No abstract

No abstract

The Advanced Technology Program (ATP), administered by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, partners with U.S. industry to develop high risk and enabling technologies, with significant potential for stimulating U.S. economic growth. Industry submits proposals containing a research plan for the work to be performed, an explanation of how the nation broadly will benefit from the new technical capability, a business plan for future commercialization of goods and services that may derive from the technology, plans for diffusing the technology beyond the innovators, and a project budget indicating the proposed cost-share arrangement. In a highly competitive process, a peer review panel, involving a mix of technical experts and business and economic experts, selects projects for funding. Once the projects are selected, the ATP staff monitors them and evaluates progress and impacts. An important component of ATP's economic evaluation plan for tracking project progress and outcomes is the administration of an electronic survey on a regular basis to all project participants funded since 1993 to determine progress of projects compared with business plans and projected economic benefit goals outlined in their proposals. The resulting Business Reporting System (BRS) database is intended for use for ATP project management, as well as for evaluation research. This report summarizes BRS data covering periods through December 31, 1996, filed by 480 companies in 210 ATP projects, funded in 19 competitions during FY 1993-1995. The report provides an overview of pathways to achieving targeted commercial and broader economic goals; a status report of completed R&D; an analysis of commercialization and technology diffusion activities; and analyses of other effects of ATP funding, such as stimulation of R&D collaborations, and increased private sector investment in high risk and enabling R&D.

This report assesses participation, strategies, and progress of firms engaged in technology development through partnerships with the Advanced Technology Program (ATP). The focus is on the performance of small firms (those with fewer than 500 employees) compared with medium-to-large firms (grouped together and referred to as "larger" firms in this report, and defined as firms with 500 or more employees). Using 1997 data collected through the ATP's Business Reporting System (BRS) from firms receiving ATP awards in 1993 through 1996, the report identifies factors contributing to the success of small firms in ATP competitions; and it addresses whether small firms are adopting effective "strategies for success," using ATP funding to accelerate R&D cycles and attract increased private funding, and overcoming at least the initial hurdles to commercial success and broad diffusion of their technologies. For purposes of comparison, parallel analyses are presented for larger firms funded by the ATP during the same period. Whether or not the firm is a participant in a joint-venture project is examined as a source of variation in the results for small firms as compared with larger firms.The study finds that small companies have been successful in winning ATP awards in competition with larger firms. Their success likely relates to their ambitious plans for numerous applications, including many "new-to-the-world" and high-performance products. Small firms also appear to be following strategies for success cited in the literature. While collaboration activity is widespread across both small firms and larger firms, small firms are placing more emphasis on strategic alliances with customers and other supply chain linkages than larger firms and more frequently report significant effects of collaboration on identifying customer needs, and on raising capital. Most small firms as well as larger firms have experienced acceleration of their R&D in the critical race to market as a result of the increased levels of investment and of collaborative activity with other organizations. On the other hand, larger firms more frequently report that they require ATP funding to undertake their projects at all. At similar stages of their projects, a larger percentage of small firms have set up pilot production, begun production, and/or have earned revenues from their ATP-funded technologies. Small firms in single-company projects are taking advantage of early opportunities for revenues from spin-off activities to support cash flow. Small firms in joint ventures appear to be making particularly strong progress towards actual production of products incorporating ATP-funded technology. Larger firms are more likely than small firms to be pursuing new or improved process technologies. Evidence to date, at a time when most of the firms are still in the R&D phase, suggests that small firms funded by the ATP are progressing at a pace at least equivalent to larger firms and engaging in collaborative and other commercialization activities needed for ...

The Advanced Technology Program (ATP) is a partnership between government and private industry to conduct high-risk research to develop enabling technologies that promise significant commercial payoffs and widespread benefits for the economy.Since the inception of ATP in 1990, ATP's Economic Assessment Office (EAO) has performed rigorous and multifaceted evaluations to assess the impact of the program and estimate the returns to the taxpayer. To evaluate whether the program is meeting its stated objectives, EAO employs statistical analyses and other methodological approaches to measure program effectiveness in terms of:• Inputs (program funding and staffing necessary to carry out the ATP mission)• Outputs (research outputs from ATP supported projects)• Outcomes (innovation in products, processes, and services from ATP supported projects)• Impacts (long term impacts on U.S. industry, society, and economy) Key features of ATP's evaluation program include:• Business Reporting System, a unique online survey of ATP project participants, that gathers regular data on indicators of business progress and future economic impact of ATP projects.• Special Surveys, including the Survey of Applicants and the Survey of Joint Ventures.• Status Reports, mini case studies that assess ATP projects on several years after project completion, and rate projects on a scale of zero to four stars to represent a range of project outcomes.• Benefit-cost analysis studies, which identify and quantify the private, public, and social returns and benefits from ATP projects • Economic and policy studies that assess the role and impact of the program in the U.S. innovation system EAO measures against ATP's mission. The findings from ATP surveys and reports demonstrate that ATP is meeting its mission:• Nine out of 10 organizations indicate that ATP funding accelerated their R&D cycle.• The existence of a "Halo Effect." As revealed by EAO surveys, shows that an ATP award establishes or enhances the expected value in the eyes of potential investors.• ATP stresses the importance of partnerships and collaborations in its projects. About 85 percent of project participants had collaborated with others in research on their ATP projects. AbstractThe author would like to thank ATP's many contractors for their inspiration and cooperation in developing economic studies of the program's impact. Their dedication to rigorous fact finding and fruitful benefit-cost analysis, despite the uncertainties and long time horizons faced in applying this tool to early-stage R&D projects, leaves a strong and continuing legacy. The author would like to acknowledge Lorel Wisniewski for asking for a comparison of ATP-funded studies that inspired this study and would also like to thank Stephanie Shipp and Connie Chang for their encouragement in pursuing it. Thanks are also due to Brian Belanger, Stephanie Shipp, and Lorel Wisniewski for their helpful review comments and to Harold Marshall, Building and Fire Research Laboratory, for his NIST ERB review. Acknowledgments Acknowl...