1. Arlen D Meyers, MD, MBA University of Colorado School of Medicine Founding President and CEO, www.sopenet.org

2. Biomedical and health professionals don’t have the education, experience, networks or money to get their ideas to markets or patients.

3. Culture celebrating innovation and entrepreneurship Structure and connectedness outside of the bureaucracy Process and metrics that reward success Innovators THERE ARE VERY FEW ENTREPRENEURIAL UNIVERSITIES THAT PROVIDE THEM

4. The Society of Physician Entrepreneurs (www.s0penet.org) and linkedin group, is a NFP global biomedical and healthcare innovation network. Members include healthcare entrepreneurs, investors, service providers, and industry representativeswww.s0penet.org

5. The mission of SoPE is to help biomedical and healthcare entrepreneurs get their ideas, discoveries and inventions to market by providing them with education, connections to service providers and investors and offering value added products and services.

6. Education Experience Mentors Connections to service providers and investors

7. 4000 global members Over 20 international chapters ongoing or in development Multiple communications platforms Multiple strategic alliances

8. 1. Innovation has shifted to the community 2. Collaborative online innovation networks are an effective way to create innovation 3. Biomedical and health innovation drives local economic development 4. Physicians are from Mars and scientists/engineers are from Venus 5. Bioentrepreneurship education programs come in lots of flavors and reflect the local innovation hub strengths

9. CU Program in Bioinnovation and Entrepreneurship 9 credit Certificate Program Collaboration between medical campus and B-School Graduate students in science, business, engineering, law and health professions Designed for those seeking non-academic careers or trying to get an idea, invention or discovery to market Includes mentors, experiential learning and connections to local innovation ecosystem

10. Student Perceptions of the CU Program in Bioinnovation and Entrepreneurship Arlen D Meyers, MD, MBA and Jeffrey Proctor University of Colorado School of Medicine (ADM) and Evaluation Center (JP) BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION The CU Certificate Program in Bioinnovation and Entrepreneurship is a novel, jointly sponsored program offered by the Graduate School at the Anschutz Medical Campus and the Bard Center for Entrepreneurship at the CU Business School at the Downtown Campus. http://www.ucdenver.edu/academics/colleges/Graduate-School/academic- programs/Pages/bioentr.aspx We sampled students who completed IDPT 7301, “Building Biotechnologies”,as part of a summative assessment of the course. MATERIALS AND METHODS The Evaluation Center created an online evaluation instrument that addressed the following questions: 1. From respondents’ perspectives, did the course satisfy the learning objectives? 2. Why did respondents choose the course? 3. Do respondents feel better prepared to work with industry as a result of taking the course? 4. Do respondents feel the course helped them prepare for a job in industry? 5. Do respondents feel this course motivated them to create their own company? 6. How do respondents rate on “predisposition for entrepreneurship” scales (as a possible predictor of bio-entrepreneurial success)? RESULTS The survey was sent out via email on the last day of the course, May 16, 2012. Reminders were sent periodically and the survey remained open until June 6, 2012 at which time the survey was closed and responses were summarized. In total, responses were received from 10 of 15 (66.7%) students in the class. When asked if the course increased their understanding of bio-entrepreneurship, all respondents (100%) strongly agreed that it did. Similarly, all of the respondents (100%) indicated that they would recommend the course to others. The survey asked respondents to indicate how prepared they felt they were to pursue a career in bio-entrepreneurship prior to taking the course. Only 50% of respondents felt they were ready to work for industry as an employee, while only 20% felt they were ready to work with industry as a consultant, and were prepared to navigate the commercialization process. Upon completion of the course however, the majority of students indicated they were ready to work for industry as an employee (80%, +30%), work with industry as a consultant (70%, +50%), and were prepared to navigate the commercialization process (100%, +80%). Students frequently commented that the things they appreciated most about the course were the teaching style that Dr. Meyers implemented, the topics of the course, and the augmentation of course concepts through the use of guest speakers. Students frequently commented that they were enthusiastic about using the knowledge they gained through the course to start their own businesses (n=3) or in their current or future employment settings (n=3). Respondents were asked what motivated them to take the course. Responses varied, however some of the most illustrative reasons included: “My interest to expand knowledge beyond science and have a more direct impact on healthcare at the consumer level as opposed to the bench.” “Science + Business = a great idea. This program has potential for real world application of business topics covered by MBA course work.” “My interest in the subject matter that was going to be taught and my desire to work in the private sector in some capacity in the future, I want to obtain a PhD but don't want to stay in academia forever so this course taught me about how to do that, that is what motivated me to take it. When asked what about the course could be improved there was a great deal of variance in the responses. Some respondents felt the course was great the way it is, while others indicated they would benefit from changes to the format of the course, possibly splitting drugs and devices into separate courses, or implementing a hybrid course format rather than completely in person. For a complete list of responses see question 5 of the appendix. The majority of students indicated there were not additional topics that they wished were covered, however, two respondents did indicate that they would have benefitted from more information on intellectual property rights. The backgrounds and future aspirations of students who completed the course were diverse. Some indicated they planned to start their own life science company (60%) while others were still undecided. When asked where they saw themselves working in five years, all of the respondents to the question (n=7) indicated they planned to be working in healthcare or bio-innovation in some capacity. SUMMARY The responses of course participants indicated that overall satisfaction with the course is very high. Results also indicate that the goals and needs of students are being met or exceeded.

11. The survey asked respondents to indicate how prepared they felt they were to pursue a career in bio-entrepreneurship prior to taking the course. Only 50% of respondents felt they were ready to work for industry as an employee, while only 20% felt they were ready to work with industry as a consultant, and were prepared to navigate the commercialization process. Upon completion of the course however, the majority of students indicated they were ready to work for industry as an employee (80%, +30%), work with industry as a consultant (70%, +50%), and were prepared to navigate the commercialization process (100%, +80%).

12. Arlen Meyers, MD, MBA ceo@sopenet.net Journal of Commercial Biotechnology at http://www.commercialbiotechnology.com CU Program in Bioinnovation and Entrepreneurship