Board of the USTAR Governing Authority

Board of the USTAR Governing Authority

Location: World Trade Center at City Creek

60 East So Temple, Salt Lake City, UT

3d Floor Canyonlands Conference Room

Thursday, January 8, 2014

3:00-5:00 PM

AGENDA

**************************

Welcome...... Greg Bell

Approval ofDecember 15th 2014 minutes...... Greg Bell

Discussion of Audit Recommendations...... Ivy Estabrooke

Brief on MEP…………………………………………………………………….Dave Sorensen

TOIP Presentations...... TOIP

Discussions of Admin and TOIP Budgets...... Jim Grover

Discussion of the Conflict of Interest Mitigation………………………………Ivy Estabrooke

Brief on the Universities…………………………………………………………Ivy Estabrooke

Other Business ...... GA Members

Board Meeting of the USTAR Governing Authority

01-08-2015 Meeting Minutes – Pending Approval

Governing Authority Members Present: Greg Bell (Chair), Val Hale (Vice Chair), David Lockwood, Rich Lunsford, Ron Mika (by phone), Susan Opp (by skype), and Florian Solzbacher

Excused: Richard Ellis and Derek Miller

USTAR Staff Present: Justin Berry, Linda Cabrales, Mary Cardon, Ivy Estabrooke (Executive Director), Jim Grover, Elenor Heyborne, Jillian Hunt, Peter Jay, Scott Marland, Koa Perlac, and Ryan Streams.

Others Present: Rob Behunin (USU), Jeff Collings (USU), Corinne Garcia (UofU), Mike Green (AG), Greg Jones (UofU), Tom Parks (UofU), Dave Sorensen (MEP), James Taylor (Weber), and Christian Volmar (USU).

Mr. Bell called to order the Governing Authority meeting. He welcomed everyone to the meeting.

Mr. Hale motioned for the approval of the December 15th 2014 meeting minutes. Dr. Solzbacher 2nd the motion. The Governing Authority Board voted and the motion to approve the minutes passed unanimously.

Dr. Estabrooke reported that the audit was released the last week of December. Overall the audit was positive with the auditors characterizing USTAR as a work in progress. USTAR has worked hard to implement all the recommendations from the previous year’s audit. However, we are not there yet and will continue to work over the next year or two to fulfill all the recommendations. The auditors have added new recommendations in the data collection and the metrics used. USTAR staff is working with our partners at the Universities to solidify the metrics and data collection in a valid way.

Mr. Bell mentioned the Auditor General appeared before the appropriations chairs to summarize the report to the legislative leaders. Dr. Estabrooke mentioned the Auditor General was supportive of USTAR going forward and would help us to implement the audit recommendations. He has offered to do the audit for us the following year due to his knowledge of the challenges USTAR has had to overcome and where we are going.

Dr. Solzbacher questioned if the Governing Authority will be working with the Legislatures more frequently. Also, do we plan to go through the audit? Mr. Bell suggested we go through the audit recommendations at the February Governing Authority meeting to provide an understanding of what USTAR is working on and provide a progress report. As well as, discuss the new recommendations and the plan to move forward. We have fairly regularly apprised the Speaker of the House and President of the Senate. We have kept Senator Shiozowa apprised as head of the business development committee. He stated that we acknowledge and agree with the audit and the recommendations.

Dr. Estabrooke introduced Dave Sorensen from the Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP). There is an opportunity for a closer partnership between MEP and USTAR.

Mr. Sorensen mentioned the four points he would be presenting on: highlight the resource that MEP is to Utah, how the MEP works with businesses in Utah, the metrics used to verify MEP performance, and how USTAR and the MEP could potentially work together. There are two extension programs: the Agriculture Extension program at USU and the Manufacturing Extension program. The challenge in manufacturing is the constant change of product. The opportunity is everything is changing. One of the fundamentals we focus one is the LEAN method of productivity. MEP works on making the manufacturing process better for the company and consumers. A couple examples of companies the MEP have impacted are Mighty Light and Intermountain Electronics. Metrics MEP collects are: bottom-line client impact ratio, investment leverage ratio, clients served per Million Federal, Impacted Clients per Million Federal, and Percent Quantified Impact. MEP is the highest in impacts and with more resources could impact more clients. We are only able to support less than 5% of manufacturers each year. Those with access to extension services are more likely to stay in business.

There are 20 industry sectors grouped into 5 major categories: Raw Material production, Finished Goods Production, Distribution, Service Providers and consumers. 84% of Intellectual Properties goes into finished goods. There are 2 ways to commercialize; you can either go to an existing company or go to a startup company. There are 3 ways for technology to move in the industry: be licensed by a large corporation, be put into a startup enterprise, or be put into a small company. 98% of all manufacturers in Utah are small businesses. MEP is meant to help medium to small businesses. Since 1995 the MEP has been continually operated by the same host West Camp Inc. He explained the MEP goes in and helps them resolve an issue. With the right kind of support they are able to use the MEP to help get the manufacturing growth of their company. The metrics used to verify MEP performance. The Federal Government goes in and surveys the companies the MEP works with and verifies the impact MEP has. How might USTAR and the MEP work together? The MEP is about profitable growth for manufactures. They look at financial and accounting, tech acceleration, continuous improvement, supplier development, workforce, and sustainability. Manufacturing wages are 20-30% above average in the State of Utah. Manufacturing accounts for 85% of exports in Utah. Manufacturing challenges are the highly diversified, capitalintensive, process changes, product changes, support above average wages, limited internal skills, etc.

The technology has to help the product uniquely meet the consumer’s needs. It has to add value, functionality, and reduce cost. When we think of those new patents and technology it has to address these items. New technology does not always result in new economic development. Manufacturing of IP becomes a reality when incorporated into products. We improve the impact of the IP by understanding the needs of the small manufacturers of Utah and their clients are. We need to help focus new R&D in areas where are opportunities for it to be applied. He explained BIC and how they expanded their line based on using the materials they already have.

Mr. Bell thanked Dave Sorensen for his presentation and explanation of the MEP. Mr. Sorensen mentioned his background and states the Universities have interaction with the larger companies. However, with the smaller manufacturers it took time to build the strong reputation and with the partnership of MEP and USTAR we would be able to move more technology.

Dr. Parks discussed how valuable the MEP is for the small manufacturers. A large amount of the IP coming from the universities does not commercialize. Some of the IP is very valuable. It is challenging for the university and small business manufacturers to understand the value of the technologies they have. Large companies have the resources to sort through university technology they often do not take full advantage of the technology. Most of the licensing revenue comes from startup companies. Mr. Jones mentioned we are trying to get more technologies out to companies that would use it. The MEP is using them to help with manufacturing companies and creating a gateway to the University technology. Dr. Solzbacher mentioned there is an option for a hybrid. Using the small companies and bringing in the IP. It is usually a quicker way to revenue versus a startup. Mr. Bell asked Dr. Parks how many companies they are working with. Dr. Jones stated they have about 100 – 150 companies.

Mr. Behunin spoke about the USU’s relationship with MEP and their extension services at USU. Inside those cohorts USU has many interns inside the small business companies. Mentioned the relationship with Intermountain Electronics is well established and are have several interns. We have a portfolio where these companies can come and look at the IP and technologies. Through these interns companies have access to the University, new ideas, etc. Mr. Jay discussed that the UVU BRC has a close connection with MEP. The MEP has the ability to close the gaps between technology and industry.

Ms. Cardon mentioned that through legislative changes we added in outreach centers that would help small businesses through our other institutions such as: UVU, Dixie, Weber, SUU, etc. The interest was in helping the smaller business throughout the State of Utah that are not getting the same help as University spin ins and spin outs.

Dr. Estabrooke introduced Scott Marland as the Director of BioInnovations Gateway (BiG). Dr.. Marland introduced himself and explained they have a dual mission economic development and workforce development. They serve the whole state although they are geographically located in Salt Lake. Primarily they work with high school students from the Granite school district. A number of students work as interns at BiG. Dr. Marland introduced Susannah Hutchins Business Operations Manager and Mathew Hansen Lab Manager. The facility houses several labs, shared office space, cube space, and shared space such as: clean room, wet lab, prototyping shop, etc. There are high school students who work as interns. BiG is an incubator that houses 15 companies and creates a space for collaboration. Dr. Marland highlighted several companies Veristride, Bend labs, and Navillum who have all come out of the University. Applied Biosensors has come out of the Nanofab lab. Dr. Estabrooke mentioned Applied Biosensors as a USTAR continuum where the IP came from a USTAR faculty but was licensed through the TVC to another University faculty who worked with Ms. Cardon on their SBIR Grants and are now incubating at BiG.

Mr. Lunsford questioned who is funding these companies. Dr. Marland responded these companies all come in with their own funding. They are coming in as a company with a business licenses some of them have grants, private investing, or self-funded. When they become profitable we help them move on. We charge them a licensing fee. The facility has a wide range of equipment. Veristride is a company that uses data analyses with sensors to track your performance athletics. Bend Labs is doing flexible wearable technology to measure joint movement. MesaGen vision is to create a new cancer drug. Navillum Technologies is working with quantum dots that are a low cost and low temperature. They will most likely graduate in the next year. We have had interaction with many high school students working with the companies in our incubator.

Mr. Jay introduces himself as the Associate Director of USTAR Central and gives his background. He explained he is located in the business resource center at UVU. Mr. Jay’sarea covers Utah, Wasatch, Summit, Tooele and Salt Lake Counties. He introducedthe programs at UVU including the g2m business accelerator.

Dr. Estabrookeand Mr. Perlac reviewed the conflict of interest policy. This policy was presented last meeting. This policy provides a procedureto the Governing Authority on when, how and what to do if a conflict of interest arises within the Governing Authority.

Mr. Lockwood motioned to pass the conflict of interest process. Mr. Hale 2nd the motion. Mr. Bell called for a vote and the motion passed unanimously.

Dr. Estabrookebriefly discussed budget policy on approval of budget and the desire to revisit it. Budget adjustments were requested to transition a part-time assistant to a full time public relations officer, hire a Central TOIP Program Director and add a part-time coordinator for the Go-to-Market program.

Mr. Lockwood motioned to pass the Administration and TOIP budget amendments. Dr. Solzbacher 2nd the motion. Mr. Bell called for a vote and the motion passed unanimously.

Dr. Estabrooke and Chairman Bellstated that theymet with the University presidents and agreed we needed to tighten up the memorandums of understanding and relationships. The cooperation is going to a new level. We desire to spend more with the research teams to understand what they do.We would like the funding implications ironed out and budgets approved. We are going to make changes and resolve issues. It was necessary to meet with the presidents to tell them where we are as an organization. In February we will be approving the budget. We need the Vice Presidents’ cooperation to move forward.

Mr. Lunsford motioned for the meeting to be adjourned. Mr. Hale 2nd the motioned. Mr. Bell called for a vote and the motion to adjourn passed unanimously.

Utah Science Technology and Research Initiative

60 E. South Temple - 3rd Floor Salt Lake City, UT 84111 (801) 538-8622