AFCEA Transformation Technet Panel: New Business Models for Transformation

1
AFCEA Transformation Technet Panel New Business
Models for Transformation
Dr. Russell Richards JFCOM ORTA Manager 21 June
2005
2
Panel Members

• Moderator Dr. Russell Richards
• Manager, JFCOM Office of Research and Technology
  Applications and Technology Transfer Coordinator
• Panelists
• Maj Gen Timothy A. Peppe, USAF (Ret.) President,
  NDIA Greater Hampton Roads Chapter
• Mr. Rick Lally President, Hampton Roads
  Technology Council
• Captain Ray Rodriguez JFCOM Business Manager

3
Agenda

• The ultimate success of defense transformation
  will require new business models and new modes of
  collaboration. USJFCOM has recently been granted
  new authorities for industry-government
  partnering. The panel will discuss what this
  means for industry, government and academia.

4
Driving Factor Make it Easier for JFCOM to Work
with External Organizations

• On 8 March 2005, DDRE (ASC) Office of
  Technology Transition delegated technology
  transfer authorities to JFCOM similar to those of
  federal laboratories
• JFCOM has not been designated a federal
  laboratory
• JFCOM remains first and foremost a combatant
  command with transformation as a primary mission
• But, DoD recognizes the RD nature of our
  transformation work and has delegated broader
  authorities to us to facilitate working with the
  private sector (industry, universities, etc.)
• JFCOM stood up an Office of Research and
  Technology Applications (ORTA) in May with
  primary Command responsibility for technology
  transfer

5
FAR-Based Engagement Tools Limit Industry
Engagement

• FAR primarily supports procurement-based
  activities the Government must pay for products
  and services
• FAR requires arms-length relationships
  competitive vice collaborative. We want to
  compete ideas, but we require a good balance
  between collaboration and competition
• FAR generally comes with a long and slow
  acquisition timeline sometimes leads to fielding
  obsolescent systems
• FAR does not provide the agility required to take
  sense and respond advantage of private sector
  RD

6
Our Objective

• We want to accelerate innovation, prototyping and
  joint concept development and experimentation
• We want to closely communicate, cooperate and
  collaborate with non-government partners to
  develop innovative new capabilities and rapidly
  deliver those capabilities to the Warfighter
• We want to advantage our private sector by
  transferring technologies developed at government
  expense by USJFCOM to American companies

7
What has Changed?

• The Secretary of Defense has recently delegated
  broad technology transfer authorities to USJFCOM.
  These give us authorities and flexibility to
  conduct technology transfer agreements with the
  private-industrial and academic sectors similar
  to the authorities of a national laboratory
• USJFCOM will remain first and foremost a
  Combatant Command focused on transformation of
  the U.S. military
• Letter dated 8 March from DoD Office of
  Technology Transition
• DoD Instruction 5535.8

USJFCOM has new technology transfer authorities
new opportunities and new responsibilities
8
What this Means to USJFCOM

• Authority provides us with a new technology
  transfer mechanisms that will augment those
  provided by the FAR
• Not to be used to get around the FAR
• Address RD not procurement
• Will facilitate bringing innovation in from the
  outside and allow us to leverage technologies or
  knowledge that can assist in achieving our
  mission goals
• Allows us to share costs and risks with industry
  partners better influence IRAD investments
• Requires us to develop new business models
• Establishing an Office of Research and Technology
  Applications (ORTA)

9
JFCOM Engagement Tools
FAR-Based

• USJFCOM Public Web Site
• Focused Forums
• Broad Agency Announcements (BAAs)
• Requests for Information (RFIs)
• Industry Cells in Wargames and Experiments
• Technology Information Exchanges (TIEs)
• Capability Presentations
• Unsolicited Proposals

10
Scope of Technology Transfer at JFCOM
Technology Transfer Process by which knowledge,
information, technology or capabilities developed
in one organization or in one area or for one
purpose, is applied or used in another
organization, or for another purpose.
11
Technology Transfer Organization
JFCOM COS
ORTA Office of Research and Technology
Applications
ORTA Tech Transfer
12
JFCOM Technology Transfer (T2) Team
T2 Team Management
ORTA ORTA Manager/T2 Coordinator ORTA Deputies

T2 Team Support
SJA (J00L) Science Advisors (J02T) Business
Manager (J02BM) Ind/Acad Engagement (J5) OPO
(J02OPO)
Russell Richards, J9 Colonel Scott Merrow,
J8 Mike Egnor, J7 John Grills, JSIC
Full Time Support related to ORTA (in Office)
Dedicated Support as Required
T2 Team Associates
T2 IPT MEMBERS
ORTA REPRESENTATIVES
IPT Integrated Process Team
IPT Support (in Dir/SubCmd)
Dedicated Support related to T2 (in Dir/SubCmd)
Directorate and Subcommand Options
Directorate (Options)
Subordinate Commands (Options)
T2 IPT Member
T2 IPT Member
T2 IPT Member
T2 IPT Member
not needed
not needed
ORTA Rep
ORTA Rep

• ORTA Representatives are as nominated by Dir/Cdr
  work both in ORTA and Dir/SubCmd
• Directorates and Subcommands have standing IPT
  members representing their equities

13
Tech Transfer Players

• ORTA Manager and Deputies (3) Full time
  represent the entire Command major
  responsibility for technology transfer and
  integration of T2 initiatives within JFCOM
• T2 Integrated Process Team Part time represent
  the T2 equities of their parent organizations
  facilitate integration of initiatives within the
  command and coordinate external contact and
  initiatives with the private sector and
  laboratories
• ORTA Representatives Part time represent their
  parent organizations facilitate decentralized
  execution of the commands T2 responsibilities
  engage with industry, labs and academia to
  solicit opportunities for their activities and
  the command while fully coordinating initiatives
  with the T2 IPT and the ORTA Manager will not
  have authority to commit resources or to approve
  T2 mechanisms.
• T2 Support Team Part time expanded team to
  include personnel with major roles that support
  technology transfer e.g., Command science
  advisors, J5 Industry Engagement, OPO,
  Contracting, PAO, Legal

14
Duties of T2 IPT Reps/ORTA Reps

• Know and represent the capability needs of their
  orgs spin-on
• Identify the possible technologies their labs
  could spin off or spin over
• Identify POCs in their orgs for demos or
  interactions and potential CRADAs
• Participate in twice monthly T2 IPT meetings
• Prepare their orgs inputs for ORTA reports and
  data base
• Deliver periodic capabilities briefings to the T2
  IPT
• Engage with external orgs, as needed, to
  facilitate capability transfer
• Keep their orgs aware of what is going on across
  the command with respect to T2 or capabilities
  transfer
• Prepare orgs inputs for the DoD ST strategic
  planning process
• Represent their orgs equities on selection of
  new ACTDs

15
Functions of ORTA

• Capture and analyze the technology requirements
  across USJFCOM
• Facilitate implementation of technology transfer
  mechanisms
• External engagement to find promising
  capabilities/technologies to meet commands needs
  (broad search to include private industry,
  academia, other federal labs, state and local
  governments)
• Research and assess promising capabilities
• Inform USJFCOM labs of promising capabilities and
  facilitate interactions between external partners
  and USJFCOM labs
• Arrange for capability demonstrations at USJFCOM

16
Functions of ORTA contd

• Maintain ORTA web site
• Assist command in execution of periodic
  technology workshops that will provide focused
  forecasts as to what the future holds
• Spread the word outside USJFCOM about our
  capability needs focused forums, technology
  information exchanges, industry days, workshops,
  conferences.
• Meet OSD Office of Tech Transfer (OTT) reporting
  requirements
• Coordinate T2 IPT meetings
• Provide inputs to USJFCOM Science Advisor for the
  DoD ST strategic planning process to influence
  the ST vision, strategy, plan and investments
• Develop and maintain a capabilities/technology
  database

17
Engaging with External Organizations
The ORTA will facilitate access to external
organizations, but engagement will be
decentralized with each JFCOM organization also
having direct access.
ORTA Reps have primary responsibility for
decentralized external engagement
18
Initial Engagement Strategy

• Science and Engineering Research Affiliates
  (SERA)
• Department of Energy National Labs
• University Affiliated Research Centers (UARCs)
• DARPA Service Research Labs (ARL, NRL, AFRL,
  ONR, etc)
• We know them and have worked with them they
  provide a fantastic window to the world use
  their rolodex to identify promising companies
  and non-government organizations)
• Local community
• Universities (ODU, VMASC, Virginia Tech, George
  Mason, U of Virginia) Hampton Roads Tech
  Council, HRTI, NDIA, AFCEA, ADPA, NASA Lockheed,
  Boeing, Northrup, Raytheon, BAE Systems, General
  Dynamics, L-3 Com, SAIC, etc.
• Virginia state government and local governments
• Federal Laboratory Consortium
• Federally Funded Research and Development
  Corporations (FFRDCs)
• Popups

19
What is a CRADA?Cooperative RD Agreement

• The principle mechanism (a contract) used by
  federal labs to engage in collaborative RD
  efforts with non-federal partners to achieve the
  goals of technology transfer
• Does not replace or get around the FAR which is
  still necessary for the procurement of
  capabilities or the purchase of services
• Relatively easy short timeline
• CRADAs provide the means to leverage technologies
  or capabilities developed by other organizations
• Encourages the creation of teams (government and
  private sector partners) to solve problems

20
Characteristics of a CRADA

• Efforts are collaborative
• Government resources (people, facilities,
  equipment, databases, MS tools) can be provided
  to support the CRADA, but no government funds
  can be paid to the non-government partner
• Not a part of acquisition/procurement process
  FAR regulations are not applicable
• CRADAs can incorporate a variety of arrangements
  to protect intellectual property, but in all
  cases the government retains a non exclusive,
  nontransferable, irrevocable, paid-up license to
  inventions developed under the CRADA.
• Corporate trade secrets are protected
• Can have durations ranging from weeks to multiple
  years

21
Initiating a CRADA

• The process of establishing a CRADA begins with
  dialog on a technical area of mutual interest
  between an outside organization and a JFCOM
  organization (the CRADA partners).
• Jointly identify the RD content (research plan)
  of the CRADA activities what are the objectives?
• Identify principal investigators for both the
  government and the non-government partners
• Identify what the government partner will do and
  what the non-government partner will do
  (activities, products, deliverables, schedule)
• Identify what resources the government and the
  non-government partners will contribute the
  government cannot contribute funds to the
  non-government partner
• A completed research plan combined with a fairly
  standard legal section forms the CRADA which goes
  into effect after both parties have signed it.

22
Role of the Principal Investigator
The Idea for the CRADA often originates with
the PI who also

• Initiates preliminary discussions
• Drafts the Statement of Work or the Research
  Plan
• Reviews the CRADA with the ORTA
• Assists the ORTA in negotiations with the
  non-government partner
• Executes the CRADA to include submission of
  periodic progress reports

23
Steps to CRADA Development

• Step 2 Draft CRADA
• Develop Research Plan
• Discussion with partners
• Financial obligations
• Partnering issues
• Intellectual property

• Step 3 Review
• Organization management
• Agency/lab legal staff
• ORTA
• Partner

• Step 5 Final Negotiation/Signature
• Submit for partner signature
• Possible renegotiate/ final revisions
• Final legal approval
• Lab director signature

• Step 6 - Execution
• Perform SOW tasks
• File progress reports

KEY
24
CRADA Activity

• Working
• Lockheed and J9 Command and control, network
  centric operations, experimentation
• Lockheed and J9 JWARS (possibly also Boeing)
• Discussions
• General Dynamics and J6/J9 Cross domain
  information sharing MNIS
• IBM and J6/J9
• BAE Systems and J6/J9 Cross domain info
  sharing MNIS MLS
• Microsoft and J7 Desktop simulation
• Honeywell Easier and faster methodology to
  certify/accredit networks for experiments and
  exercises (DITSCAP)
• Very preliminary
• SAIC
• Northrup MS networks
• NITEWorks Collaborative experimentation

25
Why Develop High-Priority List?

• Provide the focus for technology transfer
  activities
• Publish on Technology Transfer web page to inform
  private sector of our interests
• Provide themes for Focused Forums
• Provide themes for Requests for Information
• Guides external scouting for technologies
• Provides guidance to potential partners for
  CRADAs
• Provides guidance for private sector IRAD
  programs
• Lower priority tech transfer issues will not be
  ignored

26
Hi-Pri T2 Issues Focus Activities
TIE, DEMO, CRADA 1
Focused Forum Issue 1
TIE, DEMO, CRADA 2
TIE, DEMO, CRADA 3
Focused Forum Issue 2
TIE, DEMO, CRADA 4
Top 12 High Priority T2 Issues
TIE, DEMO, CRADA 5
TIE, DEMO, CRADA 6
Focused Forum Issue 3
TIE, DEMO, CRADA 7
TIE, DEMO, CRADA 8
ORTA/T2 Web Page
Focused Forum Issue 4
TIE, DEMO, CRADA 9
TIE, DEMO, CRADA 10
27
Discussion
28
How to Initiate a CRADA

• Two methods - - Lab (JFCOM) initiated and
  Industry initiated
• Lab initiated
• Primary Investigator sees a commercial use for
  an invention and wants to get it spun off for
  commercial development (probably most unlikely
  scenario)
• A PI initiates a CRADA to obtain use of unique
  resources that the organization otherwise would
  be unable to use.
• Industry initiated
• Industry wants to develop a product which can
  only be produced with the help of the federal
  lab/ or that use of government resources would be
  more cost effective
• Industry would look for specific JFCOM products
  that could be licensed for commercial uses

29
Win-Win Situation

• Tech transfer is a win-win situation, where both
  the command and industry benefit
• New authorities will speed the process of turning
  the best ideas from industry, academia, national
  labs and other government labs into new
  capabilities for the joint warfighter
• Will allow innovative companies to participate in
  the ongoing USJFCOM transformation process

30
CRADA Example

• A Cooperative Research and Development Agreement
  is signed between JFCOM and XYZ company
• XYZ uses their RD to accelerate innovation and
  prototyping
• JFCOM shares information, personnel and access to
  laboratories and equipment
• XYZ and JFCOM cooperate to develop a capability
• XYZ retains intellectual property rights in the
  technologies developed during the collaborative
  RD effort

31
Authorities

• Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act (PL
  96-480), 1980
• Bayh-Dole Act (PL 96-517 The Patent and
  Trademark Law Amendments Act), 1980
• Federal Technology Transfer Act (PL 99-502),
  1986.
• Executive Order 12591, Facilitating Access to
  Science Technology, 1987
• National Defense Authorization Acts for FY 1991,
  1993, 1994
• National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act
  (PL 104-113), 1996
• DoD Directive 5535.3, DoD Domestic Technology
  Transfer (T2) Program, May 1999
• DoD Inst 5535.8, DoD Technology Transfer (T2)
  Program, May 1999
• DoD 3210.6-R DoD Grant and Agreement Regulation
  (DGARS)
• Small Business Innovation Development Act (PL
  97-219)
• Patent and Trademark Clarification Act (PL
  98-620)
• Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act (PL
  100-418)
• National Competitiveness Technology Transfer Act
  (PL 101-189)
• Technology Transfer Commercialization Act (PL
  106-404)