Advancing Discovery to Market

Type 1 awards target immature discoveries where an innovation has been formulated with the understanding that the application may still be speculative. Proposals suitable for Type 1 awards must be at least TRL 2 at the time of proposal submission.

Examples include:

• Discoveries with the concept/application formulated
• Technologies in prototype development stages
• Early preclinical data generation efforts towards further product validation and testing

Type 1 projects should establish the commercial potential of the discovery. Successful Type 1 projects may be eligible to apply for future Type 2 funding for further development of the invention.

Expected deliverables for Type 1 awards include:

• Patent applications
• Submission of a competitive SBIR/STTR Phase I award or leveraging of other external funding opportunities to further develop the IP

Type 2 awards target discoveries where a concept is established, but refinement is necessary to advance towards the market or a startup. Proposals suitable for Type 2 awards must be TRL 3 or greater.

Examples include:

• Proof of concept validation
• Testing/validation of prototypes in relevant environment
• Advanced preclinical data generation towards clinical development

Type 2 awards should validate a viable commercialization pathway including invention licensing and/or startup development. A Type 2 funded project will not be considered for future funding support (e.g., renewal or extension) by this program.

Expected deliverables for Type 2 awards include:

• Patent applications,
• IP commercialization or identification of commercial partners,
• And/or submission of a competitive SBIR/STTR Phase II or Phase III award.

Considering the significant amount of funding provided in Type 2 awards, this funding may be considered as an investment in the for-profit commercialization partner or as a development expense.

As a first step, interested applicants are required to submit a two-page pre-proposal (due March 28, 2024). Each pre-proposal must address key evaluation criteria for ADM and will be assessed, using a blind review process, by an Internal Review Committee (IRC, which includes reviewers from Texas A&M Innovation) on a scale of 0-50 points (with 50 being the highest), based on the following elements: 

• Merit and significance of the proposed innovation (10 points): Describe in lay terms the discovery and its significance and intellectual merit. Does the discovery address a significant problem? Does it challenge the current state-of-the-art? Is the discovery unique to other current solutions to address the same problem?  
• Present state of the innovation and technical feasibility (15 points): What is the maturity and TRL of the discovery? What is the feasibility, likelihood of success, and availability of needed facilities and equipment? What is the viability, patentability, and commercialization potential of the discovery?  
• Proposed effort and brief description of methodology (10 points): Describe the work and methods needed to advance the discovery to commercial application. Describe the specific work location for completion. 
• Anticipated commercial application(s) and market viability (15 points): Identify the commercial application of the discovery, including potential markets and the license demand. What is the market potential, value proposition, and commercialization pathway of the product/technology?  
• Based on the IRC’s evaluation, promising pre-proposals will be invited to submit full proposal (due May 24, 2024). 

Pre-proposals shortlisted for further consideration will be invited to submit a proposal (anticipated submission deadline for invited proposals is May 24, 2024). Invited proposals will be evaluated and ranked by an External Review Committee (ERC) consisting of proof-of-concept reviewers, entrepreneurs, business experts and investors who are not current employees of the Texas A&M System. Each proposal will be assessed by the ERC (on a scale of 0-100 points, with 100 being the highest) based on the following elements:

• Merit and Significance of the Proposed Innovation (20 points): Does the discovery address a significant problem? Does it challenge the current state-of-the-art? Is the discovery unique to other current solutions to address the same problem? Will the proposed project overcome a barrier to advancing research in this field and broaden the horizon for future research, as well as non-research-oriented markets? 
• Present State of the Innovation and Technical Feasibility (25 points): What is the maturity and TRL of the discovery? What is the feasibility, likelihood of success (risk) and availability of needed facilities and equipment? What is the viability, patentability and commercialization potential of the discovery? What is the stage of development of the discovery? Is there any demonstration of an industrial interest/engagement from a strategic partner, investor and/or prior IP filing demonstrating barriers to entry for others? What is the PI’s/team’s previous success in the generation of IP and commercialization? 
• Proposed Effort, Objectives and Methodology (20 points): Are the proposed goals/milestones attainable within 24 months of award? What method(s) will be used to complete the goals/objectives? What are the potential risks limiting overall success? What are the proposed goals after the award period ends? How can this award enable the long-term plans for commercialization? 
• Anticipated Commercial Application(s) and Market Viability (25 points): What is the market potential, value proposition and commercialization pathway of the product/technology? Is there a clear customer base or market need for the product or service created by the discovery? Does the product/service address an unmet and scalable need? Are there current competitors in the same space? Has a start-up or business structure been established to support the marketing of the discovery? If available, provide information about potential distribution channels, pricing, marketing needs and the like. Does the discovery have a clear product development roadmap and a potential commercialization strategy after completion of this award? What is the proposed strategy for commercialization (i.e., licensing agreement or strategic alliance with a commercial partner versus formation of a startup)?
  • Additional considerations for Type 2 proposals: What do the proposing teams envision as their exit strategy? If they wish to license the technology, what techno-economic eco-systems do they plan to leverage for licensing? If they wish to access angel investors (or venture capitalists), what type  do they wish to canvass for fund raising?  
• Resource requirements (10 points): What is the state of development of the discovery? What are the investment requirements to advance discovery to a commercial state? Is the requested budget realistic and sufficient to accomplish the proposed milestones? 
• Based on ERC’s evaluation and ranking, promising proposals (i.e., inventions with a strong potential for licensing or startup development) will be shortlisted for Stage 3 (External Pitch Panel).  

The PI/team of proposals shortlisted for further consideration will be required to present a pitch to an external pitch panel (EPP), consisting of entrepreneurs, business experts and investors who are not current employees of the Texas A&M System. Note that EPP may include ERC reviewers. The following information/items are relevant to proposals shortlisted for the EPP: 

• The PI/team will be required to attend a coaching session prior to the pitch. 
• The pitch should include the goal, commercialization strategy, conceptual design, value proposition, milestones and proposed business model (for Type 2 proposals).  
• The PI/team will be allowed five minutes for their pitch, followed by 10 minutes of Q&A, and may use audio-visual presentation, printed materials and product samples/prototypes. 
• The EPP will summarize the strengths and weaknesses of each proposal and place it in one of three categories: outstanding, high priority and low priority. 
• Funding recommendations will be made by the EPP, taking into consideration the need for a balanced portfolio of projects.  

The purpose of the ADM program is to support the advancement of Intellectual Property (IP) from Texas A&M University (TAMU) and Texas A&M University System (TAMUS) research state agencies (Texas Engineering Experiment Station, Texas A&M Transportation Institute, and Texas A&M AgriLife Research) by de-risking TAMU’s discoveries and innovations, to facilitate product commercialization. Two award levels are available based on maturity of the discovery, using the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scale as a general guide. Examples of TRL scales for various federal agencies can be found at: https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-20-48g.pdf

Type 1 awards (total request of $99,000 or less, for up to 24 months) target immature discoveries where an innovation has been formulated with the understanding that the application may still be speculative. Proposals suitable for Type 1 awards must be TRL 2 or 3 at the time of proposal submission. Examples include discoveries with the concept/applicated formulated, technologies in prototype development stages, or early preclinical data generation efforts towards further product validation and testing. Type 1 awards should establish the commercial potential of the discovery. Successful Type 1 projects may be eligible to apply for future Type 2 funding for further development of the invention. Expected deliverables for Type 1 awards include patent applications, submission of a competitive SBIR/STTR Phase I award, or leveraging of other external funding opportunities to further develop the IP.

Type 2 awards (total request of $100,000 to $500,000, for up to 24 months) target discoveries where a concept is established, but refinement is necessary to advance towards the market or a startup. Proposals suitable for Type 2 awards must be TRL 3 or greater. Examples include testing/validation of prototypes in relevant environment or advanced preclinical data generation towards clinical development. Type 2 awards should validate a viable commercialization pathway including invention licensing and/or startup development. A Type 2 funded project will not be considered for future funding support (e.g., renewal or extension) by this program. Expected deliverables for Type 2 awards include patent applications, IP commercialization or identification of commercial partners, and/or submission of a competitive SBIR/STTR Phase II or Phase III award. https://www.sbir.gov/about

Although not required for proposal submission, investigators of Type 1 and Type 2 proposals selected for funding are required to file an invention disclosure with Texas A&M Innovation to receive an award.

Yes. The described project appears to fall in line with the purpose of the ADM Type 2 projects.

Yes. Pre-proposals are due on March 28, 2024

There is no limit on how many proposals an investigator can participate in. However, it is unlikely that an investigator will be awarded multiple grants as lead PI.

Yes. The program is open to researchers, faculty, staff, and students of TAMU and TAMUS research state agencies (Texas Engineering Experiment Station, Texas A&M Transportation Institute, and Texas A&M AgriLife Research).

IP must be owned by (or assigned to) TAMUS. Joint ownership of IP with another entity may be acceptable under certain conditions. External collaborators may be listed but funds may not be applied towards salaries or other expenses of non-TAMUS employees.

Yes. The inventor can apply for ADM funding to enhance the technology provided the IP is owned by (or transferred to) TAMUS. The licensing structure may need to be revisited if the proposal is selected for funding.

ADM funds may be used for salary support for faculty, graduate students and other research staff, materials and supplies, and limited travel for justified purposes. Funds cannot be used to secure IP, purchase equipment, or applied towards salaries or other expenses of external individuals (i.e., individuals who are not employees of TAMU or TAMUS research state agencies). If requesting funds to use an external facility (note that ADM funds cannot be used to pay an external individual), the PI must provide a justification including the value of using an external facility and why the work cannot be conducted at a TAMUS facility. No more than 20% of the budget may be used to pay external facilities.

Funds cannot be used to purchase equipment. If requesting funds to purchase animal models from external sources, the PI must provide a justification. Note that no more than 20% of the budget may be used to pay external facilities.

No. ADM funds may not be used for startup or associated legal costs.

No. ADM funds may not be used for consulting fees.

No. Since this is an internal seed funding program, there is no need to route the budget through SRS or include IDC in the budget.

Proposals will be evaluated using a three-stage process (note that Type 1 and Type 2 proposals will be evaluated separately). First, proposals will be screened for compliance with the program requirements, technology readiness level (TRL), or fit with the technology maturity status. Proposals that meet these requirements will be advanced to the Review Committee (RC) for evaluation and ranking. Note that the RC members will consist of entrepreneurs and investors external to TAMUS. Proposals will be assessed by the RC (on a scale of 0-100 points) based on the following elements:

• Merit and Significance (20%): Does the discovery address a significant problem? Does it challenge the current state-of-the-art? Is the discovery unique to other current solutions to address the same problem? Will the proposed project overcome a barrier to advancing research in this field and broaden the horizon for future research, as well as non-research-oriented markets.
• Market Viability (25%):  What is the market potential, value proposition, and commercialization pathway of the product/technology? Is there a clear customer base or market need for the product or service created by your discovery? Does the product address an unmet and scalable need? Are there current competitors in the same space? Has a start-up or business structure been established to support the marketing of the discovery? If available, provide information about potential distribution channels, pricing, marketing needs, and the like?  Does the discovery have a clear product development roadmap and a potential commercialization strategy after completion of this award? What is the proposed strategy for commercialization (i.e., licensing agreement or strategic alliance with a commercial partner versus formation of a startup)?
• Feasibility (25%): What is the maturity and technology readiness level (TRL) of the discovery? What is the feasibility, likelihood of success (risk), and availability of needed facilities and equipment? What is the viability, patentability, and commercialization potential of the discovery? What is the stage of development of the discovery? Is there any demonstration of an industrial interest/engagement from a strategic partner, investor and/or prior IP filing demonstrating barriers to entry for others? What is the Principal Investigator’s (PI) and proposed team’s previous success in the generation of IP and commercialization. Is the PI and team open to coaching and mentoring?
• Objectives and Methodology (20%): What are the proposed goals/milestones attainable within 24 months of award? What method(s) will be used to complete the goals/objectives? What are the potential risks limiting overall success? What are the proposed goals after the award period ends? How can this award enable the long-term plans for commercialization?
• Resource requirements (10%): What funding sources have been used to achieve the current discovery? What is the state of development? What are the investment requirements to advance discovery to a commercial state?

The RC will select promising proposals (i.e., inventions with a strong potential for licensing or startup development) for further consideration. Finally, the PI/team of proposals shortlisted for further consideration will be required to present a pitch to the RC. The PI/team will be required to attend a Coaching Session prior to the pitch. The PI/team will be allowed about 5 minutes for their pitch followed by 10 minutes of Q&A, and may use audio-visual presentation, printed materials, and product samples/prototypes.

External reviewers/facilitators of the ADM program will be required to sign a non-disclosure agreement to ensure the confidentiality of the discovery. However, it is the responsibility of the PI/team to protect all proprietary and confidential information related to their discovery throughout the process including during proposal submission and discovery pitch (if selected). The University assumes no responsibility for unwarranted disclosure of proprietary information. Those interested in participating in the ADM program are encouraged to review the Texas A&M System policy on IP and Commercialization prior to submitting a proposal. System Policy 17.01 – Intellectual Property Management and Commercialization

Please see the Timeline section above