MEP Advisory Board Meeting January 28, 2014. Today’s Agenda 8:30 amMeeting LogisticsKaren Lellock,...

MEP Advisory Board Meeting

January 28, 2014

Today’s Agenda8:30 am Meeting Logistics Karen Lellock, NIST MEP

8:40 am Welcome Introductions and Opening Remarks Vickie Wessel, Vice Chair

8:50 am Audience Introductions

9:00 am MEP Director Update on Activities Phil Singerman, Acting Director NIST MEP

9:45 am NIST Manufacturing Initiatives Roger Kilmer, NIST Chief Manufacturing Officer

10:15 am Break

10:30 am MEP Strategic Planning and Board Discussion Denny Dotson, Chair & Strategy Subcommittee Members

12:30 pm Lunch

1:30 pm Strategic Planning & Discussion Part 2 Denny Dotson, Chair & Strategy Subcommittee Members

2:30 pm MEP Update on Recent Board Recommendations NIST MEP Staff

3:15 pm Break

3:30 pm Board Discussion, Feedback, and Public Comments

5:00 pm Adjournment

2January 28, 2014 Advisory Board Meeting

NIST MEP Director Update

January 28, 2014 Advisory Board Meeting 3

Budget Update


NIST FY 2014 Omnibus Appropriations Bill(Dollars in millions)

FY 2014 FY 2014 FY 2013 President's CongressionalEnacted Request Budget

STRS $579.8 $693.7 $651.0Laboratory Programs 517.1 616.8 TBD

Corporate Services 17.3 18.7 TBDStandards Coordination and Special Programs 45.4 58.2 TBD

ITS $133.6 $174.5 $143.0Advanced Manufacturing Technology Consortium (AMTech) 10.6 21.4 15.0

Hollings Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) 123.0 * 153.1 128.0

CRF $55.9 $60.0 $56.0 Construction and Major Renovations 11.8 11.8 TBD

Safety, Capacity, Maintenance and Major Repairs 44.1 48.2 TBD

Total Discretionary $769.3 $928.2 $850.0

National Network for Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI) $0.0 $1,000.0 $0.0

Total NIST $769.3 $1,928.2 $850.0

*Includes Transfer of $3 Million from AMTech


NIST MEP Appropriations History (Dollars in Millions)

FY 2010 $124.7

FY 2011 $128.4

FY 2012 $128.4

FY 2013 $120.0

FY 2014 $128.0


NIST MEP Spend Plan(Dollars in Millions)

FY 2014(budgeted)

Existing Center Renewals $89.4

Additional Available Center Fund 10.6

Strategic Competitions 6.7

Support to Centers 5.5 Programmatic Support $2.4

Centralized MEP System Support $3.1

MEP Labor + Benefits 8.2Other Objects 1.2

NIST Overhead 4.3

$125.9

Carryover/contingency 2.1

TOTAL $128.0

*Includes $3 million transfer from AMTech


January 2014 NIST Manufacturing Programs 8

Working with Industry toPromote U.S. Innovationand Industrial Competitiveness

Roger D. KilmerChief Manufacturing Officer

National Institute of Standards and TechnologyDepartment of Commerce

8


NIST’s Mission

To promote U.S.

innovation and industrial

competitiveness by

advancing measurement

science, standards,

and technology in ways that

enhance economic security

and improve our quality of life.


Major Assets• ~ 3,000 Employees; 1800 Scientists and Engineers

• ~ 2,800 Associates and Facilities Users

• ~ 400 NIST Staff on ~1,000 national and international

standards committees

• JILA – atomic, molecular, & optical physics

• JQI – quantum science

• IBBR – biotech – adv. therapeutics

• HML – marine bioscience

• NCCoE – cybersecurity

• CHiMaD – “materials by design”

NIST-at-a-Glance

NIST has two main campuses…… and six joint institutes

Gaithersburg, MD62 buildings; 578 acres

Boulder, CO26 buildings; 208 acres

Plus~ $120 M from other Government Agencies~ $50 M for other reimbursable services

Plus two sites housing NIST radio stations:• Ft. Collins; 390 acres • Kauai; US Navy 30 acre site

FY2014 - $850M


NIST Laboratories Provide measurement and standards solutions for industry

and the nation

Manufacturing Extension Partnership - MEP Nationwide network of centers helps smaller manufacturers

compete globally

Advanced Manufacturing Office - AMO Enhances technology transfer in U.S. manufacturing

industries and helps companies overcome technical obstacles to scaling up production of new technologies

Baldrige Performance Excellence Program Strengthens performance excellence in U.S. organizations

NIST ProgramsM

aksi

m D

ubin

sky/

shutt

erst

ock.

com

Poud

re©

R. R

athe


NIST Strategic Framework

National Priorities:

• Advanced Manufacturing

• Cybersecurity

• Advanced Communications

• Cyber-Physical Systems

• Healthcare

• Forensic Science

• Disaster Resilience

Long Term Trends:

• Biotechnology

• Modeling and Simulation

• Big Data

• Systems Engineering

• In-place Precision Measurement


Advanced Manufacturing

Advanced manufacturing is . . .

. . . a family of activities that (a) depend on the use and coordination of information, automation, computation, software, sensing, and networking, and/or (b) make use of cutting-edge materials and emerging capabilities enabled by the physical and biological sciences, for example nanotechnology, chemistry, and biology. This involves both new ways to manufacture existing products, and especially the manufacture of new products emerging from new advanced technologies.

PCAST Report, June 2011

This requires: Innovative Approaches Measurements and Standards Multidiscipline Expertise Technology Adoption Partnerships and Collaboration


NIST Activities in Advanced Manufacturing• NIST Labs

– Precision Measurements– Bio- and Nano-manufacturing– Smart Manufacturing– Advanced Materials

• Advanced Manufacturing Office– NNMI– AMTech

• Manufacturing Extension Partnership– National Network of MEP Centers– M-TAC

We (NIST) want to make sure that our programs are focused on what we “Should Do” rather than what we “Could Do” to strengthen U.S. manufacturing, new materials discovery and innovation.

U.S. Innovation Agenda – NIST has an increasing roleOur first priority is making America a magnet for new jobs and manufacturing .

Last year, we created our first manufacturing innovation institute in Youngstown, Ohio. A once-shuttered warehouse is now a state-of-the art lab where new workers are mastering the 3D printing that has the potential to revolutionize the way we make almost everything. There’s no reason this can’t happen in other towns.

So tonight, I’m announcing the launch of three more of these manufacturing hubs, where businesses will partner with the Departments of Defense and Energy to turn regions left behind by globalization into global centers of high-tech jobs.

And I ask this Congress to help create a network of 15 of these hubs and guarantee that the next revolution in manufacturing is made right here in America.

President ObamaState of the Union Address

February 13, 2013

New Lab Initiative Funding:

• FY2012 – $19M• FY2013 – $15M• FY2014 – $30M

Advisory Board Meeting 14


NIST’s Support for Technological Innovation

• Measurement is key to technological innovation – Understand how things work Improve the design Optimize control

• Basic Research – NIST Laboratories

• User Facilities – NIST CNST & NCNR

• Centers of Excellence – National Cybersecurity & Advanced Materials

• Consortium Building – AMTech

• Partnerships for Technology Development – NNMI

• Supply Chain Technology Deployment – M-TAC

• Regional Partnerships for Technology Adoption – MEP

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This provides multiple resources and connection points to identify, develop and adopt innovative

technology.


MEP

Metrology and Research

Supply Chain Technology

Deployment and Adoption

NIST Labs

Basic Applied Commercialization

NIST Programs Supporting Manufacturing

AMTech

Pre-competitive R & D

Applied RD&D addressing Scale-Up

NNMI

MTAC

Regional Partnerships for Technology Deployment &

Adoption


NIST Chief Manufacturing Officer

Support the NIST Director (Dr. Patrick Gallagher) and Associate Director for Laboratory Programs (Dr. Willie May) in the direction and management of manufacturing programs.

Serve as the strategic advisor in terms of program planning, operations and execution of laboratory-based manufacturing initiatives.

Facilitate cross-organizational coordination within NIST and with partners/stakeholders to ensure manufacturing programs target national needs.

Provide representation of the manufacturing-related portfolio within the NIST Laboratory Programs to external stakeholders including Congress and other agencies.

Coordinate high-profile manufacturing programs that span the mission and expertise of NIST laboratories.


NIST Laboratory Program

Associate Director for Laboratory Programs

Material Measurement

Laboratory

Physical Measurement

Laboratory

Engineering Laboratory

Information Technology Laboratory

Center for Nanoscale

Science and Technology

NIST Center for Neutron

Research

Special Programs OfficeLaw Enforcement Standards, National Security Standards, Climate Assessment & Advanced Communications Programs

Standards Coordination OfficeStandards Services DivisionNIST Quality Manager

NIST Lab Resources for FY13• ~ $580 million from Direct Appropriations• ~ $120 million from Other Federal and State Agencies • ~ $50 million for other reimbursable services

Driving innovation through Measurement Science and Standards

Metrology LaboratoriesMetrology Laboratories

Accelerating the adoption and deployment of advanced technology solutions

Technology LaboratoriesTechnology Laboratories

Providing world class, unique, cutting-edge research facilities

National User FacilitiesNational User Facilities

CommunicationTechnology Laboratory

FY2014 ~ $650M


1. Driving innovation through measurement

2. Accelerating the adoption and deployment of advanced technology solutions

3. Providing world class, unique, cutting-edge research user facilities

Primary Missions

NIST Laboratories

Baxley/JILA

NIST

Rathe

Young/NIST

http://www.nist.gov

http://www.nist.gov/

http://www.nist.gov/


NIST Metrology Laboratories

The Material Measurement Laboratory (MML) serves as the national reference laboratory for measurements in the chemical, biological, and material sciences through activities ranging from fundamental and applied research, to the development and dissemination of certified reference materials, critically evaluated data, and other programs/tools to assure the quality of measurement results.

The Physical Measurement Laboratory (PML) develops and disseminates the national standards of length, mass, force and shock, acceleration, time and frequency, electricity, temperature, humidity, pressure and vacuum, liquid and gas flow, and electromagnetic, acoustic, ultrasonic, and ionizing radiation through activities ranging from fundamental measurement research to provision of measurement services, including calibration services, standards, and data.

Responsible for advancing the state-of-the-art for measurement science and the dissemination of this metrology into industry, other government agencies, and academia.


NIST Technology Laboratories

Information Technology Laboratory (ITL)Cybersecurity

Cloud Computing

Identity Management

Computer Forensics

Wireless Communications

Health IT

Engineering Laboratory (EL)Building Technologies

Fire Research

Smart Grid & Energy Technology

Advanced Manufacturing Technology


NIST – Research User Facilities

The Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology (CNST) provides national access to world-class nanoscale measurement and fabrication methods and technology.

Operates the rapid-access NanoFab, a shared resource with a comprehensive, commercial state-of-the-art nanofabrication tool set

Provides access to emerging, cutting-edge instrumentation being developed by CNST’s multidisciplinary research staff

The NIST Center for Neutron Research (NCNR) is a national resource for researchers from industry, university and other government agencies.

Currently 28 experiment stations Hosts more than 2,000 researchers annually


NEW – NIST Laboratory

Communication Technology Laboratory NIST and NTIA will work together to focus on Advanced Communications• MOU between NIST and NTIA signed on May 24th, 2013

Planned Objectives:• Enhancing mission effectiveness of both agencies by better coordinating

research and testing functions of NIST and NTIA• Promoting interdisciplinary research, development, and testing in advanced

communication-related areas (radio frequency technology, digital information processing, cybersecurity, etc.)

• Providing a single focal point for engaging both industry and other government agencies


• Public-private collaboration to design, implement, test, and demonstrate integrated cybersecurity solutions and promote their widespread adoption.

• Center hosts “Use Cases” that:– Represent complex cybersecurity business challenges – Require an integrated solution that has clear benefits for one or more

particular industry sectors • Results from NCCoE projects will be shared with the broad IT user and

vendor communities.• “Use Cases” demonstrate cybersecurity principles and practices that are

feasible for businesses and measure them against standards.– Health Care IT Use Case - Q4FY12– Cloud IT Use Case - Q1FY13– Continuous Monitoring Use Case - Q1FY13– Energy Use Case Q1FY14

National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence (NCCoE)

www.nist.gov/itl/csd/nccoe-022112.cfmwww.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/upload/nccoe.pdf

The State of Maryland and Montgomery County, Md., will partner with NIST in the New National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence. A Memorandum of Understanding was signed Feb. 21, 2012

Photo Credit: NIST

January 28, 2014 Advisory Board Meeting

http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/upload/nccoe.pdf


• RFP in 2013 published June 27th, closed August 12th

• Awarded to new Center for Hierarchical Materials Design (CHiMaD) Consortium lead by Northwestern

• University of Chicago

• Northwestern-Argonne Institute of Science and Engineering (partnership between Northwestern and DoE’s Argonne National Lab)

• The Computation Institute (partnership between University of Chicago and Argonne National Lab)

• $5 million NIST award with $4.65 million consortium contribution

• CHiMaD will focus on the discovery of novel hierarchical materials. Hierarchical materials exploit distinct structural details at various scales from the atomic on up to achieve special, enhanced properties.

Advanced Materials Center of Excellence

Cred

it: D

ougl

as/N

IST


Advanced Manufacturing: Precision Measurements

Cre

dit:

NIS

T

Cre

dit:

Tom

lin/N

IST

This program supports a new paradigm in self-calibration capabilities for U.S. manufacturers

New self-calibrating measurements are important: • Current methods for calibrating machinery and

assessing quality can introduce cost and time delays • Applies to virtually all manufacturing processes• New precision measurement capabilities would provide

competitive advantage to U.S. manufacturers

NIST will: • Leverage initial successes, i.e., miniature atomic clocks,

into a range of measurements (electrical quantities, pressure, temperature)

• Provide on-chip reference measurements to improve the quality and reliability of manufacturing processes


Advanced Manufacturing: NIST-on-a-Chip

An integrated program to develop and deploy SI-traceable measurements and physical standards that are:

• Flexible - Provide a broad range of SI-traceable measurements and standards (often quantum-based) relevant to the

particular customer needs / applications.- One, few, or many measurements from a single small form package.

• Manufacturable - Potential for production costs commensurate with the applications.- Low cost for broad deployment; or- Acceptable cost for high-value applications.

• Deployed in the customer’s factory floor, lab, device, system, home, anywhere... • Usable - Usually small size (important exceptions), low power consumption, rugged,

easily integrated and operated.

• Photonic sensing of thermodynamic quantitiesReplace obsolete, limited performance resistance thermometers with easily deployable, robust photonic systems (fiber systems with chip-based sensors).

• Quantum-based electrical standardsExpand capabilities of existing chip-based voltage measurements and prepare for new measurement technologies for current and other electrical quantities.

• Atom-based measurements in vapor cellsDramatic improvement in deployed measurements of time, length, magnetic field and other quantities.

• Optical / photonic input and outputMicroscale laser frequency comb technologies to transduce “on chip” measurement to user-friendly quantities and sensed parameters to “chip measurable” quantities.

NIST is building on its earlier successes to: develop much broader range of deployable SI-traceable measurements and integrate multiple measurements into single devices.


This program supports manufacturers in overcoming barriers to the high volume production of transformative materials and products based on emerging trends in nanotechnology and biotechnology

Advanced Manufacturing: Measurement Science and Standards to Support Emerging Technologies in Bio- and Nano-manufacturing

Barriers exist for full commercial exploitation of manufacturing processes integrating emerging technologies • Lack of nanomanufacturing and nanomaterial characterization tools

means significant delay and high cost of product development• Lack of measurements to characterize the environmental, health,

and safety risks of engineered nanomaterials• Biotechnology medicines are the fastest growing category of health

care spending, but manufacturing processes are not optimizedNIST will:• Characterize manufactured nanomaterials to enable accurate

assessment of health and environmental risks• Develop innovative measurement methods to ensure product

quality during high-speed processing of nanocomposite systems• Better tools to determine safety and efficacy of biopharmaceuticals

including characterization of 3-D protein structure and glycosylation• Support new manufacturing paradigms that use cells as factories


Advanced Manufacturing: Measurement Science and Data Infrastructure for Advanced Materials

• In the same way that silicon in the 70s led to the modern IT era, advanced materials could fuel multibillion dollar industries in energy, national security, and human welfare.

• This effort will provide critical links needed to realize the vision of the Materials Genome Initiative (MGI), aimed at accelerating industrial innovation by significantly reducing the timeline from discovery to commercial deployment for new materials.

• NIST will support the MGI and enable advanced materials by developing:

o Computational and validated databases, data assessment tools, and standards

o Modeling and simulation tools o Mechanisms for exchange of information

This program is focused on enabling and accelerating the creation and manufacture of innovative, advanced materials via the integration of modeling and simulation, experimental tools, and digital data/informatics.

Atomistic simulations of materials used in automotive light-weighting


Advanced Manufacturing: Smart Manufacturing

NIST work in this area will provide U.S. manufacturers with foundations for optimizing production and quality.

Smart Manufacturing refers to production systems at the equipment, factory, and enterprise levels that integrate cyber and physical systems to enable innovative production, products, and systems of products. This requires infrastructural advances to enable:

• smart operations systems to monitor, control, and optimize performance • systems engineering-based open architectures and standards, and • embedded and/or distributed sensing, computing, communications, actuation, and control

technologiesNIST will:

• Develop measurements and standards for a quality measurement system focusing on automated in-process quality monitoring and control

• Develop a testbed which integrates a systems architecture framework and an open standards platform for facilitating the simultaneous engineering of the computational (cyber) and physical elements of manufacturing systems


High impact partnerships with manufacturers

Electronics Industry - Partnerships with e.g. SEMATECH, INTEL, IBM and Rohm & Haas enabled:

• industry adoption of models that optimize processes for deposition of metals into nanoscale IC vias and interconnects

• measurements and models for nanoporosity necessary for manufacturers to adopt a new generation of low-K dielectric materials

• X-ray based dimensional metrology instrumentation needed to quantify the shape, fidelity and roughness of 3D chip nanostructures

Automotive Industry - Partnerships with USCAR, USX, Alcoa, GM and Ford enabled:

• Development of instrumented dies needed to quantify the sheet-forming behavior of emerging lightweight alloys for fuel efficient vehicles

• Industry adoption of new used to accelerate the design of dies suitable for lightweight aluminum and high-strength steel alloys.


NIST Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO)

• New NIST Advanced Manufacturing Technology Consortia (AMTech) Program. Consortia solicitation proposal evaluations underway.

• $7.4 Million for Additive Manufacturing Research and Measurement Science for Advanced Manufacturing (MSAM)

• Provides core support for interagency Advanced Manufacturing National Program Office (AMNPO) and NNMI, including staffing of President’s Advanced Manufacturing Partnership (AMP 2.0)

AMTech

MSAM for Additive Manufacturing

http://www.manufacturing.gov

http://www.manufacturing.gov/

http://www.manufacturing.gov/


Advanced Manufacturing Technology ConsortiaNewly authorized program, includes:

1. Planning awards: multi-sector consortia to develop a shared vision of industry’s research needs via a technology roadmap 2013: $4.5M for multiple planning awards.

2. Implementation awards: larger awards to consortia to facilitate the realization of clearly stated long-term industry research needs. 2014: $15M

Nanoelectronics Research Initiative (NRI)demonstrate non-conventional, low-energy technologies which can outperform CMOS on critical applications in ten years and beyond.

NIST technically collaborates with the NRI Program on a wide range of measurement needs in areas such as: graphene devices, tunnel-transistors, spintronics, and nanomagnetics.

NRI Centers funded by Industrial consortia, Federal and State funds.

33


National Network for Manufacturing Innovation - NNMI

March 2012

January 2013

2014Next Steps!

15 IMIs + PilotCongressional Authorization

Formation of Network and

New Institutes

Additive Manufacturing Pilot Institute Digital Mfg ● Power Electronics ● Lightweight Metals

3 Full Institutes Vision of 45 InstitutesWorkshops, Public Comment

• Led by the White House and interagency Advanced Manufacturing National Program Office (AMNPO)

• President’s proposed $1B, one-time funds to establish up to 15 Institutes for Manufacturing Innovation, a program to be managed by AMNPO at NIST

• Awaiting Congressional authorization and appropriation• PCAST’s Advanced Manufacturing Partnership 2.0 working to improve manufacturing in U.S.

January 2014 – three full size institutes

34


Questions?

36

NIST MEP Strategic PlanningAdvisory Board Session


Generic Strategic Planning Process

• Data Collection• Data Review and SWOT Analysis• Strategy Development• Measurement Selection and Alignment• Action Plan Development• Execution and Review

Mission/Vision to be revisited after feedback from January Board/System meetings


Guiding Principles – Advisory Board Subcommittee

38

Include inputs from:• States• Centers: Directors and Board Chairs• Manufacturers – include large firms• Associations • Administration priorities• Other key stakeholders

Plan should be high-level with strategic and operational metrics

Develop a process for measuring performance and reporting


Guiding Principles – Centers

39

• Create a broad framework with objectives that are not prescriptive

• Acknowledge the differences in states and centers

• Focus on the needs of the clients

• Allow for flexibility and diversity

• Identify (few) aligned performance metrics


Actions to Date

40

June 2012 Pat Gallagher’s Charge to Board

Sept 2012 1st Advisory Board Subcommittee CallCenters’ Input – Strategic Planning Process in

PortlandFull Advisory Board Update

Oct – Dec Weekly Strategic Planning Team (SPT) Meetings Nov 14 NGA MeetingDec 10-11 Center Advisory Group Meeting Dec & Jan Advisory Board Subcommittee Calls

Regional Center Board Chair CallsAssociation and Federal Agency Mtgs.Review of Center Strategic PlansEnvironmental Scanning (reports, etc.)


High Level Timeline Moving Forward

41

January

January 27-29

Feb – May

May – July


Organize and prioritize inputs (Draft SWOT elements)

Advisory Board and System Meeting: -- Visioning exercise (Advisory Board) -- Review and revision of SWOT elements-- Begin strategy development: strategic responses to SWOT

Build out of full plan in consultation with subcommittee and other key stakeholdersReview of plan by Advisory Board

Action plan development and implementation

Data Collection – External Sources

Federal Agencies• Commerce, Defense, Energy, Labor, Environmental Protection Agency,

National Science Foundation, Small Business Administration, SelectUSAStates

• NIST-sponsored NGA Policy Academy: AK, AR, DE, KY, MA, MT, NC, OK, PA, VT, WV

• Additional Follow-up Planned

Associations• Alliance for American Manufacturing, American Association of Community

Colleges, Association for Manufacturing Technology, Fabricators & Manufacturers Association, International Economic Development Council , National Association of Manufacturers, State Science and Technology Institute


What We Have Learned So FarCalls with Center Board Chairs

43

• US Manufacturing can compete on customer service and short lead times

• Most significant challenges relate to policies/regulations or business climate vis a vis foreign competition

• Exception is workforce – recruitment, retention, retirement

• State leaders respond to MEP centers’ ability to increase tax base

• Uncertainty of funding (national, state, NIST) is a major concern

• NIST MEP direction overly prescriptive and changeable


What We Have Learned So FarCenter Workgroup for Reporting and Evaluation

44

• Manufacturing is hot and MEP is well positioned to benefit – strong accountability, demonstrated ROI, client-focused expertise

• Need to make better use of data from survey

• Initiatives that do not generate revenue create challenges

• Initiatives that do not take into account state/center variability create challenges

• Opportunities: - supply chain;

- “green”, but customized;

- additive manufacturing, but can’t currently deliver value-added, revenue-generating services

• Current engagement strategy is a huge improvement


What We Have Learned So FarState Partners – NIST sponsored NGA Academy

45

• Manufacturing is important in states (states were asked to rank manufacturing’s importance to their state on a 10 point scale and the average ranking was 7.85), but awareness is low

• Workforce development is most significant issue

• States would like to see MEP centers take a bigger role- Need to generate revenue is a barrier

- Centers perceived as too focused on transactions to be part of strategic conversation

• Encouraged more flexibility for centers to engage in things like: workforce development, rebranding of manufacturing, connecting startups to technology, etc.

• Communication with centers/NIST currently good; more communication would be helpful if purposeful and high quality


What We Have Learned So FarEnvironmental Scanning

46

• Report Summaries

- Administration: PCAST, NSTC, Nat’l. Export Initiative, etc.- States: NGA Policy Academy, GA Mfg Survey, etc.- Global: World Economic Forum, KPMG, IDA, etc.- Think Tanks: ITIF, McKinsey,

• Manufacturing Trends• Non-Manufacturing Trends


What We Have Learned So Far

47

Exporting

Technology needs

Financing

Managing suppliers

Sustainability

Workforce

Product innovation

Growth

Continuous Improvement

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

6%

9%

10%

11%

18%

25%

37%

43%

55%

7%

9%

15%

11%

21%

17%

38%

49%

59%

Client Challenges (N ~ 24,000 per 3 year cohort)

3 Years Ago %Past 3 Years %

Percent Selecting


To Date:• NIST MEP managers have read and discussed the report• NIST MEP hosted a webinar for the benefit of MEP System with Report Chair Phil Shapira• NIST MEP management has been reviewing the recommendations, and were already working on

many when the report was released• NIST MEP will use findings/recommendations as key inputs into our ongoing strategic planning effort• NIST MEP will suggest “clarifications” to Academies to correct certain items from the report

Moving Forward:• January discussion with National Advisory Board• Consult with centers on implementation of recommendations (beginning with presentation at

tomorrow’s full system meeting as part of “Strategic Planning” discussion) much like we have the Center Workgroup for Reporting and Evaluation.

• Formal response from Board in their Annual Report (within 30 days of President’s Proposed Budget)• This draft is intended to provide program guidance for the Board’s consideration in their formal

response and begin consultation with centers

48

What We Have Learned So FarNational Academies Report on 21st Century Manufacturing


What We Have Learned So FarNational Academies Study - Recommendations

January 28, 2014 49Advisory Board Meeting

1. Focus more on driving the overall improvement of MEP centers rather than focusing on the outcomes of individual centers

– CORE, System Meetings, Center Panel Reviews, State Partnerships2. Use resources to leverage maximum beneficial outcomes rather than reaching

the maximum number of manufacturers– Strategic Planning, CORE, Client Analysis, Business Model research

3. Continue to encourage lean manufacturing– CORE Impact Metrics/Center Diagnostics, “Lean Integration”

4. Continue Next Generation Strategy but address challenges inherent in its transition

– Contracts Review, Peer Working Groups, Strategic Plan, Empowered Boards

What We Have Learned So FarNational Academies Study – Recommendations, cont.

5. Significantly improve its collection and analysis of performance data– More center sharing/collaboration, CORE, Survey Response Rates,

Imputation/Modeling, “Research as Service” rather than solely “Performance Reporting”

6. Federal funding for the MEP Program should be at a level commensurate with its mission, and take into account relevant international benchmarks.

– Cost share recommendations, center re-application, center rebalancing, reducing reporting burden and increased operational efficiencies

7. Be more flexible in the management and funding of MEP centers– Cost share recommendations

8. Take into account lessons from U.S. and international best practice– Increased MEP feedback on NIST 3 Year Plan (through Advisory Board’s Annual

Report)– Overlap of board membership on policy committees (e.g. Jeff Wilcox on DOC

Manufacturing Council)

January 28, 2014 50Advisory Board Meeting

What We Have Learned So FarNational Academies Study – Next Steps

51

• Finalizing “program response” for consideration by Board for eventual Board response that will be included as part of Board’s Annual Report

• Engagement with Board and System in Charlotte January 2014

• Use findings and recommendations in strategic planning SWOT and other inputs

• Offer areas in which we disagree with facts presented or to help clarify findings/recommendations to NAS authors


Visioning Exercise: “What does success look like for the MEP System?”

52

• Who are the stakeholders critical to the sustainability and growth of the MEP program?

• What measureable outcomes must we achieve to meet/exceed their expectations?


Visioning Exercise: “What does success look like for an MEP center?”

53

• What outcomes will be need to be produced by MEP centers to achieve this vision?


Set-up for SWOT Discussions

54

Objective: Use the SWOT Analysis to develop potential strategic responses

– SWOT is a descriptive analysis– Strategy occurs through the responses to this analysis– Typically at the intersection of the Internal and External

Using your thoughts from your pre-work you will be discussing potential strategic responses to the SWOT


Developing Strategic Responses

55

Generic Approach to Strategic Responses


Developing Strategic Responses


Strategic Plan Format• Two Pages in A3 Format

57

Strategy Metrics Initiatives


Strategy Development Timeline

58

Feb-Mar

April-May

May

May- JuneJanuary 28, 2014 Advisory Board Meeting

Develop Draft Strategic PlanReview by: Staff

ASMC “Hill Day”Engaged

StakeholdersRevise Draft Strategic PlanReview by: Advisory Board

Subcommittee

Finalize Strategic PlanShare with: Advisory Board

SystemNIST/DOC

Board Mtg: Review and Endorsement of Strategic PlanGuidance on Operational Planning

Operational Planning and Implementation

Strategic Plan Review and Updates

59

When and how should the Strategic Plan be reviewed?

What should be the process for updating the Strategic Plan?


Wrap-up

60

How are you feeling about the strategy effort?

Any final guidance as we move forward?


NIST MEP Update on Recent Board Recommendations


NIST MEP Advisory Board Recommendation Follow-up

Employee Exchange Program


Background and Potential BenefitsBackground:At the recommendation of the MEP National Advisory Board, NIST MEP developed a plan for implementing an Employee Exchange Program between the MEP Centers and NIST MEP

Potential Benefits:– To the MEP Centers:

• A better understanding of NIST’s role in maintaining a nationwide network of MEP Centers

• Improved communications with NIST MEP• A better understanding of the intricacies of operating in a Federal government

environment with multiple constituencies (e.g., DOC, other Federal agencies, Congress and White House)

– To NIST MEP:• Improved understanding of complexities in running an MEP Center• Better understanding of partner organizations and stakeholder relations• Better understanding of needs, challenges and growth opportunities for U.S.

manufacturers


Action Steps:• Sep 2013 - Established an internal team comprised of Ron Gan, Mike Simpson, Tab Wilkins and

Melissa Davis.

• Nov/Dec 2013 - Developed an Employee Exchange Model and presented this proposed program to the Center Director Working Group.

• Dec 2013/Jan2014 - Made revisions to the Model based on Center Director Working Group input and presented the plan to the National Advisory Board.

• Feb/May 2014 - Pilot the proposed model.

• May 2014 - Provide the NIST MEP Advisory Board with an update of the pilot Employee Exchange program and a proposed rollout plan.


Proposed Pilot Approach

Pilot Program:• In conjunction with a pilot group of Centers, develop a set of topics (e.g. developing a viable

Business Model for the E3 Program, expansion of the ExporTech program in the Center system) for participants to focus on during their exchange details.

• Identify a set of MEP Centers that are interested/concerned with topics that are identified. Work with the Centers to determine a “statement of work” to be accomplished during the employee exchange detail.

• NIST MEP to pay travel costs for both NIST staff and Center staff participating in the exchange program. MEP Centers and NIST MEP would continue to cover the salary/labor costs of their respective employees.


Proposed Pilot Approach (continued)Model of Center staff detailed to NIST

– May involve multiple visits to NIST MEP, with each visit lasting approximately 5-10 days– Topical Focus (e.g. Operating Plan Development, Survey Process, Program Development and

Deployment, Panel Reviews, etc.)– In-depth and live “walk-through” of NIST processes and organizations– Observe relevant operating approaches used by NIST– Help develop National Working Groups

Model of NIST staff detailed to MEP Centers– Visit a set of Centers (2-3 days at each MEP Center)– Topical focus (e.g., Operating Plan Development, Survey Process, Program Development and

Deployment, etc.)– Visits to be conducted in “real time” (i.e., MEP staff to be integrated into actual work being

done by the MEP Center)– Upon return to NIST, employee exchange participant to debrief fellow NIST MEP staff on the

detail, including lessons learned and opportunities for improved alignment with Centers


QUESTIONS?

Thank You


Center Advisory Group


69

Purpose and Intent of Our Efforts • Reduce center burden • Increase center flexibility • Better inform center choices• Better articulate program impacts, outputs, and

outcomes• Better inform national policy dialogue• Maintain program integrity and credibility• Gather center input as part of decision making

processJanuary 28, 2014 Advisory Board Meeting

70

Center Advisory Group Membership Criteria

Diversity of:• Geography• State / Sub-State • Business Model• Size• Performance• Funding• Center/System Experience


71

Center Workgroup Members• Northeast: Bonnie Del Conte (CT)

Ben Rand (NY/Buffalo Region)

• Mid-Atlantic: Jack Pfunder (PA - Lehigh Valley Region)Dave Satterfield (WV)

• Southeast: Karen Fite (GA)Chester Vrocher (AL)

• Midwest: Bob Kill (MN)Dave Snow (IN)

• Southwest: Ron Lehman (TX)Tom Bugnitz (CO)

• Northwest: Jim Watson (CA - Southern CA)Sandy Haslem (NV)


72

Center Workgroup Process• September Meeting via web/phone• November – individual center calls• December – 2 day “in person” meeting• Today’s Presentation – Color Commentary and

Reflection – Tom Bugnitz (CO)– Karen Fite (GA)


73

Key Decisions: Areas of Focus • Definition of Manufacturing • CORE• Project Coding• Reduction of Reporting Burden• Data Sharing within MEIS


Program Evaluation and Management



Program Evaluation and ManagementObjective:

• Establish a Decision Framework Methodology- Effectively support strategic initiatives- Efficiently allocate resources - Transparently communicate decisions

Current Actions and Next Steps:• Codify and Align Program Evaluation with Contract

Management requirements• Evaluation Criteria • Current Evaluations• Alignment with Strategic Plan

January 28, 2014

76Advisory Board Meeting

Codify and Align and Integrate Program Evaluation with Contract Management

• Document a Contract Management Procedure consistent with Acquisitions Management Division requirements and regulations – October 2013

• Integrate the Contract Management and Program Evaluation Process – DRAFT – November 2013

January 28, 2014


Evaluation CriteriaFoundational Review Factors• Fit

– Alignment with MEP Mission? – Is there a measured demand for resource or offering? (a) centers; (b) manufacturers?

• Value Proposition – Does this serve a gap in existing capability or capacity?– Business model considerations Success Measures and Impact – What happens if we

don’t do it? If ongoing activity, what has been the impact

• Complexity– Is this proposed as a one-time or on-going level of effort– Economy of scale benefit –is doing it at national level a better approach that doing it

locally?– Can this work be done with internal resources? Impact?– Does this activity require specialized expertise or focused resource(s)?

January 28, 2014


Program Evaluation CriteriaExtension of Existing Work • Historical experience with the contractor:

Contractor capacity: (other awards, proportion of the contractor’s activity that MEP represents)

• Proposed Period of Performance• Budget

January 28, 2014


Current Evaluations and Next Steps• Contract and Program Evaluations

– National Innovation Marketplace (NIM) Evaluation – Complete – December 2013

– Innovation Engineering (IE) Evaluation – Complete – January 2014– State Science & Technology Institute (SSTI) Evaluation – DRAFT - January

2014– ExporTech – DRAFT – January 2014– Technology Scouting/Technology Driven Market Intelligence (TS/TDMI) –

Complete – September 2013 – Evaluating future activities• Fully Implement Contract and Performance Management Protocols –

November 2013• Incorporate and align Decision Framework Methodology with Strategic

Planning activity – Concurrent with Strategic Plan Development

January 28, 2014


Next Steps• FY-2014 Funding Decisions made on:

– SSTI– ExporTech– TS/TDMI

• Complete revision to evaluation methodology – February 2014

• Implement revised Evaluation and Contract Management methodology – February 2014

• Incorporate and align Decision Framework Methodology with Strategic Planning activity – Concurrent with Strategic Plan Development

January 28, 2014


Questions/Discussion

January 28, 2014

MEP Advisory Board Meeting January 28, 2014. Today’s Agenda 8:30 amMeeting LogisticsKaren Lellock,...

Documents

Transcript of MEP Advisory Board Meeting January 28, 2014. Today’s Agenda 8:30 amMeeting LogisticsKaren Lellock,...