1. STARTING A BIOTECHNOLOGY PROGRAM WHERE DO I START?

2. College Performs a Gap Analysis – What is missing Type of training Research (biomedical, environmental, biofuels) Manufacturing (drugs, medical devices) First Things First Will the college support the program? Financially Faculty Support Primary Purpose of the Program Get students job after completing the program? Prepare them to transfer to a university to obtain a B.S.

3. Incumbent worker training – Short Courses Expanding your student base State and local biotechnology initiative grants Make sure the program aligns with industry needs You can’t do this on your own What state and local organizations track biotechnology Focus the program – Do not dilute student learning by being to broad based Corporate Partners – Who you know and who they know The primary way of getting in the door This opens the door to internships

4. The most surprising aspect of starting the Biotechnology & Compliance program The willingness of companies to work with me on every aspect of the program and to make commitments of time and resources to enable the program to produce competent students ready to enter the workforce.

5. Developing New Workforce Training Programs and Platforms: The Catalytic Role of Bioscience Trade Associations in Defibrillating Companies, College Administrators and Faculty, WIBs, 1-Stop Centers and Government Agencies A. Stephen Dahms President and CEO Emeritus, Alfred E. Mann Foundation Vice President Academic, Industry and Government Affairs, So. California Biomedical Council Member Federal Emerging Technology and Research Advisory Committee

6. Eye-balling and Traversing the Bioscience Industries Workforce Development Arena -Observations Over the Past 15 Years-

7. SEC Disclaimer Chair, WF/Education Committees 1995-2006 (BODs) – BIOCOM, BayBio, SoCalBio – California Healthcare Institute – Addressed the full span of regional WF development activities -> national and international level, including the medical device arena (AdvaMed) Chair, BIO WF Development Committee 1996-2007 (BIO/ECS BOD and BOD Committees 1994-2008) – DOC, DOE, NSF, DOL, NIH, BLS, GAO, Beltway groups – House and Senate Science/Labor Committees – NRC/NAS/IOM/NAE: GUIRR, Federal Demonstration Pship – International organizations: EU and OECD (1998-2008) – Professional scientific societies – H1B visas, Skills Standards, training needs (#s and areas)

8. The Workforce Development Landscape Federal Agencies Regional/City & County Agencies State Agencies

9. Constellation of Actors in the Theater of Workforce Development ????? County DD NSF/NIH DOL City DD State EDD CC District 1-Stop Centers 1-Stop Centers State CC Office DOE Cos & Non-Profits County WIB City WIB DOC

10. Research and Product Development Manufacturing and Production Technical Affairs Information, Finance and Administration Sales and Marketing

11. Research and Product Development Manufacturing and Production Technical Affairs Information, Finance and Administration Sales and Marketing

12. Layers of Complexity ????? Counties CCDs NSF/NIH DOL Cities CDDs State EDD CC District X 1 - Stop Centers X 1 - Stop Centers State CC Office DOE Cos & Non-Profits Counties WIBs Cities WIBs DOC

13. The Take Home Lesson

14. Trade Organizations to the Rescue! T-ORG Counties CCDs NSF/NIH DOL City DD State EDD CC District X 1 - Stop Centers X 1 - Stop Centers State CC Office DOE Cos & Non-Profits Counties WIBs Cities WIBs DOC

15. Human Capital Intellectual Capital FinancialCapital The Trade Organization: Integrator of Regional Inputs to Build Industry Clusters Regional Integrator Industry Cluster

17. T-ORGS: a WF development coordinator, organizer, catalyst and nucleating device…often a defibrillator T-ORGs County DD NSF/NIH DOL City DD State EDD CC District 1-Stop Centers 1-Stop Centers State CC Office DOE Non-Profits County WIB City WIB DOC

18. Problems Facing T-ORGs in WF Development -Cities and Counties- Often naïve understanding of the playing field by the players: understanding of technology…some still bemoaning the loss of the buggy-whip industry Layers of complexity…especially in megacities Pre-existing, high-walled political bailiwicks Historical partnering among the players and segmentation difficult to change: breaking up the “party”…divorces are difficult Time-lines for completion of projects: triage vs. long-term solutions “Project Product”: sustainability vs. triage Players lack of understanding of the necessary resources

19. Problems Facing T-ORGs in WF Development -Cities and Counties- Unreasonable expectations of the WF development arena regarding companies CC’s: administrators, role of non-academic training operations, multiple CC’s aiming for the same targets, unrealistic expectations of companies, survey impacts, moving off the “molecular biology” raison d’etre dime T-ORG BOD’s: regional, state, and national 2-year -> 4-year institutional programs: regionally-approved, industry validated layered, stackable certificates Research universities: often a considerable problem: understanding the critical role of CC’s, intrusion into CC space, sparse laboratory training in some universities A battle of wills…and entrenched public service organizations very adept at survival

22. WIB, etc. & Naïve Understanding of the Biotech Industry Recomb DNA 1990 Monoclonal Antibodies Gene Therapy Small Molecules Antisense Recomb DNA Monoclonal Antibodies 1985 Narrow Choices Broader Choices

23. Complexity of the Biotech Industry 2009 -27 Years after 1986- DNA-based computation Bioinformatics (Data management & Data mining) Proteomics-Computational expression analysisdrug design Genetic Novel ProfilingPharmacogenomics chemistries Micro-arrays & nanotechnologies Combinatorial chemistry Biosensors High throughput screening Gene therapy Recombinant DNA technologies Anti-sense RNAi, etc. MAbs& phage display Multiplexed Array of Technologies

26. Knowledge of Training Ingredients?

28. Wouldn’t It Be Nice If It Were This Easy!!

30. Points of Attack of T-ORGs in WF Development “Sector Intermediary Role” -Cities and Counties- Facilitating an increased understanding of the playing field Removing layers of complexity…especially in megacities Circumventing or removing high-walled political bailiwicks Expanding partnering among the technologically-naïve players Encouraging departure from total reliance on triage approaches Demanding sustainability Educating the players on the true costs of training in the 21 st century Embracing CC administrators and engaging them in solutions Catalyzing applied research and manufacturing programs: faculty training Stimulation of specialized training facilities, especially in the megacities Education of T-ORG boards of directors Creating regionally-approved, industry validated layered, stackable certificates Constant education of the research universities Outreach to federal agencies Triage of the DOL

31. Problems Facing T-ORGs -Operating In the Sphere of the DOL, one person’s experiences- Hooray…T-ORGs are recognized as Sector Intermediaries, but...there are DOL focal problems –Little DOL concept of need for sustainability –Little DOL concept of training costs –Entry-level employee predominant focus –Reorientation of Congressional mandates –“Spread the Geld” political mentality –Reviewers: Invaders from Planet X Underdeveloped appreciation of true vs. interpolated WF needs –H1B Training Skills RFP case in point

33. H1B’s in the Biotechnology Industry 2000-2007 6-10% of the biotech WF = 18,000 80% passed through US higher education Degrees: in red, composition of the US biotech WF – 40% PhD (19%) – 35% MS (17%) – 20% BS (50%) – 5% MD – 0% AA/AS/vocEd(14%) 85% acquired permanent residency ($150M) And the role of the DOL is exactly what in addressing this dependency upon foreign nationals?

34. What is/was the DOC Thinking? Is it really making the H1B problem go away…or is there another agenda at work?….

35. Trade Organizations to the Rescue! T-ORG Counties CCDs NSF/NIH DOL City DD State EDD CC District X 1 - Stop Centers X 1 - Stop Centers State CC Office DOE Cos & Non-Profits Counties WIBs Cities WIBs DOC

36. T-ORGs: A Firm Foundation on Which to Coordinate and Facilitate Workforce Development