Federal Research

The Advanced Technology Program, which is run by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), is a competitive, cost-sharing program involving both the federal government and industry. The program is intended to foster the development and broad dissemination of challenging, high-risk technologies that offer significant economic benefits for the nation. In September 1997, NIST issued a list of projects chosen to receive awards under the fiscal year 1997 competitions. Project proposals were rejected if NIST concluded that the applicants could probably find funding elsewhere or a delay in project progress would not be a serious national economic concern. This testimony summarizes the findings of a February 1997 GAO report on the information used by the program to make these decisions.

GAO noted that: (1) according to program officials, for the FY 1997 competition, NIST made the determination of whether the applicant could probably find funding elsewhere based on information gathered throughout the proposal review process; (2) this included questioning the applicants during the oral review phase if doubt remained as to whether the applicants could have found project funding elsewhere; (3) for the FY 1997 competition, there was no requirement that applicants report that they could not find funding elsewhere; (4) however, in December 1997, ATP revised its requirements such that in the future applicants must indicate on the proposal application their efforts to find private funding; (5) likewise, program officials told GAO that information acquired during the proposal review was used to determine if program support was important to the project from a national economic perspective; (6) specifically, according to ATP officials, one of the five selection criteria for evaluating program proposals, "Potential Net Broad-based Economic Benefits," relates to whether or not funding a project would create a serious national economic concern; (7) according to the guidance to applicants for preparing project proposals, the review process would include a review of the proposal by panels of outside experts in business and economics to determine the proposed project's potential for broad-based benefits and its commercial viability; and (8) however, program officials neither defined what they meant by a serious national economic concern nor how the ATP reviews resulted in a determination that a delay in project progress would not be a serious national economic concern.