and systems to a point in the commercialization process where the applicant is ready to demonstrate a commercial prototype or actually enter the market with a product
  • Eligible Purposes
    • The OTF will fund grant applications that focus on the following types of projects:
    • Developing and commercializing new advanced materials or sensors products, manufacturing processes, or technologies that can address one or more issues (including cost, size, weight, strength, resistance to the environment, or durability of advanced materials), reduce the cost and improve the functionality of sensors technologies or systems, or address technical commercialization barriers
    • Adapting or modifying an existing product or components or systems that are produced in Ohio
    • Commercially oriented demonstration projects in Ohio of advanced materials or sensors or sensor-related technologies that maximize incorporation of Ohio components and are operating under final use conditions. Please note that proof of principle and bench scale demonstrations are not considered to be commercial demonstrations
    • The OTF will not fund the construction or operation of production scale facilities
  • Technology Preferences
    • Advanced Materials - Preference for polymer and carbon nano-materials, liquid crystals, and bio-based materials
    • Advanced Materials and Sensors – Preference for projects that apply advanced materials or sensors technologies within one or more of Ohio’s key industries, including Advanced Energy and Environmental Technologies; Aerospace and Aviation; Agriculture and Food Processing; Biomedical; Instruments, Controls, and Electronics; Motor Vehicle and Parts Manufacturing; Distribution and Logistics; and Polymers and Advanced Materials, including Bioproducts
    • Competitive advanced materials or sensors technologies are those that can be shown to meet or exceed technical and cost standards emanating from end users, any federal research, development, and policy work, or other recognized national and international associations dedicated to the advanced materials or sensors industries
    • Preference is for work to be done within 2 years and not more than 3 years
  • Eligible Lead Applicants
    • Lead Applicant (for-profit, not-for-profit, government research institute, public body, or educational institution) must be based in Ohio or have a principal place of business in Ohio, or be an out-of-state for-profit company that pledges to locate a principle place of business within Ohio as a pre-condition to award
    • A substantial portion of the project activity and the benefit from the project must occur in Ohio
    • Must be a collaborative effort where either the Lead Applicant or one collaborator must be a for-profit company, but must be comprised of, in any mix, two or more independent firms, higher education institutions, or eligible not-for-profit or government research institutions
  • Funding
    • Development anticipates awarding up to:
      • Advanced Materials Program = $10 million
        • $8 million Third Frontier Research and Development Fund (TFR&DF); $2 million Wright Capital Fund (WCF)
      • Sensors Program = $10 million
        • $8 million Third Frontier Research and Development Fund (TFR&DF); $2 million Wright Capital Fund (WCF)
  • Funding
    • There are no restrictions of the use of Third Frontier Research and Development funds (i.e., may be used for operating or capital purposes) or on the eligibility of organizations to receive these funds
    • Wright Capital Funds must be used solely to acquire, renovate, or construct facilities and purchase equipment that is part of property of facilities owned by an Ohio State-supported or state-assisted institution of higher education or by a non-profit corporation or a public body that provides access and use of facilities or equipment to a collaborating Ohio State-supported or state-assisted institution of higher education
    • Wright Capital Funds requested for any one proposal may not exceed the total WCF available
    • Not more than 20 percent of the total direct State grant funds requested may be budgeted for Indirect Costs
    • Un-recovered Indirect Costs are an allowable form of Cost Share
  • Cost Share
    • Must be at least one dollar for every one dollar of State Grant Funds requested (i.e., a ratio of at least 1:1)
    • Preference will be given to Proposals that pledge Cost Share as discretionary, unrestricted, and unallocated cash and such cash must appear on the financial records of the Lead Applicant
    • Must be documented on the budget forms, in the budget narrative, and in a letter from each organization contributing Cost Share signed by a representative authorized to commit the organization to the proposed Project and the Cost Share described.
    • Must represent a specific new commitment to the Project described in the Proposal
    • Must be allowable costs that are verifiable and auditable and consistent with the Cost Share guidelines
  • Cost Share
    • Resources that have been designated as Cost Share for some other award cannot be used as Cost Share for an Ohio Third Frontier award
    • Cost Share must be applied to the Project during the Project Period
    • If an organization has a published indirect cost rate, un-recovered Indirect Costs (the difference between 20% and the published rate) may be used as Cost Share
      • - If the Lead Applicant does not have a federally negotiated and approved Indirect Cost rate agreement, then the Lead Applicant is limited to using 20 percent of its Cost Shared direct costs as Cost Shared Indirect Costs and no other un-recovered Indirect Costs from the operating budget may be claimed
    • OTF funding may not be used as Cost Share, and funds awarded under this RFP may not be used as Cost Share against other Third Frontier projects
    • Lead Applicant will be held to the Cost Share ratio proposed
  • Proposal Evaluation Criteria
    • The following criteria have been designated with the highest
    • relevance to and weighting for the OTFAMP AND OTFSP:
    • - Level of Scientific Merit
    • - Alignment of the Proposal with the OTFAMP or OTFSP
    • purpose, goals, objectives, eligibility, funding, and Cost Share
    • requirements as described in Section 2 of the RFPs
    • - Quality of responses to the requirements of the RFPs as
    • outlined in sections 3.3.6 through 3.3.12 of the RFPs
    • - Compliance with the RFPs’ administrative requirements
    • - Past Performance (if applicable)
  • Proposal Evaluation Criteria
    • - 3.3.6 Technical Plan
    • - 3.3.7 Commercialization Strategy
    • - 3.3.8 Performance Goals
    • - 3.3.9 Performance on Prior OTF Awards
    • - 3.3.10 Experience and Qualifications
    • - 3.3.11 Budget
    • - 3.3.12 Collaborator Information/Letters of Commitment
  • Review Process
    • Administrative Review
      • Third Frontier Commission staff
      • Receive and process proposals for administrative compliance
      • Forward to external evaluators for technical review
    • Technical Review
      • Independent, external evaluators
      • Technical and commercial review
      • Establish a competitive range
      • Second stage review
      • Rank proposals
      • Compile recommendations
      • Submit recommendations and summary evaluation statements to Ohio Third Frontier Commission
  • Review Process
    • In addition to the external review, Development may review
    • applications to assess:
    • - Past performance of Lead Applicant and its team;
    • - Proposal’s strategic fit with prior Third Frontier investments,
    • other State investments, Development’s strategies, and the
    • Ohio Board of Regent’s strategies; and
    • - Factual business intelligence relevant to describing the Ohio
    • economic development opportunity
    • The results of such review will be presented to the Ohio Third
    • Frontier Commission for its consideration
  • Timeline
    • October 7, 2009 RFP Released
    • November 4, 2009 LOIs due by 2:00 p.m.
    • December 7, 2009 Proposals due by 2:00 p.m.
    • December 2009 – March 2010 Review Process
    • Approximately March 2010 Award Announcements
    • Be sure to use the current version of the RFP and application / budget forms
  • Exceptional Opportunity Funding
    • If the Lead Applicant believes they have an exceptional opportunity,
    • fitting the intent of the specific OTF program, but requiring significantly
    • higher funding than the RFP allows, then the Lead Applicant may also
    • submit a white paper that describes:
      • the additional dimensions of the Project;
      • the uses for the larger amount of funding requested; and,
      • a clear justification for why the expanded scope represents an exceptional economic development opportunity for Ohio
    • Note: The core Proposal must stand alone and not depend on the
    • exceptional opportunity white paper to achieve the benefits required
    • for a successful Project.
    • The white paper should consist of a narrative not to exceed five (5) pages, supplemental budget forms and a schedule of activities. The white paper must include the title of the core Proposal and the Proposal number assigned by Development.
    • The supplemental award request must be for no less than $1 million in additional support. The request for additional funds is subject to the at least 1:1 Cost Share requirement.
    • If the Lead Applicant’s core Project is ranked high enough by the external evaluators to be recommended for funding, the white paper will be evaluated and presented to the OTFC. At its discretion, the OTFC may request additional due diligence be undertaken that will include submitting a more complete Proposal for the additional funding. Final decisions on supplemental awards will occur at the end of the FY 2010 program year.
    Exceptional Opportunity Funding
  • Policy & Administrative Questions
    • All questions must be submitted via e-mail
    • E-mail: [email_address] , with subject
    • line “OTFAMP Q&A”
    • [email_address] , with subject line
    • “ OTFSP Q&A”
    • * LOIs are to be submitted to the respective e-mail address, with
    • the subject line of “2010 OTFAMP LOI” or “2010 OTFSP LOI”
    • Frequently asked questions will be posted on the Third Frontier web site: www.thirdfrontier.com
  • RFP Modifications & Clarifications
    • From time to time, it may be necessary to modify or clarify portions of the RFPs, as well as the forms. In that event, we will post a document titled “RFP Modifications and Clarifications” to the RFP page for the particular program on the Third Frontier website. The document will have an explanation of any changes.
    • It is your responsibility to be aware of any RFP modifications and to ensure that your proposal conforms with any such modifications
  • Budget Forms
    • BF1 – The Total Budget Plan – Detail of total budget plan for the State funds requested and all Cost Share. This form includes the Lead Applicant and Collaborator(s). Subcontract/Subgrant line-item is not to be used .
    • BF2 – The Lead Applicant budget – Detail of Lead Applicant’s requested State funds and committed Cost Share. Subcontract/Subgrant line-item is to contain total amount of requested State funds and committed Cost Share from all Collaborator BF3s.
    • BF3 – The Collaborator Budget – Must be submitted for each and every Collaborator receiving State funds and/or committing Cost Share.
    • BF4 – Cost Share – Single form that lists the source of the Cost Share by both entity and type for the Lead Applicant and all Collaborators committing Cost Share. Do not submit multiple BF4s .
    • Note : *** The total on Budget Form 1 and the total on Budget Form 2 are to equal
    • *** The total of all Budget Form 3s are to equal the “Subcontract/Subgrant” line-item totals on Budget Form 2
    • Budget Forms have been reformatted – only use the reformatted Forms!
    • Please carefully read the Instructions tab before filling out the Forms!
  • Things to Avoid
    • Collaborations
    • Failure to consider/involve OTF grantees when it makes sense
    • Involving OTF grantees when it doesn’t add value
    • Window dressing and a cast of thousands
    • Hollow letters of support
  • Things to Avoid
    • Cost Sharing
    • Not viewing Cost Share as a true half of the whole
    • Not addressing Cost Share specifics in the budget narrative
    • Missing letters of commitment
    • “ Related” Cost Share
    • Bait & switch
    • The ratio you propose is the ratio we hold you to
    • Assuming the highest bidder wins
  • Things to Avoid
    • Commercialization / Market
    • Over/under estimating your position in the framework
    • Proposing a program in its infancy
    • Not acknowledging the competition
    • Not considering/involving end users, suppliers, manufacturers
    • Not being industry driven, omitting industrial leaders
    • Unrealistic impacts
  • Things to Avoid
    • Administrative Issues
    • Late proposals – deadline is 2:00 p.m.
    • Ignoring page limitations
    • More than 5 key personnel
    • Claiming everything as proprietary information
    • Appending material
    • Requesting more funding than what’s allowed
  • Questions?