Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: EXACT: "Schacht, Wendy H." in: author
Clear all search criteria
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
Federal R&D, Drug Discovery, and Pricing: Insights from the NIH-University-Industry Relationship [June 10, 2011]
From the Summary: "Public interest in approaches that might provide prescription drugs at lower cost, particularly for the elderly, has rekindled discussion over the role the federal government plays in facilitating the creation of new pharmaceuticals for the marketplace. In the current debate, some argue that the government's financial, scientific, and/or clinical support of health-related research and development (R&D) entitles the public to commensurate considerations in the prices charged for any resulting drugs. Others view government intervention in price decisions based upon initial federal funding as contrary to a long-term trend of government promotion of innovation, technological advancement, and the commercialization of technology by the business community leading to new products and processes for the marketplace. […] The particular nature and expense of health-related R&D have focused attention on the manner in which the National Institutes of Health (NIH) undertakes research activities. Critics maintain that any need for technology development incentives in the pharmaceutical and/or biotechnology sectors is mitigated by industry access to government-supported work at no cost, monopoly power through patent protection, and additional regulatory and tax advantages such as those conveyed through the Hatch-Waxman Act, the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act, and the Orphan Drug Act. Supporters of the existing approach argue that these incentives are precisely what are required and have given rise to robust pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries. It remains to be seen whether or not decisions related to federal involvement in issues related to pharmaceutical R&D will change the nature of the current approach to governmentindustry- university cooperation."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2011-06-10
-
Technology Innovation Program [March 2, 2009]
"The Technology Innovation Program (TIP) at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was established in 2007 to replace the Advanced Technology Program (ATP). This effort is designed 'to support, promote, and accelerate innovation in the United States through highrisk, high-reward research in areas of critical national need,' according to the authorizing legislation. Grants are provided to small and medium-sized firms for individual projects or joint ventures with other research organizations. While similar to the Advanced Technology Program in the promotion of R&D that is expected to be of broad-based economic benefit to the nation, TIP appears to have been structured to avoid what was seen as government funding of large firms that opponents argued did not necessarily need federal support for research. The committee report to accompany H.R. 1868, part of which was incorporated into the final legislation, stated that TIP replaces ATP in consideration of a changing global innovation environment focusing on small and medium-sized companies. The design of the program also 'acknowledges the important role universities play in the innovation cycle by allowing universities to fully participate in the program.'"
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2009-03-02
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [Updated April 1, 2005]
"The government spends approximately one third of its annual research and development budget1 for intramural R&D to meet mission requirements in over 700 government laboratories (including Federally Funded Research and Development Centers). The technology and expertise generated by this endeavor may have application beyond the immediate goals or intent of federally funded R&D. These applications can result from technology transfer, a process by which technology developed in one organization, in one area, or for one purpose is applied in another organization, in another area, or for another purpose. It is a way for the results of the federal R&D enterprise to be used to meet other national needs, including the economic growth that flows from new commercialization in the private sector; the government's requirements for products and processes to operate effectively and efficiently; and the demand for increased goods and services at the state and local level. Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them. At the same time, State governments are increasingly involved in the process. At issue is whether incentives for technology transfer remain necessary, if additional legislative initiatives are needed to encourage increased technology transfer, or if the responsibility to use the available resources now rests with the private sector."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2005-04-01
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [Updated April 24, 2007]
"The federal government spends approximately one third of its annual research and development budget1 for intramural R&D to meet mission requirements in over 700 government laboratories (including Federally Funded Research and Development Centers). The technology and expertise generated by this endeavor may have application beyond the immediate goals or intent of federally funded R&D. These applications can result from technology transfer, a process by which technology developed in one organization, in one area, or for one purpose is applied in another organization, in another area, or for another purpose. It is a way for the results of the federal R&D enterprise to be used to meet other national needs, including the economic growth that flows from new commercialization in the private sector; the government's requirements for products and processes to operate effectively and efficiently; and the demand for increased goods and services at the state and local level. Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them. At the same time, State governments are increasingly involved in the process. At issue is whether incentives for technology transfer remain necessary, if additional legislative initiatives are needed to encourage increased technology transfer, or if the responsibility to use the available resources now rests with the private sector."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2007-04-24
-
Technology Innovation Program [June 29, 2009]
"The Technology Innovation Program (TIP) at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was established in 2007 to replace the Advanced Technology Program (ATP). This effort is designed 'to support, promote, and accelerate innovation in the United States through highrisk, high-reward research in areas of critical national need,' according to the authorizing legislation. Grants are provided to small and medium-sized firms for individual projects or joint ventures with other research organizations. While similar to the Advanced Technology Program in the promotion of R&D that is expected to be of broad-based economic benefit to the nation, TIP appears to have been structured to avoid what was seen as government funding of large firms that opponents argued did not necessarily need federal support for research. The committee report to accompany H.R. 1868, part of which was incorporated into the final legislation, stated that TIP replaces ATP in consideration of a changing global innovation environment focusing on small and medium-sized companies. The design of the program also 'acknowledges the important role universities play in the innovation cycle by allowing universities to fully participate in the program.'"
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2009-06-29
-
Technology Innovation Program [December 8, 2011]
"The Technology Innovation Program (TIP) at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was established in 2007 to replace the Advanced Technology Program (ATP). This effort was designed 'to support, promote, and accelerate innovation in the United States through highrisk, high-reward research in areas of critical national need,' according to the authorizing legislation. Grants were provided to small and medium-sized firms for individual projects or joint ventures with other research organizations. While similar to the Advanced Technology Program in the promotion of R&D [research and development] that is expected to be of broad-based economic benefit to the nation, TIP appeared to have been structured to avoid what was seen as government funding of large firms that opponents argued did not necessarily need federal support for research. The committee report to accompany H.R. 1868, part of which was incorporated into the final legislation, stated that TIP replaces ATP in consideration of a changing global innovation environment focusing on small and medium-sized companies. […] Mechanisms that enhance the market's opportunities and abilities to make such choices are preferred. It is suggested that agency discretion in selecting one technology over another can lead to political intrusion and industry dependency. On the other hand, supporters of direct methods argue that it is important to focus on those technologies that have the greatest promise as determined by industry and supported by matching funds from the private sector. They assert that the government can serve as a catalyst for cooperation. As the Congress makes appropriation decisions, the discussion may serve to redefine thinking about governmental efforts in facilitating technological advancement in the private sector."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2011-12-08
-
Technology Innovation Program [August 17, 2011]
"The Technology Innovation Program (TIP) at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was established in 2007 to replace the Advanced Technology Program (ATP). This effort is designed 'to support, promote, and accelerate innovation in the United States through highrisk, high-reward research in areas of critical national need,' according to the authorizing legislation. Grants are provided to small and medium-sized firms for individual projects or joint ventures with other research organizations. […] The elimination of ATP and the creation of TIP have renewed the debate over the role of the federal government in promoting commercial technology development. In arguing for less direct federal involvement, advocates of this approach believe that the market is superior to government in deciding technologies worthy of investment. Mechanisms that enhance the market's opportunities and abilities to make such choices are preferred. It is suggested that agency discretion in selecting one technology over another can lead to political intrusion and industry dependency. On the other hand, supporters of direct methods argue that it is important to focus on those technologies that have the greatest promise as determined by industry and supported by matching funds from the private sector. They assert that the government can serve as a catalyst for cooperation. As the Congress makes appropriation decisions, the discussion may serve to redefine thinking about governmental efforts in facilitating technological advancement in the private sector."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2011-08-17
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [December 5, 2011]
"The federal government spends approximately one third of its annual research and development (R&D) budget for intramural work to meet mission requirements in over 700 government laboratories (including Federally Funded Research and Development Centers). The technology and expertise generated by this endeavor may have application beyond the immediate goals or intent of federally funded R&D. These applications can result from technology transfer, a process by which technology developed in one organization, in one area, or for one purpose is applied in another organization, in another area, or for another purpose. It is a way for the results of the federal R&D enterprise to be used to meet other national needs, including the economic growth that flows from new commercialization in the private sector; the government's requirements for products and processes to operate effectively and efficiently; and the demand for increased goods and services at the state and local level. Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them. At the same time, State governments are increasingly involved in the process. At issue is whether incentives for technology transfer remain necessary, if additional legislative initiatives are needed to encourage increased technology transfer, or if the responsibility to use the available resources now rests with the private sector."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2011-12-05
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [December 3, 2012]
"The federal government spends approximately one-third of its annual research and development (R&D) budget for intramural work to meet mission requirements in over 700 government laboratories (including Federally Funded Research and Development Centers). The technology and expertise generated by this endeavor may have application beyond the immediate goals or intent of federally funded R&D. These applications can result from technology transfer, a process by which technology developed in one organization, in one area, or for one purpose is applied in another organization, in another area, or for another purpose. It is a way for the results of the federal R&D enterprise to be used to meet other national needs, including the economic growth that flows from new commercialization in the private sector; the government's requirements for products and processes to operate effectively and efficiently; and the demand for increased goods and services at the state and local level. Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them. At the same time, state governments are increasingly involved in the process. At issue is whether incentives for technology transfer remain necessary, if additional legislative initiatives are needed to encourage increased technology transfer, or if the responsibility to use the available resources now rests with the private sector."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2012-12-03
-
Technology Innovation Program [June 14, 2010]
"The Technology Innovation Program (TIP) at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was established in 2007 to replace the Advanced Technology Program (ATP). This effort is designed 'to support, promote, and accelerate innovation in the United States through highrisk, high-reward research in areas of critical national need,' according to the authorizing legislation. Grants are provided to small and medium-sized firms for individual projects or joint ventures with other research organizations. While similar to the Advanced Technology Program in the promotion of R&D that is expected to be of broad-based economic benefit to the nation, TIP appears to have been structured to avoid what was seen as government funding of large firms that opponents argued did not necessarily need federal support for research. The committee report to accompany H.R. 1868, part of which was incorporated into the final legislation, stated that TIP replaces ATP in consideration of a changing global innovation environment focusing on small and medium-sized companies. The design of the program also 'acknowledges the important role universities play in the innovation cycle by allowing universities to fully participate in the program.'"
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2010-06-14
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [Updated August 25, 2008]
This CRS report discusses the use of federally funded research and development. "Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them. At the same time, State governments are increasingly involved in the process. At issue is whether incentives for technology transfer remain necessary, if additional legislative initiatives are needed to encourage increased technology transfer, or if the responsibility to use the available resources now rests with the private sector."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2008-08-25
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [Updated March 19, 2007]
"The federal government spends approximately one third of its annual research and development budget1 for intramural R&D to meet mission requirements in over 700 government laboratories (including Federally Funded Research and Development Centers). The technology and expertise generated by this endeavor may have application beyond the immediate goals or intent of federally funded R&D. These applications can result from technology transfer, a process by which technology developed in one organization, in one area, or for one purpose is applied in another organization, in another area, or for another purpose. It is a way for the results of the federal R&D enterprise to be used to meet other national needs, including the economic growth that flows from new commercialization in the private sector; the government's requirements for products and processes to operate effectively and efficiently; and the demand for increased goods and services at the state and local level. Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them. At the same time, State governments are increasingly involved in the process. At issue is whether incentives for technology transfer remain necessary, if additional legislative initiatives are needed to encourage increased technology transfer, or if the responsibility to use the available resources now rests with the private sector."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2007-03-19
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [Updated February 20, 2007]
"The federal government spends approximately one third of its annual research and development budget1 for intramural R&D to meet mission requirements in over 700 government laboratories. The technology and expertise generated by this endeavor may have application beyond the immediate goals or intent of federally funded R&D. These applications can result from technology transfer, a process by which technology developed in one organization, in one area, or for one purpose is applied in another organization, in another area, or for another purpose. Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them. At the same time, State governments are increasingly involved in the process. At issue is whether incentives for technology transfer remain necessary, if additional legislative initiatives are needed to encourage increased technology transfer, or if the responsibility to use the available resources now rests with the private sector."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2007-02-20
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [February 10, 2006]
"The government spends approximately one third of the $83 billion federal R&D budget for intramural research and development to meet mission requirements in over 700 government laboratories (including Federally Funded Research and Development Centers). The technology and expertise generated by this endeavor may have application beyond the immediate goals or intent of federally funded R&D. This can be achieved by technology transfer, a process by which technology developed in one organization, in one area, or for one purpose is applied in another organization, in another area, or for another purpose. It is a way for the results of the federal R&D enterprise to be used to meet other national needs, including the economic growth that flows from new commercialization in the private sector; the government's requirements for products and processes to operate effectively and efficiently; and the demand for increased goods and services at the state and local level. Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them. At the same time, State governments are increasingly involved in the process. At issue is whether incentives for technology transfer remain necessary, if additional legislative initiatives are needed to encourage increased technology transfer, or if the responsibility to use the available resources now rests with the private sector."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2006-02-10
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [November 5, 2009]
"The federal government spends approximately one third of its annual research and development [R&D] budget for intramural R&D to meet mission requirements in over 700 government laboratories (including Federally Funded Research and Development Centers). The technology and expertise generated by this endeavor may have application beyond the immediate goals or intent of federally funded R&D. These applications can result from technology transfer, a process by which technology developed in one organization, in one area, or for one purpose is applied in another organization, in another area, or for another purpose. [...] Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them. At the same time, State governments are increasingly involved in the process. At issue is whether incentives for technology transfer remain necessary, if additional legislative initiatives are needed to encourage increased technology transfer, or if the responsibility to use the available resources now rests with the private sector."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2009-11-05
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [Updated November 6, 2007]
"The federal government spends approximately one third of its annual research and development budget1 for intramural R&D to meet mission requirements in over 700 government laboratories (including Federally Funded Research and Development Centers). The technology and expertise generated by this endeavor may have application beyond the immediate goals or intent of federally funded R&D. These applications can result from technology transfer, a process by which technology developed in one organization, in one area, or for one purpose is applied in another organization, in another area, or for another purpose. It is a way for the results of the federal R&D enterprise to be used to meet other national needs, including the economic growth that flows from new commercialization in the private sector; the government's requirements for products and processes to operate effectively and efficiently; and the demand for increased goods and services at the state and local level. Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them. At the same time, State governments are increasingly involved in the process."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2007-11-06
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [March 2, 2009]
This CRS report discusses the use of federally funded research and development. "Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them. At the same time, State governments are increasingly involved in the process. At issue is whether incentives for technology transfer remain necessary, if additional legislative initiatives are needed to encourage increased technology transfer, or if the responsibility to use the available resources now rests with the private sector."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2009-03-02
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [July 7, 2006]
"The federal government spends approximately one third of its annual research and development budget1 for intramural R&D to meet mission requirements in over 700 government laboratories (including Federally Funded Research and Development Centers). The technology and expertise generated by this endeavor may have application beyond the immediate goals or intent of federally funded R&D. These applications can result from technology transfer, a process by which technology developed in one organization, in one area, or for one purpose is applied in another organization, in another area, or for another purpose. It is a way for the results of the federal R&D enterprise to be used to meet other national needs, including the economic growth that flows from new commercialization in the private sector; the government's requirements for products and processes to operate effectively and efficiently; and the demand for increased goods and services at the state and local level. Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2006-07-07
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [Updated May 30, 2006]
"The government spends approximately one third of the $83 billion federal R&D budget for intramural research and development to meet mission requirements in over 700 government laboratories (including Federally Funded Research and Development Centers). The technology and expertise generated by this endeavor may have application beyond the immediate goals or intent of federally funded R&D. This can be achieved by technology transfer, a process by which technology developed in one organization, in one area, or for one purpose is applied in another organization, in another area, or for another purpose. It is a way for the results of the federal R&D enterprise to be used to meet other national needs, including the economic growth that flows from new commercialization in the private sector; the government's requirements for products and processes to operate effectively and efficiently; and the demand for increased goods and services at the state and local level."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2006-05-30
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [Updated May 23, 2007]
"Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them. At the same time, State governments are increasingly involved in the process. At issue is whether incentives for technology transfer remain necessary, if additional legislative initiatives are needed to encourage increased technology transfer, or if the responsibility to use the available resources now rests with the private sector."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2007-05-23
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [Updated December 11, 2006]
"The federal government spends approximately one third of its annual research and development budget1 for intramural R&D to meet mission requirements in over 700 government laboratories. The technology and expertise generated by this endeavor may have application beyond the immediate goals or intent of federally funded R&D. These applications can result from technology transfer, a process by which technology developed in one organization, in one area, or for one purpose is applied in another organization, in another area, or for another purpose. Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them. At the same time, State governments are increasingly involved in the process. At issue is whether incentives for technology transfer remain necessary, if additional legislative initiatives are needed to encourage increased technology transfer, or if the responsibility to use the available resources now rests with the private sector. "
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2006-12-11
-
Technology Transfer: Use of Federally Funded Research and Development [Updated August 3, 2006]
"The federal government spends approximately one third of its annual research and development budget1 for intramural R&D to meet mission requirements in over 700 government laboratories (including Federally Funded Research and Development Centers). The technology and expertise generated by this endeavor may have application beyond the immediate goals or intent of federally funded R&D. These applications can result from technology transfer, a process by which technology developed in one organization, in one area, or for one purpose is applied in another organization, in another area, or for another purpose. It is a way for the results of the federal R&D enterprise to be used to meet other national needs, including the economic growth that flows from new commercialization in the private sector; the government's requirements for products and processes to operate effectively and efficiently; and the demand for increased goods and services at the state and local level. Congress has established a system to facilitate the transfer of technology to the private sector and to state and local governments. Despite this, use of federal R&D results has remained restrained, although there has been a significant increase in private sector interest and activities over the past several years. Critics argue that working with the agencies and laboratories continues to be difficult and time-consuming. Proponents of the current effort assert that while the laboratories are open to interested parties, the industrial community is making little effort to use them. At the same time, State governments are increasingly involved in the process. At issue is whether incentives for technology transfer remain necessary, if additional legislative initiatives are needed to encourage increased technology transfer, or if the responsibility to use the available resources now rests with the private sector."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2006-08-03
-
National Institute of Standards and Technology: An Overview [Updated November 28, 2005]
"The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has a mandate to increase the competitiveness of U.S. companies. NIST research also provides the measurement, calibration, and quality assurance techniques that underpin U.S. commerce. Congressional debate has focused on the merits of NISTs external R&D programs directed toward increased private sector commercialization, including the Advanced Technology Program (ATP) and the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP). The level of funding for internal research efforts has also come under scrutiny by the Congress. P.L. 108-447, the FY2005 Omnibus Appropriations Act, provided NIST with $695.3 million (after mandated rescissions), an increase of 14% over the earlier fiscal year. For FY2006, the Administrations budget proposed funding NIST at $532 million, a 23% decrease from the previous fiscal year due primarily to an absence of support for ATP and a significant cut in financing for MEP. H.R. 2862, the FY2006 Science, State, Justice, and Commerce appropriations bill as originally passed by the House, provided $548.7 million to NIST and had no funding for ATP. The version of H.R. 2862 initially passed by the Senate funded NIST at $844.5 million and included increased support for ATP and laboratory construction. The final FY2006 appropriation in P.L. 109-108 provides $761.8 million for NIST, an increase of 9% over FY2005 (before a mandated 0.28% rescission)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2005-11-28
-
National Institute of Standards and Technology: An Overview [Updated February 16,2007]
"The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has a mandate to increase the competitiveness of U.S. firms and provide the measurement, calibration, and quality assurance techniques that underpin U.S. commerce. Congressional debate has focused on the merits of NIST's external R&D programs directed toward increased private sector commercialization, including the Advanced Technology Program (ATP) and the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP). The level of funding for internal research efforts has also been scrutinized by Congress. FY2006 appropriations legislation provided $752 million for NIST, an increase of 8.2% over FY2005 (after mandated rescissions) and financed ATP, although at a reduced rate, despite the President's budget and the original House-passed bill that included no support for the program. While no final FY2007 appropriations legislation was enacted during the 109th Congress, a series of continuing resolutions financed NIST at FY2006 levels through February 15, 2007. In the current Congress, P.L. 110-5 provides NIST with $675 million for FY2007. The President's FY2008 budget request for NIST totals $640.7 million and includes a significant cut in support for MEP and no funding for ATP. This report will be updated as events warrant."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2007-02-16
-
Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program: An Overview [October 3, 2012]
"The Hollings Manufacturing Partnership (MEP) is a program of regional centers that assist smaller, U.S.-based manufacturing companies in identifying and adopting new technologies. Operating under the auspices of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), centers in all 50 states and Puerto Rico provide technical and managerial assistance to firms. Federal funding is matched by non-federal sources. Existing resources in government, business, and academia are leveraged while the program endeavors to build on current state and local activities and industrial extension efforts. The MEP program has, at times, been included in the discussion surrounding termination of government programs that provide direct federal support for industry. Questions have been raised in congressional debate as to the appropriateness of government funding for this program when the technologies are available in the marketplace. Instead of the government picking 'winners and losers,' opponents argue, the marketplace should make decisions regarding firms worthy of investment. However, proponents of the program stress that, to date, no direct funding is available to companies through MEP and that assistance is technical, scientific, and/or managerial. The centers facilitate the adoption of new technologies that foster competition and promote innovation. As Congress continues to make appropriation decisions, support for manufacturing extension may be discussed in the context of the role of the federal government in facilitating research and technological advancement."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2012-10-03
-
Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program: An Overview [June 19, 2013]
"The Hollings Manufacturing Partnership (MEP) is a program of regional centers that assist smaller, U.S.-based manufacturing companies in identifying and adopting new technologies. Operating under the auspices of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), centers in all 50 states and Puerto Rico provide technical and managerial assistance to firms. Federal funding is matched by non-federal sources. Existing resources in government, business, and academia are leveraged while the program endeavors to build on current state and local activities and industrial extension efforts. The MEP program has, at times, been included in the discussion surrounding termination of government programs that provide direct federal support for industry. Questions have been raised in congressional debate as to the appropriateness of government funding for this program when the technologies are available in the marketplace. Instead of the government picking 'winners and losers,' opponents argue, the marketplace should make decisions regarding firms worthy of investment. However, proponents of the program stress that, to date, no direct funding is available to companies through MEP and that assistance is technical, scientific, and/or managerial. The centers facilitate the adoption of new technologies that foster competition and promote innovation. As Congress continues to make appropriation decisions, support for manufacturing extension may be discussed in the context of the role of the federal government in facilitating research and technological advancement."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2013-06-19
-
Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program: An Overview [March 24, 2009]
"The Hollings Manufacturing Partnership (MEP) is a program of regional centers to assist small and medium-sized manufacturing companies use knowledge and technologies developed under the auspices of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).[...] The MEP program has, at times, been included in the discussion surrounding termination of government programs that provide direct federal support for industry. Questions have been raised in congressional debate as to the appropriateness of government funding for this program when the technologies are available in the marketplace. Instead of the government picking 'winners and losers,' opponents argue, the marketplace should make decisions regarding firms worthy of investment. However, proponents of the program stress that no direct funding is available to companies through MEP and that assistance is technical, scientific, and/or managerial. The Centers facilitate the adoption of new technologies that foster competition and promote innovation. As the 111th Congress makes budget decisions, support for manufacturing extension may be discussed in the context of the role of the federal government in facilitating research and technological advancement."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2009-03-24
-
Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program: An Overview [Updated February 16, 2007]
"The Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, P.L. 100-418, created a program of regional centers to assist small and medium-sized manufacturing companies in using knowledge and technologies developed under the auspices of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), a laboratory of the Department of Commerce. Now known as the Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), centers in all 50 states and Puerto Rico provide technical and managerial assistance to firms. Federal funding is matched by non-federal sources. As the program expanded, funding increased until FY1999, when support declined reflecting a decrease in the federal portion of financing from one-half to one-third as individual centers operated longer than six years. Through FY2004, funding remained fairly constant despite the Administration's FY2003 budget that proposed an 88% reduction in support such that MEP centers "with more than six years' experience operate without federal contribution." Financing was cut 63% in FY2004, but restored in FY2005. The President's FY2006 and FY2007 budget proposed funding reductions; however in FY2006 MEP was financed at $104.6 million (after mandated rescissions) and because no final FY2007 appropriation was enacted during the 109th Congress, the program was financed through February 15, 2007 at the FY2006 level by a series of continuing resolutions. Enacted in the 110th Congress, P.L. 110-5 provides $104.6 million for MEP in FY2007. The President's FY2008 budget request includes a significant reduction in support for MEP to $46.3 million This report will be updated as events warrant."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2007-02-16
-
Manufacturing Extension Partnership Program: An Overview [February 11, 2008]
"A program of regional centers to assist small and medium-sized manufacturing companies use knowledge and technologies developed under the auspices of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was created by P.L.100-418. The Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) has centers in all 50 states and Puerto Rico that provide technical and managerial assistance to firms. Federal funding is matched by non-federal sources. Funding increased until FY1999, when support declined reflecting a decrease in the federal portion of financing from one-half to onethird as individual centers operated longer than six years. Through FY2004, funding remained fairly constant despite the Administration's FY2003 budget that proposed an 88% reduction in support such that MEP centers 'with more than six years' experience operate without federal contribution.' Financing was cut 63% in FY2004, but restored in FY2005. The President's FY2006 and FY2007 budget again proposed funding reductions; however in FY2006 MEP was financed at $104.6 million (after mandated rescissions) and at $104.6 million in FY2007. A significant reduction in support for MEP to $46.3 million was included in the Administration's FY2008 budget. The FY2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act, P.L. 110-161, finances the Partnership at $89.6 million, 14.4% less than the FY2007 figure. The President's FY2009 budget request includes $4 million to close out the federally funded portion of the program. P.L. 110-69, the America COMPETES Act, authorizes funding for MEP through 2010 and creates several new manufacturing R&D programs. This report will be updated as events warrant."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2008-02-11
-
Industrial Competitiveness and Technological Advancement: Debate Over Government Policy [December 8, 2010]
"There is ongoing interest in the pace of U.S. technological advancement due to its influence on U.S. economic growth, productivity, and international competitiveness. Because technology can contribute to economic growth and productivity increases, congressional attention has focused on how to augment private-sector technological development. Legislative activity over the past 25 or more years has created a policy for technology development, albeit an ad hoc one. Because of the lack of consensus on the scope and direction of a national policy, Congress has taken an incremental approach aimed at creating new mechanisms to facilitate technological advancement in particular areas and making changes and improvements as necessary. Congressional action has mandated specific technology development programs and obligations in federal agencies. Many programs were created based upon what individual committees judged appropriate within the agencies over which they had authorization or appropriation responsibilities. However, there has been recent legislative activity directed at eliminating or significantly curtailing many of these federal efforts. Although, for the most part, this approach has not been adopted, the budgets for several programs have declined. The proper role of the federal government in technology development and the competitiveness of U.S. industry continues to be a topic of congressional debate. Current legislation affecting the research and development (R&D) environment has included both direct and indirect measures to facilitate technological innovation. In general, direct measures are those which involve budget outlays and the provision of services by government agencies. Indirect measures include financial incentives and legal changes (e.g., liability or regulatory reform; new antitrust arrangements). As the Congress develops its appropriation priorities, the manner by which the government encourages technological progress in the private sector again may be explored and/or redefined."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Schacht, Wendy H.
2010-12-08
