Advanced Technology Program
Inherent Factors in Selection Process Are Likely to Limit Identification of Similar Research Gao ID: GAO-05-759T May 26, 2005The Advanced Technology Program (ATP) supports research that accelerates the development of high-risk technologies with the potential for broad-based economic benefits for the nation. Under the program, administrators at the National Institute of Standards and Technology are to ensure that they do not fund research that would be conducted in the same period without ATP funding. Between 1990 and September 2004, ATP funded 768 projects at a cost of about $2.3 billion. There is a continuing debate over whether the private sector has sufficient incentives to undertake research on high-risk, high-payoff emerging technologies without government support, such as ATP. This testimony discusses the results of GAO's April 2000 report, Advanced Technology Program: Inherent Factors in the Selection Process Could Limit Identification of Similar Research (GAO/RCED-00-114) and provides updated information. GAO determined (1) whether ATP had funded projects with research goals that were similar to projects funded by the private sector and (2) if ATP did, whether its award selection process ensures that such research would not be funded in the future.
The three completed ATP-funded projects GAO reviewed, which were approved for funding in 1990 and 1992, addressed research goals that were similar to those already funded by the private sector. GAO chose these 3 projects from among the first 38 completed projects, each representing a different technology sector: computers, electronics, and biotechnology. These three technology sectors represent 26 of the 38 completed ATP projects, or 68 percent. The projects included an on-line handwriting recognition system, a system to increase the capacity of existing fiber optic cables for the telecommunications industry, and a process for turning collagen into fibers for human prostheses use. In the case of the handwriting recognition project, ATP provided $1.2 million to develop a system to recognize cursive handwriting for pen-based (i.e., without a keyboard) computer input. GAO identified several private firms that were conducting similar research on handwriting recognition at approximately the same time the ATP project was funded. In fact, this line of research began in the late 1950s. In addition, GAO identified multiple patents, as early as 5 years prior to the start of the ATP project, in the field of handwriting recognition. GAO found similar results in the other two projects. Two inherent factors in ATP's award selection process--the need to guard against conflicts of interest and the need to protect proprietary information--make it unlikely that ATP can avoid funding research already being pursued by the private sector in the same time period. These factors, which have not changed since 1990, make it difficult for ATP project reviewers to identify similar efforts in the private sector. For example, to guard against conflicts of interest, the program uses technical experts who are not directly involved with the proposed research. Their acquaintance with ongoing research is further limited by the private sector's practice of not disclosing its research efforts or results so as to guard proprietary information. As a result, it may be impossible for the program to ensure that it is consistently not funding existing or planned research that would be conducted in the same time period in the absence of ATP financial assistance. GAO made no recommendations in its April 2000 report.
GAO-05-759T, Advanced Technology Program: Inherent Factors in Selection Process Are Likely to Limit Identification of Similar Research
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-05-759T
entitled 'Advanced Technology Program: Inherent Factors in Selection
Process Are Likely to Limit Identification of Similar Research' which
was released on May 31, 2005.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Testimony:
Before the Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government
Information, and International Security, Committee on Homeland Security
and Government Affairs, U.S. Senate:
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
For Release on Delivery Expected at 2:30 p.m. EDT:
Thursday, May 26, 2005:
Advanced Technology Program:
Inherent Factors in Selection Process Are Likely to Limit
Identification of Similar Research:
Statement of Robin M. Nazzaro, Director, Natural Resources ad
Environment:
GAO-05-759T:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-05-759T, a report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on
Federal Financial Management, Government Information, and International
Security, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S.
Senate:
Why GAO Did This Study:
The Advanced Technology Program (ATP) supports research that
accelerates the development of high-risk technologies with the
potential for broad-based economic benefits for the nation. Under the
program, administrators at the National Institute of Standards and
Technology are to ensure that they do not fund research that would be
conducted in the same period without ATP funding. Between 1990 and
September 2004, ATP funded 768 projects at a cost of about $2.3
billion. There is a continuing debate over whether the private sector
has sufficient incentives to undertake research on high-risk, high-
payoff emerging technologies without government support, such as ATP.
This testimony discusses the results of GAO‘s April 2000 report,
Advanced Technology Program: Inherent Factors in the Selection Process
Could Limit Identification of Similar Research (GAO/RCED-00-114) and
provides updated information. GAO determined (1) whether ATP had funded
projects with research goals that were similar to projects funded by
the private sector and (2) if ATP did, whether its award selection
process ensures that such research would not be funded in the future.
What GAO Found:
The three completed ATP-funded projects GAO reviewed, which were
approved for funding in 1990 and 1992, addressed research goals that
were similar to those already funded by the private sector. GAO chose
these 3 projects from among the first 38 completed projects, each
representing a different technology sector: computers, electronics,
and biotechnology. These three technology sectors represent 26 of the
38 completed ATP projects, or 68 percent. The projects included an on-
line handwriting recognition system, a system to increase the capacity
of existing fiber optic cables for the telecommunications industry, and
a process for turning collagen into fibers for human prostheses use. In
the case of the handwriting recognition project, ATP provided $1.2
million to develop a system to recognize cursive handwriting for pen-
based (i.e., without a keyboard) computer input. GAO identified several
private firms that were conducting similar research on handwriting
recognition at approximately the same time the ATP project was funded.
In fact, this line of research began in the late 1950s. In addition,
GAO identified multiple patents, as early as 5 years prior to the start
of the ATP project, in the field of handwriting recognition. GAO found
similar results in the other two projects.
Two inherent factors in ATP‘s award selection process”the need to guard
against conflicts of interest and the need to protect proprietary
information”make it unlikely that ATP can avoid funding research
already being pursued by the private sector in the same time period.
These factors, which have not changed since 1990, make it difficult for
ATP project reviewers to identify similar efforts in the private
sector. For example, to guard against conflicts of interest, the
program uses technical experts who are not directly involved with the
proposed research. Their acquaintance with ongoing research is further
limited by the private sector‘s practice of not disclosing its research
efforts or results so as to guard proprietary information. As a result,
it may be impossible for the program to ensure that it is consistently
not funding existing or planned research that would be conducted in the
same time period in the absence of ATP financial assistance.
GAO made no recommendations in its April 2000 report.
www.gao.gov/cgi-bin/getrpt?GAO-05-759T.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact Robin M. Nazzaro at (202)
512-3841 or nazzaror@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Dear Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
We are pleased to be here today to discuss our past work,[Footnote 1]
as well as to provide some updated information, on the funding that the
Advanced Technology Program (ATP) provides for private research. As you
know, ATP was established in 1988 to support research that accelerates
the development of high-risk technologies with the potential for broad-
based economic benefits for the nation.[Footnote 2] Under the
provisions establishing ATP, program administrators at the National
Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) are to ensure that they
are not funding existing or planned research that would be conducted in
the same time period in the absence of ATP financial assistance.
Between 1990 and September 2004, ATP funded 768 projects at a cost of
about $2.3 billion in federal matching funds.
Research can provide both private benefits, which accrue to the owners
of the research results, and societal benefits, which accrue to society
as a whole. In some instances, the private sector does not fund
research that would be beneficial to society because doing so might not
provide an adequate return on a firm's investment. To address this
situation, the federal government, through tax credits or direct public
funding, supports research that has very broad societal benefits, such
as basic research and research focused on developing technologies in
areas such as public health and nutrition, energy conservation, and
environmental protection. However, there is a continuing debate over
whether the private sector has sufficient incentives to undertake
research on high-risk, high-payoff emerging and enabling technologies
without government support, such as ATP.
In this context, in our prior work, we determined (1) whether, in the
past, ATP had funded projects with research goals that were similar to
projects funded by the private sector and (2) if we identified such
cases, whether ATP's award selection process ensures that such research
would not be funded in the future. To determine whether ATP has funded
projects similar to private sector projects, we chose 3 of the first 38
completed projects, each representing a different technology sector:
biotechnology; electronics; and information, computers, and
communications. These three technology sectors represent 26 of the 38,
or 68 percent, of the ATP projects completed by 1999. We reviewed the
ATP project files and held discussions with industry and academic
experts, technical reviewers, and award recipients to assist in our
examination of these projects. We also conducted patent searches on the
technical areas associated with each of the three projects. Our
objective was not to provide an evaluation of the quality of the
research funded by ATP or the private sector, nor the impact these
projects may or may not have had on their respective industries. To
address the second objective, we reviewed ATP's award selection
process. We did not review the overall management of the program. We
performed our initial work from October 1999 through April 2000, and
developed updated information in May 2005, in accordance with generally
accepted government auditing standards.
Results in Brief:
The three completed ATP-funded projects, which were approved for
funding in 1990 and 1992, addressed research goals that were similar to
those already funded by the private sector. The projects included an on-
line handwriting recognition system, a system to increase the capacity
of existing fiber optic cables for the telecommunications industry, and
a process for turning collagen into fibers for human prostheses use. In
the case of the handwriting recognition project, ATP provided $1.2
million to develop a system to recognize cursive handwriting for pen-
based (i.e., without a keyboard) computer input. We identified several
private firms that were conducting similar research on handwriting
recognition at approximately the same time the ATP project was funded.
In fact, this line of research began in the late 1950s. In addition, we
identified multiple patents, as early as 5 years prior to the start of
the ATP project, in the field of handwriting recognition. We found
similar results in the other two projects.
Two inherent factors in ATP's award selection process--the need to
guard against conflicts of interest and the need to protect proprietary
information--make it unlikely that ATP can avoid funding research
already being pursued by the private sector in the same time period.
These factors, which have not changed since 1990, make it difficult for
ATP project reviewers to identify similar efforts in the private
sector. For example, to guard against conflicts of interest, the
program uses technical experts who are not directly involved with the
proposed research. Their acquaintance with on-going research is further
limited by the private sector's practice of not disclosing its research
efforts or results so as to guard proprietary information. As a result,
it may be impossible for the program to ensure that it is consistently
not funding existing or planned research that would be conducted in the
same time period in the absence of ATP financial assistance.
Background:
ATP, which began funding projects in fiscal year 1990, was intended to
fund high-risk research and development (R&D) projects with broad
commercial and societal benefits that would not be undertaken by a
single company or group of companies, either because the risk was too
high or because the economic benefits of success would not accrue to
the investors. ATP is viewed as a mechanism for fostering investment in
areas in which societal returns would exceed private returns. ATP has
addressed other opportunities to achieve broader societal goals, such
as small business participation, as well as the establishment of joint
ventures for high-risk technologies that would be difficult for any one
company to justify because, for example, the benefits spread across the
industry as a whole. Thus, ATP is seen by some as a means of addressing
market failure in research areas that would otherwise not be funded,
thereby facilitating the economic growth that comes from the
commercialization and use of new technologies in the private sector.
Advocates of the program believe that the government should serve as a
catalyst for companies to cooperate and undertake important new work
that would not have been possible in the same time period without
federal participation. Critics of the program view ATP as industrial
policy, or the means by which government rather than the marketplace
picks winners and losers.
ATP provides funding through cooperative agreements--a type of
financial assistance in which the federal government is substantially
involved in project management. ATP offers these agreements through
announced annual competitions. It provides multiyear funding to single
companies and to industry-led joint ventures. The proposal review and
selection process is a multistep process based on NIST regulations. In
general, these steps include a preliminary screening, technical and
business reviews, semifinalist identification, oral reviews, ranking,
and final selection. At the beginning of each round of ATP
competitions, NIST establishes Source Evaluation Boards (SEBs) to
ensure that all proposals receive careful consideration. Each SEB is
comprised of NIST technical experts as well as outside specialists with
backgrounds in business and economics. ATP supplements the SEBs with
outside technical reviewers, generally federal government experts in
the specific industry of the proposal. Independent business experts are
also hired on a consulting basis, including high-tech venture
capitalists, people who teach strategic business planning, retired
corporate executives from large and small high-tech businesses, as well
as economists and business development specialists. All SEB members and
outside reviewers must sign nondisclosure statements, agree to protect
proprietary information, and certify that they have no conflicts of
interest.
As part of the proposal evaluation process, ATP uses the external
reviewers to assess the technical and business merit of the proposed
research. Each proposal is sponsored by both technical and business SEB
members, whose roles include identifying reviewers, summarizing
evaluative comments, and making recommendations to the SEB. The SEB
evaluates the proposals, selects the semifinalists, conducts oral
interviews with semifinalists, and ranks the semifinalists. A source
selecting official makes the final award decisions based on the ranked
list of proposals from the SEB.
The three projects that we reviewed received funding through the ATP
competitions announced in 1990 and 1992. In those years, the selection
criteria included scientific and technical merit, potential broad-based
benefits, technology transfer benefits, the proposing organization's
commitment level and organizational structure, and the qualifications
and experience of the proposing organization's staff. Each of the five
selection criteria was weighted at 20 percent. Today, these same
selection criteria are used but are grouped into two categories, each
weighted at 50 percent. The "Scientific and Technical Merit" category
addresses a variety of issues related to the technical plan and the
relevant experience of the proposing organization. The second category,
"Potential for Broad-Based Economic Benefits," addresses the means to
achieving an economic benefit and commercialization plans, as well as
issues related to the proposer's level of commitment, organizational
structure, and management plan. Technical and business reviewers
complete documentation, referred to as technical and business
evaluation worksheets, that address various aspects of these criteria.
Three ATP Projects Addressed Similar Research Goals to Projects in the
Private Sector:
The three completed projects that we reviewed addressed research goals
that were similar to goals the private sector was addressing at about
the same time. Each of the three projects was from a different sector
of technology--computers, electronics, and biotechnology. The projects
include (1) an on-line handwriting recognition system for computer
input, (2) a system to increase the capacity of existing fiber optic
cables for the telecommunications industry, and (3) a process for
turning collagen into fibers for human prostheses use.
ATP Project on Handwriting Recognition:
Both the ATP project and several private sector projects had a similar
research goal of developing an on-line system to recognize natural or
cursive handwritten data without the use of a keyboard. This technology
would make computers more useful where keyboard use is limited by
physical problems or in situations where using a keyboard is not
practical. On-line handwriting recognition means that the system
recognizes handwritten data while the user writes. The primary
technical problem in handwriting recognition is that writing styles
vary greatly from person to person, depending upon whether the user is
in a hurry, fatigued, or subject to a variety of other factors. While
the technology for obtaining recognition of constrained careful writing
or block print writing was commercially available, systems for cursive
writing recognition were not commercially available because of the
greater handwriting variability that was encountered.
The ATP project we reviewed sought to develop an on-line natural
handwriting recognition system that was user-independent and able to
translate natural or cursive handwriting. Communication Intelligence
Corporation (CIC) was the award recipient. CIC used its ATP funding of
$1.2 million from 1991 to 1993 to build its own algorithms and models
for developing its handwriting recognition system.[Footnote 3] During
the project, CIC created a database that includes thousands of cursive
handwriting samples and developed new recognition algorithms. Some of
this technology has been incorporated into a registered software
product that has the ability to recognize cursive writing in limited
circumstances.
According to the experts we interviewed, as well as literature and
patent searches, several companies were attempting to achieve a similar
goal of handwriting recognition through their research around the same
time that the ATP project received funding. Some of the key players in
the private sector conducting research on cursive handwriting
recognition included Paragraph International (in collaboration with
Apple Computer) and Lexicus (which later became a division of
Motorola). For example, Apple licensed a cursive handwriting
recognition system from a Soviet company, Paragraph International,
according to articles published in computer magazines in October 1991.
According to these sources, this technology provided Apple with a
foundation for recognizing printed, cursive, or block handwritten text.
Another indication of research with a similar goal appeared in the
October 1990 edition of PC Week, which reported that "handwriting
recognition is an emerging technology that promises increased
productivity both for current microcomputer owners and for a new breed
of users armed with hand-held 'pen-based' computers." Similarly a
technical journal article indicated that there was renewed interest in
the 1980s in this field of on-line handwriting recognition, from its
advent in the 1960s, because of more accurate electronic tablets, more
compact and powerful computers, and better recognition
algorithms.[Footnote 4]
Moreover, according to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's (PTO)
database, over 450 patents were issued on handwriting recognition
software, concepts, and related products from 1985 through
1999,[Footnote 5] indicating that research of a similar goal was being
conducted around the time of the ATP project. Given the fact that it
can take many years between the time a research project takes place and
the time that an outcome is realized, this time period for a patent
search allowed us to determine whether there was research ongoing
during the time of the ATP project. The dates of the patents actually
occurred sometime after the research was conducted. And, as we reported
in a prior report,[Footnote 6] the time between the point when a patent
application is filed until the date when a patent is issued, or the
application is abandoned, ranged from 19.8 months to 21 months, adding
additional time to when the research was done.
ATP Project on Capacity Expansion of Fiber Optic Cables:
Another ATP project we reviewed, which proposed to develop a system to
increase the capacity of existing fiber optic cables for the
telecommunications industry, also had a similar goal to that of
research in the private sector. At the same time, firms in the private
sector were attempting to increase the number of light signals that can
be transmitted through a single strand of fiber optic cable using a
technology called wavelength division multiplexing (WDM).[Footnote 7]
In the 1980s, telephone companies laid fiber optic cables across the
United States and other countries to create an information system that
could carry significantly more data than the copper wires they
replaced. Tremendous increases in cable traffic, primarily from the
Internet, have crowded these cables. WDM technology was aimed at
providing a cost-effective alternative to the expensive option of
installing additional fiber optic cables.
Accuwave Corporation (Accuwave) was the ATP award recipient. Accuwave
used its ATP funding of approximately $2 million from March 1993
through March 1995 to develop a wavelength division multiplexing system
that would substantially increase the number of signals that could be
transmitted through a single optical fiber strand, using the concept of
volume holography. Volume holography uses holograms to direct multiple
light signals simultaneously through a single fiber strand. Accuwave
was able to make improvements on these issues but not enough to fully
develop and market a successful WDM system for the telecommunications
market. In 1996, a competitor beat Accuwave to the market. After the
completion of the ATP project, Accuwave filed for bankruptcy protection
due to its inability to successfully commercialize a wavelength
division multiplexing system.
Other private firms were involved in research with a similar goal of
increasing the capacity of fiber optic cable at about the same time as
Accuwave was conducting its research. Conceptual research on such
systems dates back to the early 1980s, but development and
commercialization did not flourish until the mid-to late-1990s. Bell
Labs (now Lucent Technologies), Nortel Networks, and Ciena Corporation,
among others, were considered some of the major competitors in the
industry. In the early 1990s, these firms were attempting to develop
WDM technology using different methods and materials. For example,
Ciena Corporation developed a system that incorporated fiber-Bragg
gratings, which are filters embedded directly onto fiber optic cable
that help to separate multiple light signals through a single fiber
strand.
We also found an indication of WDM-related research through a review of
issued patents. According to PTO's database, over 2,000 patents were
issued related to wavelength division multiplexing components, systems,
and concepts from 1985 through 1999. The patents issued ranged from 10
patents in 1985 to 493 in 1999.
ATP Project on Regenerating Tissues and Organs:
Both the ATP project and private sector projects we identified in the
tissue engineering field had similar broad research goals of developing
biological equivalents for defective tissues and organs utilizing
diverse technical approaches. ATP's project proposed procedures for
extracting, storing, spinning, and weaving collagen (the main
constituent of connective tissue and bones) into fibers suitable for
human prostheses that could induce the body's cells to regenerate lost
tissue. Tissue Engineering, Inc., received ATP's award of about $2
million for use over the years 1993 through 1996. The company's long-
term and yet unrealized goal is to transplant these prostheses into
humans, after which the collagen framework, or scaffold, would induce
the growth and function of normal body cells within it, eventually
remodeling lost human tissue and replacing the scaffold.
Within the very innovative field of tissue engineering, however, many
competitors were attempting to achieve similar broad research goals.
Organogenesis, the Collagen Corporation, Integra LifeSciences, Advanced
Tissue Sciences, Genzyme Tissue, Osiris Therapeutics, Matrix
Pharmaceuticals, and ReGen Biologics are key players in the market to
develop structures that could replace or regenerate cells, tissues, and
organs such as skin, teeth, orthopedic structures, cartilage, and
valves. A number of these companies have subsequently received ATP
awards. In addition, universities and medical schools have researchers
investigating the many possibilities to engineer human tissues, and
eventually complex organs, such as the liver, pancreas, and heart.
According to one expert, there is a great deal of competition within
the field of tissue engineering.
Although the Tissue Engineering, Inc. research focused on the use of
collagen as the basis for these structures, other companies were
pursuing a variety of technical approaches for addressing the goal of
developing biological equivalents for defective tissues and organs. In
addition to research in collagen, other companies and researchers have
also been attempting to create human tissues and organs from other
biological materials, synthetics, and hybrid products, which are both
biologic and synthetic. For example, researchers from the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (MIT) developed an artificial skin product
using collagen and a natural polymer. Several companies have since
developed comparable products. In 1986, researchers from MIT and a
hospital in Massachusetts began inserting cells into scaffolds created
of biodegradable polymer. As the cells multiply, tissues form. The
magazine BusinessWeek reported this concept as "an elegantly simple
concept that underlies most engineered tissue."[Footnote 8] Two
competitors, Integra LifeSciences and Organogenesis, reported that they
were also doing work on the use of collagen in various applications.
Although their technical approaches were different than the ATP
project, the broad research goals were similar.
In addition to our discussions with experts and literature searches,
patent research shows that there was activity related to the field of
tissue engineering prior to and during the ATP project. According to a
search done on the PTO website, at least 370 patents were issued
related to cell culturing, scaffolding or matrix development, and
tissue engineering from 1985 through 1999. Experts have also indicated
that there are several patents related to the field, with a
considerable amount of overlap in the technologies described in those
patents.
ATP's Award Selection Process Is Unlikely to Avoid Funding Similar
Research:
Two factors in ATP's award selection process could result in ATP's
funding research similar to research that the private sector would fund
in the same time period. These two factors are inherent in the review
process and limit the information the reviewers have on similar private
sector research efforts. Due to conflict-of-interest concerns,
technical reviewers are precluded from being directly involved with the
proposed research, making them less likely to know about all the
research in an area. Also, the information available about private
sector research is limited because of the private sector practice of
not disclosing research results. Until a patent is issued, a private
sector firm generally publishes very few details about the research to
protect proprietary information. Therefore, it is difficult for the
reviewers to identify other cutting-edge research.
ATP's Conflict-of-Interest Provision Limits Its Ability to Identify
Similar Research:
ATP selection officials rely on outside technical reviewers to evaluate
a proposal's scientific and technical merit. All reviewers must certify
that they have no conflicts of interest. To minimize possible conflicts
of interest, the technical reviewers are generally federal government
employees who are experts in the specific technology of the research
proposal but are not directly involved with the proposed research area.
Although this approach helps to guard against conflict of interest, it
has inherent limitations on the program's ability to identify similar
research efforts. The technical reviewers rely on their own knowledge
of research underway in the private sector. One of the technical
reviewers we interviewed said that he did not personally know of other
companies that were doing similar work. However, he believed that it
was unlikely that there were not dozens of others working on the same
issue.
Proprietary Information Limits ATP's Ability to Identify Similar
Research:
ATP reviewers are significantly limited in their ability to identify
similar research efforts by an inherent lack of information on private
sector research. Although ATP officials use several sources, such as
colleagues, conferences and symposia, and current technical literature,
to try to identify research efforts conducted by the private sector and
the federal government, this information is often proprietary. Most of
the private sector and university experts we consulted agreed that it
can be very difficult to identify the specific research that private
sector firms are conducting, especially considering the competitive
nature of most industries. The early release of information on a
company's research could be costly to the firm. If a competing firm
could determine the nature and progress of another company's research,
it could help the competitor to develop and commercialize an identical
or higher-quality product before the other firm. At the very least, the
early release of research information by a firm can give competitors an
idea as to the focus of the firm's strategic plan. Thus, many firms are
very careful about releasing detailed information related to research
and development activities they are conducting.
In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, the process ATP follows to select projects
for funding is limited in its ability to identify similar research
efforts in the private sector. Our retrospective look at the three ATP
research projects showed that their goals were similar to research
goals already being funded by the private sector. Examining the process
that ATP uses to select projects, we found two inherent factors--the
need to guard against conflicts of interest and the need to protect
proprietary information--that limit ATP's ability to identify similar
research efforts in the private sector. These two factors have not
changed since the beginning of the program. We recognize the valid need
to guard against conflicts of interest and to protect proprietary
information; thus, we did not recommend any changes to the award
selection process. However, we believe that it may be impossible for
the program to ensure that it is consistently not funding existing or
planned research that would be conducted in the same time period in the
absence of ATP financial assistance.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I would be happy to
respond to any questions that you or Members of the Subcommittee may
have.
Contacts and Acknowledgements:
For further information about this testimony, please contact Robin M.
Nazzaro at 202-512-6246. Diane Raynes, Carol Herrnstadt Shulman, and
Jessica Evans made key contributions to this statement.
FOOTNOTES
[1] GAO, Advanced Technology Program: Inherent Factors in Selection
Process Could Limit Identification of Similar Research, GAO/RCED-00-114
(Washington, D.C.: April 24, 2000).
[2] The Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 (Pub. L. No. 100-
418).
[3] Algorithm here refers to the mathematical procedures involved in
recognizing writing as it is being written on a computer device.
[4] IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence,
"The State of the Art in On-Line Handwriting Recognition" (Aug. 1990),
vol. 12, no. 8.
[5] A patent is a grant given by a government to an inventor of the
right to exclude others for a limited time (usually 20 years) from
making, using, or selling his or her invention.
[6] GAO, Intellectual Property: Comparison of Patent Examination
Statistics for Fiscal Years 1994-1995, GAO/RCED-97-58 (Washington,
D.C., Mar. 13, 1997).
[7] A fiber optic cable consists of many extremely thin strands of
glass or plastic, each capable of transmitting light signals.
Wavelength division multiplexing transmits separate light signals
through a single optical fiber strand at different wavelengths.
[8] "Biotech Bodies," BusinessWeek, July 27, 1998.
