1. Ohio Research and Technology Support Programs Garrison Walters and Harry Andrist Ohio Board of Regents August 14, 2003

2. State of Ohio Funding for Higher Education Cost-based, FTE-based subsidy system was developed 40 years ago to support an expanding higher education system  Doctoral subsidy is now on a modified block grant funding formula Research support programs are funded as separate general revenue fund and capital line items administered by the Ohio Board of Regents

3. State of Ohio Research Support Program Objectives To enhance the ability of individual universities to secure sponsored program support dollars, especially from federal agencies and Ohio industry To foster effective research collaboration within an overall statewide strategic viewpoint To develop high-end, high-performance computing and networking infrastructure needed to enable a broadly based community of academic and industrial scientists to work effectively at the frontiers of research To promote economic growth derived from the transfer of technology to Ohio businesses and industries

4. Guiding Principles 1.Research is a critical investment in the future of the State of Ohio. 2.The integration of research and education is vital because learning to do research is the primary mechanism for developing the next generation of scientists and engineers. 3.Excellence is promoted when research investments are made based strictly upon the results of a merit-based, disinterested peer review of proposals.

5. Research Support Programs Administered by the Ohio Board of Regents Research Challenge…………….….$18 million per year Hayes Investment Fund (capital)……$7 million per year Action Fund (capital)………………..$3 million per year Ohio Eminent Scholars……………..$2-5 million per biennium Eminent Scholar Capital Grants……$2-3 million per biennium =============================================== Ohio Supercomputer Center………...$5 million per year Computer Science Enhancement……$4 million per year

6. 1983: How can Ohio (#7 in GSP) become a national model for stimulating local economic growth through research and development? How can Ohio’s universities lead this effort? High-Quality R&D Personnel => Eminent Scholars Research Competitiveness => Research Challenge Research Infrastructure => Action & Investment Fund Commercialization Connection => Third Frontier Project Genesis of Ohio’s Research Support Programs

7. Ohio Eminent Scholars Program Started in 1983 to provide endowed faculty chair positions in outstanding academic departments and to enhance existing research excellence and academic quality for selected programs.. Each of 15 participating institutions of higher education is eligible to submit proposals in response to periodic RFPs. Awards are recommended by a panel of experts in the disciplines who live and work outside of the State of Ohio.

8. Ohio Eminent Scholars Program: Funding and Program Evaluation $5.2 million in FY 2000-01 plus $2.75 million in OES capital grants for a total of $7.95 million; $3 million in FY 2002-03; and $1.46 million in FY 2004-05.

9. Research Challenge Program Created in 1985 as the Regents’ first performance-based challenge fund with the objective of reinforcing academic research competitiveness. Provides research infrastructure funding in proportion to each institution’s level of external research support in the previous biennium. Each of 15 participating institutions of higher education submits a report on external funding claims and a research investment plan for the resulting State funding. Awards are made by Regents’ staff in consultation with university research officers.

10. Research Challenge Program: Funding and Program Evaluation $18 million per year plus long-term leverage of federal and industrial support of greater than 10:1 in each fiscal year (>12:1 in FY 2000-01).

11. Established in 1990 to provide State matching funds for laboratory renovation/construction and major research instrumentation proposals to federal agencies. Provides research infrastructure funding to those Ohio universities, and their participating industrial partners, who are successful in attracting federal research funding. Each of 15 participating institutions of higher education are eligible to submit proposals prior to submission for peer review by federal agencies, whose funding decisions determine which Action Fund commitments are funded. Action Fund

12. $6-13 million per funding cycle plus long-term leverage of federal and local support of greater than 5:1 (7.5:1 in FY 1999-00). Action and Investment Fund combined budget is $20 million per capital biennium. Total investment is in excess of $39 million. Most recent external evaluation: December, 1997 by an external panel. Action Fund: Funding and Program Evaluation

13. Hayes Investment Fund Created in 1990 to enhance academic research infrastructure through State funding of laboratory renovation/construction and major research instruments. Provides research infrastructure capital funding to active research consortia involving both universities and industry. Each of 15 participating institutions of higher education are eligible to submit proposals in response to periodic RFPs. Awards are recommended by a panel of experts in the disciplines who live and work outside of the State of Ohio.

14. $7-14 million per funding cycle plus significant leverage of federal and local support. Action and Investment Fund combined budget has been $20 million per capital biennium. Total investment is $95 million. Most recent external evaluation: December, 1997 by an external panel. Hayes Investment Fund Program: Funding and Program Evaluation

15. The 3 rd Frontier Project: Ohio’s 10-Year $6 Billion Investment in High-Tech, High-Wage Jobs Regents’ Ohio Plan => Governor’s 3 rd Frontier Project

16. Currently Committed TFP Programs: $500 million/ 10 years Third Frontier Technology Action Fund = $150 Million:  Focus: early stage capital for start-up, early stage growth companies, and commercializing technologies including fuel cell technologies Biomedical Research & Technology Transfer Trust Fund Partnership Awards = $350 Million:  Focus: large collaborative projects intended to improve health, increase jobs, and business opportunities

17. Capital Funding: $500 million/ 10 years Wright Centers of Innovation:  Facilities for research, technology development, and commercialization  Currently committed funds = $100 million

18. Program Operational Funding: $500 million/ 10 years Ballot Initiative on November 4, 2003  Proceeds will be used to increase applied research and technology commercialization with new endowing chairs, attracting world- class research teams, and supporting activities to develop and bring innovative products to the market

19. Innovation Ohio Fund: $100 million/ 10 years Create incentive financing Provide loans from $0.25 - 5 million New product development Fund fixed assets Currently committed funds = $50 million

20. The Current Technology Commercialization Environment Ohio is not yet known as a technology-intensive state. Ohio ranks below the national average in total high-technology workforce. Ohio’s traditional manufacturing sectors are moving slowly toward product innovation. New technology-based business formation rates are low. Source: 2002 Battelle Report

21. Ohio’s Core Research and Technology Strengths Advanced Materials Biosciences Instruments, Controls, and Sensors as well as Advanced Manufacturing Technologies Power and Propulsion Information Technology Source: 2002 Battelle Report

22. The Advantage of Industry- University Strategic Partnerships “Fast-growth companies that utilize university resources are 59% more productive than their peers. They also have 21% higher annual revenues, and 23% higher capital investments. Private and public collaboration provides many of these companies a strategic advantage.” - Coopers & Lybrand

23. University Technology Transfer Outcomes for Ohio Invention disclosures = #6 Number of patent applications = #10 Total patents issued = #1 Technology licenses executed = #17 License income collected by universities = #16 Business start-ups from university research = #7 FY 2001 data provided by the Association of University Technology Managers have been normalized on the basis of R&D expenditures and then averaged for all universities in each state.

24. Ohio Lags the Region and the National Average in Per Capita R&D

25. Ohio Gains the Most R&D Jobs in the Region if R&D Performance Increased to US Average

27. Research Support Program Results since FY 1986 The Ohio Board of Regents’ Research Challenge Program has leveraged total R&D support at a ratio in excess of 10 to 1 in each fiscal year. The Ohio Board of Regents’ Action Fund has leveraged total R&D support at a ratio in excess of 5 to 1 in each fiscal year.

28. Current Challenges Funding for academic research infrastructure has not kept pace with rapidly changing technology, expanding research opportunities, and increasing numbers of users. Computational science technologies have enabled the development of many new science and engineering tools as well as made others more powerful, remotely usable, and connectable.  The new tools make researchers more productive and able to do more complex and different tasks than they could in the past—need to make the technology pervasive. Increasing numbers of researchers need to be connected, remotely and on-site, to a sophisticated array of facilities, instruments, databases, technical literature, and real-time experimental data. There is an urgent need to increase state investments to provide access for scientists and engineers to the latest and best scientific instrumentation and computational tools, as well as to update the infrastructure currently in place.

29. A Key Activity Third Frontier Network provides the infrastructure for major breakthroughs –Ready to light 1,600 miles of “dark fiber” in the fall of 2003 –Unparalleled capacity and quality of service at a lower cost –Will expand rapidly from original university/ federal lab core to two-year campuses and private colleges –Will provide pervasive access to leading-edge computation and visualization as well as shared instrumentation. –Pilot project on high definition video conferencing is under way –Will realize original goal of having a researcher in Athens (Ohio University) and Cleveland (Case Western Reserve) able to work together as if their laboratories were next door to each other.

30. Keys to Continued Progress Close alignment of Ohio science and technology programs promises to deliver a coherent statewide strategy for maximum effectiveness  Collaboration within a strategic view  Proper mix of competition and collaboration will continue to foster excellence