 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Questions and Answers
|
| Question | What is the significance of this announcement of focused program areas? Does this represent a change of policy for the ATP? |
|---|---|
| Answer | ATP
programs define key technology areas that become the focus of a multiyear,
coordinated effort by the ATP and industry to overcome the major technical
barriers in each program area.
In the four ATP competitions completed to date, project proposals were accepted and considered from any area of technology. This strategy was the most effective approach when the ATP was a relatively small pilot program.
As the ATP expands to a full-scale effort, we need a strategy that retains the emphasis on leadership by the private sector, while realizing the greatest possible benefits for the nation's economy. The ATP works with the private sector to define key technology areas with strong potential for economic benefit, and then focuses resources on those areas through special ATP competitions open only to projects relevant to a particular program. |
| Question | Does this mean the ATP is abandoning the idea of general competitions open to all areas of technology? |
| Answer | No, in fact we are conducting one such general competition now. But a significant share of our funding will be concentrated on program-oriented competitions. |
| Question | How many different programs were considered by the ATP? |
| Answer | The current set of programs was based on over 550 individual proposals, mostly from private industry. Many of the suggested program areas overlapped, of course. The five current programs were developed by combining elements of about 150 different suggestions, further refining the final proposal through a series of 12 public workshops, and consulting with experts from industry, academia, and other federal agencies. The final program proposals were put together by ATP program managers. |
| Question | What are the major areas of emphasis in these programs? |
| Answer | There is a strong focus in these programs on information and manufacturing technologies, reflecting the large number of program suggestions from industry and the importance of these technologies throughout our economy. |
| Question | What were the decisions based on? |
| Answer | Each
program proposal is evaluated against four basic criteria:
In addition to meeting these criteria, a candidate program area must present well-developed plans for both the R&D program and the future business development of the technology after the ATP program is finished. |
| Question | How many different programs is the ATP prepared to undertake at the same time? |
| Answer | This
depends entirely on the level of funding for the ATP. The Clinton
Administration has proposed that the ATP be scaled up over the next
three years to about $750 million per year. At that level, the ATP
would expect to run about 20-24 programs simultaneously.
Since ATP programs have a definite length -- they are not open-ended -- at any given time some programs would be in mid-course, some would be starting up, and some would be winding down. |
| Question | What about other technologies that don't fit these programs? |
| Answer | The development and initiation of new program areas will be a continuous process. However, the future progress of technology can never be forecast with precision. That's why the ATP will continue to hold at least one general competition each year open to projects that don't fall under a current program area. |
| Question | Does industry have a role in charting the course of these programs? |
| Answer | Yes.
ATP research directions always have been driven by industry's priorities,
as evidenced by the project proposals submitted during competitions.
Program-specific competitions restrict proposers to those projects appropriate to the program area, of course, but the programs themselves originate in suggestions from industry. Because industry has a critical role in defining programs and in planning and executing research projects, and must cost-share all projects, the ATP is market-oriented -- administered in a "bottom-up" rather than "top-down" process. |
| Question | Will the ATP fund research at the companies and organizations that originally suggested these five programs? |
| Answer | That depends on whether or not they submit project proposals and on how those proposals fare in the competition. Program-specific competitions under the ATP follow the same procedures as general competitions, including thorough technical and business reviews of the proposals, and ranking against specific selection criteria. Companies that originally suggested the programs still must submit specific project proposals if they wish to be considered for an award. They will receive no preferential treatment. |
| Question | What about programs that were suggested but are not included in this announcement? |
| Answer | The five programs announced today are the best-developed, most promising programs at this time. Others are still in development, including possible programs in construction, environmental technologies, chemicals, electronics, manufacturing, biotechnology, materials, and information technology. We continue to solicit "white papers" from industry proposing other program areas. We envision program development as a continuous process and are working toward an additional set of programs that we hope to announce in November 1994. |
| Question | Why do ATP-funded companies get sole intellectual-property rights to technologies developed with taxpayer assistance? |
| Answer | Bear
in mind that the basic ATP mission is not technology development per
se, but rather economic growth -- to work for the nation's economic
growth and the international competitiveness of its industry by investing
directly in innovative technologies with strong commercial potential.
The ATP does not fund product development. It backs promising but high-risk, enabling technologies that can form the basis for new and improved products, manufacturing processes, and services. It accelerates technologies that, because they are risky, are unlikely to be developed in time to compete in rapidly changing world markets without such a partnership of industry and government.
The selection criteria used to pick ATP projects include the potential of the technology to bring broad economic benefits to a significant portion of industry -- not just a single company. Companies are encouraged to share non- proprietary results and are expected to share results at workshops to be held periodically for each program, but NIST also encourages them to protect intellectual property developed under ATP projects because that increases their incentive to further pursue the technology and develop new products, processes, or services after the completion of the R&D. |
| Question | Some of these program areas seem to involve a great deal of technical risk, such as Component-Based Software, but others, such as Information Infrastructure for Healthcare, seem to involve much less risk. Why? |
| Answer | All of these programs involve significant technical risks overall, otherwise there would be no need for the ATP to get involved. There may be differences between programs that involve only a handful of components, all of which are quite risky, and programs that involve a large number of diverse components that may not be so risky individually. In the latter case, the issue is that the aggregate technical risk of pulling together all the individual components necessary for complete success is quite high, even if some components, on their own, are not particularly chancy. |
| Question | Aren't you duplicating research that already is being pursued by other federal agencies such as NIH or ARPA? |
| Answer | The
program development process includes close cooperation with research
managers in other federal agencies to avoid just such a duplication
of effort. Some ATP programs -- Tools for DNA Diagnostics, for example
-- complement work under way at other agencies but have a distinctly
different emphasis from any current or planned activities.
In fact, a number of program suggestion white papers were forwarded to other agencies, such as ARPA, DOE, NIH, NASA, and the Department of Transportation, because they were closely related to mission-oriented research at those agencies. Where there are complementary R&D programs being supported by both the ATP and other government agencies, the ATP works closely with those agencies to plan and execute its programs. Agencies throughout the government have been very helpful to the ATP in this process. |
| Question | What do you expect to be the short- and long-term effects of these programs on employment? |
| Answer | Economists broadly agree that technology is a key driver for economic growth, which in turn is vital in generating jobs for the economy. The ATP is expected to generate hundreds of thousands of jobs in the long-term, once the underlying technologies developed by companies with ATP support are brought to the market as commercial products. In addition to the jobs that would result directly from the ATP-supported technologies, a multiplier effect would be felt throughout the economy. For example, each manufacturing job typically can expect to yield an additional four to five jobs. We have not tried to estimate the specific job-generation prospects for each of these programs being announced today, recognizing that the largest payoff in terms of jobs will occur down the road and depends heavily on full commercial deployment of these technologies by U.S. companies. |
Date created: August
1994
Last updated:
April 12, 2005
 |
ATP
website comments: webmaster-atp@nist.gov
/ Technical ATP inquiries: InfoCoord.ATP@nist.gov NIST is an agency of the U.S. Commerce Department Privacy policy / Security Notice / Accessibility Statement / Disclaimer / Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) / No Fear Act Policy / NIST Information Quallity Standards / ExpectMore.gov (performance of federal programs) |
 |