Federal Laboratory Technology Transfer

Fiscal Year 2016

Summary Report to the President and the Congress

Prepared by:

National Institute of

Standards and Technology

U.S. Department of Commerce

September 2019
This page intentionally left blank
FOREWORD

The Department of Commerce (DOC) is pleased to submit the Fiscal Year 2016 Technology 

Transfer Summary Report to the President and the Congress. This report illustrates the 

continuing efforts of federal laboratories to ensure that the Nation’s investment in innovative 

research is transferred from our laboratories to the American people. 

Federal laboratories, through their fundamental and mission-oriented research and development 

(R&D) investments, have historically been at the forefront of scientific discovery, invention, and 

technological innovation. Technology transfer facilitates the practical application of federal 

research directly through the transfer of laboratory results and by providing non-federal entities 

opportunities to partner with federal laboratories on innovative research of mutual interest. Over 

the years, new products, services, and the formation of new companies have occurred through 

technology transfer initiatives.

The cross-agency focus on the lab-to-market efforts have emphasized the important role that

innovation plays in accelerating the development of new industries, products, and services that 

lead to economic growth and job creation. Agencies have engaged in efforts to accelerate 

technology transfer activities, improved and expanded the collection of technology transfer 

metrics, and established performance goals and evaluation methods to enhance the efficiency and 

impact of their technology transfer activities. 

In 2018, the President’s Management Agenda contained a Cross Agency Priority Goal to 

“Improve Transfers of Federally Funded Technologies from Lab-to-Market.” As part of that 

effort, we have undertaken a program we call the Return on Investment Initiative. Under this 

initiative, the DOC National Institute of Standards and Technology is leading an effort to gather 

public input, examine our global competition, and examine how our underlying technology 

transfer structure and approach can be improved to maximize the return to the U.S. taxpayer for 

their investment in our Nation’s research and development programs. 

This report fulfills the requirement of Title 15 of the United States Code, Section 3710(g)(2), for 

an annual report summarizing the use of technology transfer authorities by federal agencies. It 

highlights the achievements of federal technology transfer and includes data on the use of 

specific transfer authorities. Future editions of this report will be used to continue to keep the 

President and the Congress informed of the ongoing efforts of 

federal laboratories to expand our technology transfer efforts in 

partnership with U.S. industry, academic institutions, non-profit 

foundations, and state, local and tribal governments. These efforts 

will continue to play a vital role in building the Nation’s economic 

strength.

Dr. Walter G. Copan

Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology &

Director, National Institute of Standards and Technology
This page intentionally left blank
Table of Contents

Chapter 1 Overview of Federal Technology Transfer.................................................................... 1

Federal Technology Transfer Summary...................................................................................... 4

Chapter 2 Agency Performance in FY 2016................................................................................. 23

Department of Agriculture (USDA).......................................................................................... 24

Department of Commerce (DOC)............................................................................................. 32

Department of Defense (DoD) .................................................................................................. 45

Department of Energy (DOE) ................................................................................................... 57

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) .................................................................. 69

Department of Homeland Security (DHS)................................................................................ 80

Department of the Interior (DOI) .............................................................................................. 93

Department of Transportation (DOT) ..................................................................................... 103

Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) ...................................................................................... 109

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)............................................................................... 124

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)...................................................... 133

Chapter 3 Conclusion.................................................................................................................. 144

Appendix A................................................................................................................................. 146

Appendix B................................................................................................................................. 150

Appendix C................................................................................................................................. 157
This page intentionally left blank
1

Chapter 1

Overview of Federal Technology Transfer

Many federal agencies conduct research and development (R&D) activities that result in the 

creation of new technologies. In most cases, these technologies are created to support specific 

needs of an agency’s mission. In other cases, they are spontaneous creations of ongoing 

research. Regardless of how they are created, federal technologies can have significant value that 

goes beyond an agency’s mission. It is the role of an agency’s technology transfer office to 

identify this value and provide the most effective means to transfer it outside of the agency.

Federal legislation provides a variety of vehicles through which federal technologies can be 

transferred.

1 These vehicles facilitate the potential commercialization of inventions, enable the 

use of federal laboratory facilities by non-federal entities, and allow for the establishment of 

research partnerships between federal government laboratories and other entities. This includes 

the processing of patent applications and licenses as well as cooperative research and 

development agreements (CRADAs) and other mechanisms that convey knowledge, ownership 

rights, or establish formal research agreements. 

Collaborative research is particularly important to the technology transfer process and in many 

ways, is fundamental to every agency’s mission. By bringing together thousands of highly 

qualified researchers and world class research facilities, collaborative research between federal 

and non-federal organizations greatly enhances research capabilities, core competencies, and 

creativity. This in turn leads to the flow of new ideas, new tools, more efficient techniques, new 

processes and products, and new businesses. Collaborative research also helps agencies attract 

and retain talented scientific personnel through rewards and royalty sharing opportunities.

Over the last seven years, agencies have responded to the need to improve technology transfer 

operations to better address the needs of businesses and especially small businesses that are 

vulnerable to a slow-moving bureaucratic system. The interagency coordination of efforts has

led agencies to review their operations and propose new ways to improve the overall customer 

experience. These improvements include efforts to streamline operations to open doors to more 

efficient technology transfer opportunities. Other improvements target the way customers 

interact with the federal system. 

 1 The primary legislation addressing federal technology transfer includes the Stevenson-Wydler Technology 

Innovation Act of 1980, 15 U.S.C. 3701 et seq., the Patent and Trademark Act Amendments of 1980 (Bayh-Dole 

Act), 35 U.S.C. 200 et seq., the Small Business Innovation Development Act of 1982, 15 U.S.C. 638, and the 

Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986, 15 U.S.C. 3710a. Numerous other acts indirectly affect federal 

technology transfer activities.
2

This annual report summarizes the technology transfer activities and transfer vehicles used by 11

federal agencies that have significant federal laboratory operations:2

Department of Agriculture (USDA)

Department of Commerce (DOC)

Department of Defense (DoD)

Department of Energy (DOE)

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)

Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

Department of the Interior (DOI)

Department of Transportation (DOT)

Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

National Aeronautics and Space 

 Administration (NASA)

Each of these agencies has established programs for promoting the transfer and 

commercialization of technologies developed in its R&D laboratories and has provided the data 

contained in this report. The DOC’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 

prepared and organized this report. An electronic version of this report is available at

https://www.nist.gov/tpo/federal-laboratory-interagency-technology-transfer-summary-reports.

Federal R&D Spending 

Spending on R&D by the federal government supports a wide variety of agency-specific 

missions, for instance, military objectives, health and human services issues, energy 

development, space exploration, and so forth. In FY 2016, the total federal budget for R&D was 

$115,040 million. Of this, $71,616 million (62%) was used to support R&D activities that 

occurred outside of federal laboratories. This includes funding for grants, cooperative 

agreements, and similar instruments.3 The remainder, $43,424 million (38%), supported R&D 

activities that occurred inside federal laboratories. This includes $32,020 million to support 

intramural activities and $11,404 million to support federally funded R&D centers (FFRDCs).4

The technology transfer activities described in this report support new technologies that arise 

from these federal laboratory R&D investments. As shown in the table below, the percent of an 

agency’s budget that was available for federal laboratory R&D varied significantly among 

agencies.

 2 In this report, the term “Federal laboratory” refers to any laboratory, any federally funded research and 

development center, or any center established under 15 U.S.C. § 3705 or 15 U.S.C. § 3707 that is owned, leased, or 

otherwise used by a federal agency and funded by the federal government, whether operated by the Government or 

by a contractor. 3 A federal award is an instrument setting forth terms and conditions of an agreement between a federal agency and 

non-federal entity. Awards can include, among other things, grants and cooperative agreements. Grants and 

cooperative agreements are similar in that they transfer funds (or anything of value) to a non-federal entity but differ 

in that cooperative agreements involve substantial involvement by the federal awarding agency usually in terms of 

project oversight and management. 4 For a list of FFRDCs see https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/ffrdclist/.
3

Federal Obligations for R&D

By Agency FY 2016 ($ million)

5

(a) Intramural activities cover costs associated with the administration of intramural and extramural programs by federal 

personnel as well as actual intramural performance.

(b) FFRDC = federally funded research and development center

In FY 2016, DoD spent the largest amount of funding for intramural activities and FFRDCs, 

$18,567 million (41% of its R&D budget). DOE was second with $8,152 million (70% of its 

R&D budget) and HHS was third with $7,642 million (24% of its R&D budget).

 5 National Science Foundation (NSF), National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics, Survey of Federal 

Funds for Research and Development, Federal Obligations for Research and Development, by Agency and 

Performer: FY 2016, Table 7. https://ncsesdata.nsf.gov/fedfunds/2016/html/ffs2016_dst_007.html
4

Federal Technology Transfer Summary

Every federal agency that operates or directs one or more federal laboratories or that conducts 

research and development is required to prepare and submit an annual report of its technology 

transfer activities as described in 15 U.S.C. § 3710(f). These reports contain details on each 

agency’s technology transfer program as well as agency efforts to use technology transfer to 

advance the agency’s mission and to promote U.S. competitiveness.6 The following tables 

summarize federal technology transfer activities for the five-year period from FY 2012 through 

FY 2016.

7

Federal Invention Disclosures and Patenting

The protection of intellectual property can be vital to attracting the additional investment and 

product development resources necessary for early stage research products to be brought to their 

full commercial potential. Federal laboratory achievements in the areas of invention disclosures 

and patents issued are often cited as metrics of the active management of intellectual assets and 

technical know-how by federal agencies.

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of invention disclosures reported by federal 

agencies decreased by 5% to 5,086. The number of patent applications filed increased by 1% to 

2,596, and the number of patents issued increased by 1% to 2,341. DOE reported the largest 

number of invention disclosures with 1,760 in FY 2016, followed by NASA with 1,554 and DoD

with 874. These three agencies accounted for 82% of all invention disclosures reported in this 

fiscal year.

In FY 2016, DOE reported the largest number of patent applications with 999 and patents issued 

with 856. DoD was second in both categories with 941 patent applications and 665 patents 

issued. HHS was third with 269 patent applications and 579 patents issued. These three 

agencies accounted for 85% of patent applications and 90% of patents issued.

 6 For a list of agency technology transfer reports see http://nist.gov/tpo/publications/agency-technology-transferreports.cfm. 7 Technology transfer data are routinely adjusted over time to account for new information resulting from changes in 

reporting procedures, patent decisions, programmatic changes, and other corrections. Throughout this report, data 

prior to FY 2016 have been adjusted where necessary, to reflect the most accurate estimates for each year reported.
5

5,347

5,339

5,106

4,826

5,086

2,576

2,579

2,694

2,481

2,596

2,325

2,049

2,215

2,185

2,341

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Federal Invention Disclosures and Patenting

New Invention Disclosures Patent Applications Filed Patents Issued

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

New Invention Disclosures 5,347 5,339 5,106 4,826 5,086

Patent Applications Filed 2,576 2,579 2,694 2,481 2,596

Patents Issued 2,325 2,049 2,215 2,185 2,341
6

Technical Area Summary of U.S. Federal Agency Patents

The chart below uses data from the U.S. Patent Office (USPTO) to illustrate the technical areas 

covered by patents issued to federal agencies in FY 2016. The chart shows the percentage of 

patents issued to federal agencies by technology area based on a fractional count of patents.8 In 

FY 2016, the largest number of federal patents issued to federal agencies involved Measurement

(11%) followed by Biotechnology (8%), Electrical Machinery, Apparatus, Energy (7%), 

Pharmaceuticals (7%), Other Special Machines (6%), Computer Technology (6%), and 

Telecommunications (4%). Semiconductors (4%), Chemical Engineering (4%), Organic Fine 

Chemistry (4%), Transport 4% and Basic Materials Chemistry (3%). All other technology areas 

(32%).9

USPTO Patents Assigned to Selected U.S. Federal Agencies by Technology Area: FY 2016

Federal Licenses

Licensing of federally developed technologies is an important technology transfer mechanism 

that creates incentives for industry to invest the resources necessary to develop and 

commercialize nascent leading-edge technologies. Successful development and 

commercialization of federal technologies create benefits to the economy and contributes to 

competitiveness and domestic economic growth. The ability to grant licenses to the nonfederal 

sector helps protect utilize or further develop and utilize federally developed innovations, which 

 8 In this summary, patents are credited on a fractional-count basis (i.e., for patents with assignees from multiple 

federal agencies, other U.S. institutions, or foreign institutions, each federal agency receives fractional credit based 

on the proportion of its participating institution(s)). Furthermore, fractioning is used at the level of Internal Patent 

Classification (IPC) codes to ensure that the sum of patents across technology areas (WIPO technology 

classification) is equal to the total number of patents as each patent can be assigned to more than one technology 

area. Source: Prepared by Science-Metrix using USPTO data indexed in PatentsView in April 2017. Used with 

permission.

9 Definitions for all technology areas addressed are included in Appendix B.
7

would not be further developed into commercial products or services otherwise. The terms and 

conditions under which federal intellectual property is licensed varies based upon many factors, 

including the extent of development of the technology, the financial resources needed to further 

develop the technology for consumer use, fields of use, projected market impact, and other 

factors.

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of total active licenses reported by federal 

laboratories increased by 7% from 8,351 in FY 2012 to 8,950 in FY 2016. The number of new 

licenses increased by 7% from 1,116 in FY 2012 to 1,193 in FY 2016. The number of invention 

licenses increased by 7% to 4,156 while the number of new invention licenses increased by 14% 

to 572. Invention licenses refers to inventions that are patented or could be patented. The 

number of income-bearing licenses increased by 13% to 5,804, and the number of exclusive 

income-bearing licenses increased by 6% to 863. 

DOE reported the largest number of total active licenses with 5,410 licenses. HHS was second 

with 1,750 licenses and DoD was third with 515 licenses. These three agencies accounted for 

86% of all licenses reported in FY 2016. 

HHS reported the largest number of invention licenses with 1,721, followed by DOE with 943

and NASA with 387. Together these three agencies accounted for 73% of invention licenses. 

DOE reported the largest number of income-bearing licenses, 3,963, which was significantly 

higher than all other agencies combined. HHS was second with 837 followed by USDA with 

439. Together these three agencies accounted for 90% of income-bearing licenses. 

USDA reported the largest number of income-bearing exclusive licenses with 307, followed by 

DOE with 231, and DoD with 218. Together these three agencies accounted for 88% of incomebearing exclusive licenses.
8

Federal Income from Licenses

Licensing income includes income received for earned royalties from partners, license issue fees, 

minimum annual royalties, paid-up license fees, and reimbursement for full-cost recovery of 

goods and services provided by the lab to the licensee, including patent costs. Between FY 2012

and FY 2016, income from all licensing increased by 7% to $179 million. Income from 

invention licenses increased by 8% to $171 million and total earned royalty income decreased by 

9% to $140 million. 

HHS accounted for the most licensing income in FY 2016 with $133 million, followed by DOE

with $31 million, and DoD with $6 million. Together these three agencies accounted for 95% of 

reported licensing income.

HHS accounted for the most invention license income in FY 2016 with $131 million, followed 

by DOE with $27 million, and DoD with $5 million. Together these three agencies accounted 

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Licenses, Total Active 8,351 8,197 8,905 9,745 8,950

New Licenses 1,116 896 906 1,070 1,193

Invention Licenses, Total Active 3,893 3,774 3,997 4,123 4,156

New Invention Licenses 501 436 383 567 572

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 5,131 5,432 5,960 6,349 5,804

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 816 562 510 454 863
9

for 96% of Invention License Income.

HHS accounted for the most Earned Royalty Income in FY 2016 with $110 million, followed by 

DOE with $16 million, and DoD with $6 million. Together these three agencies accounted for 

94% of Earned Royalty Income.

Challenges in Federal Patent Licensing

On June 19, 2018, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report entitled Federal 

Research: Additional Actions Needed to Improve Licensing of Patented Laboratory Inventions 

(GAO-18-327). This report recommends that “[t]he Secretary of Commerce should instruct 

NIST to fully report the range of challenges in federal patent licensing, such as those outlined in 

this report, by, for example, leveraging its survey of practices at federal technology transfer 

offices, past Federal Laboratory Consortium studies, and agency reports and including that 

information in its summary reports to Congress.”

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Total Income, All Active Licenses $167,110 $185,003 $194,939 $203,787 $179,161

Invention Licenses $159,043 $167,118 $185,088 $193,626 $171,496

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $153,305 $171,032 $154,747 $149,219 $140,090
10

This recommendation aligns with the 2018 President’s Management Agenda and is a 

continuation of long running efforts by the federal interagency technology transfer community. 

As a part of the President’s Management Agenda’s Cross-Agency Priority (CAP) goal on 

improving the transfer of federally funded innovations from the laboratory to the market, NIST 

launched the Return on Investment (ROI) initiative to develop a report that identifies short-term 

and long-term findings to streamline and accelerate the transfer of the laboratory results from 

federal research and development funding efforts to the American marketplace. The ROI report 

will be a key input into the Lab to Market CAP goal, a cross-agency initiative co-led by NIST 

with the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. The ROI initiative is an effort 

to work collaboratively with the public sector, private sector, and other federal R&D, intellectual 

property, and technology transfer stakeholders on a wide range of topics that impact the transfer 

of federally funded technologies. 

In response to the GAO report and in support of the CAP goal effort, the Secretary of Commerce 

has instructed NIST to:

1. Fully report the range of challenges in federal patent licensing, such as those outlined in 

the GAO report, by, for example, leveraging its survey of practices at federal technology 

transfer offices, past studies conducted by the FLC, and agency reports, and including

that information in its summary reports to Congress;

2. Clarify the link between the establishment of patent license financial terms and the goal 

of promoting commercial use, through appropriate means, such as the upcoming ROI 

rulemaking process and updating relevant guidance; and

3. Facilitate formal information sharing among the agencies to provide federal labs with 

information on financial terms in comparable patent licenses, as appropriate.

NIST is currently analyzing responses from the public on a wide-range of technology transfer 

topics submitted in response to a formal Request for Information as well as a series of public 

forums, meetings, and other engagements with stakeholders. A more complete report of the 

ROI findings will be included in the FY 2017 Federal Technology Transfer report.

Federal Collaborative R&D Relationships

Collaborative R&D relationships between federal laboratories and non-federal collaborators are 

widely viewed as an effective and economical means of transferring technology through joint 

research. These relationships create a mutually advantageous leveraging of federal agency and 

collaborator resources and technical capabilities, as well as to provide avenues for both the 

collaborator and the federal laboratory to gain new competencies and develop new skills. 

One frequently used mechanism for establishing joint research relationships is the cooperative 

research and development agreement (CRADA). The CRADA is a multifaceted mechanism that 

can be used to address several kinds of partnership needs. A “traditional CRADA” refers to 

formal collaborative R&D agreements between a federal laboratory and nonfederal partners. 

Other special CRADA arrangements are used by federal agencies to address special purpose 
11

applications such as material transfer agreements or agreements that facilitate technical 

assistance activities.

In addition to CRADAs, agencies have other specific authorities that also facilitate cooperative 

R&D relationships, such as Space Act Agreements (NASA) or other transaction authorities.

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of active CRADAs increased by 40% to 11,644. 

The number of new CRADA agreements increased by 23% to 5,325. The number of traditional 

CRADAs increased by 57% to 6,720, while other collaborative R&D relationships decreased by 

5% to 18,472.

In FY 2016, DoD reported the largest number of CRADAs with 3,125, followed by DOC with 

2,940 and VA with 2,613. VA reported the largest number of traditional CRADAs with 2,359, 

followed by DoD with 2,297 and DOE with 739. USDA reported the largest number of other 

collaborative R&D relationships with 11,854, DOC was second with 3,273, and NASA was third 

with 2,204 (Space Act Agreements).
12

Trends in Federal Technology Transfer Activities

Technology transfer activities are not spontaneous events. Inventions typically require years, if 

not decades of research effort before they are disclosed. A review of a patent application may 

take two years or more before the patent is awarded. It may also take several years to license a 

federal patent or form the collaborative commitment behind a CRADA. To get an understanding 

of how technology transfer activities are performing over time, it is helpful to view the trends in 

key metrics. Unfortunately, it is not always easy to isolate trends from raw data because 

technology transfer metrics fluctuate widely. However, by converting metric values to a 

common scale or index, we can develop a simple tool to illustrate trends. 

Index values are calculated by dividing the value of a metric in each year (year “t”), by the value 

in the base year (year “i”), and then multiplying by 100. 

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

CRADAs, Total Active 8,307 9,461 9,875 9,845 11,644

New CRADAs 4,335 4,354 4,176 4,953 5,325

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 4,293 6,306 6,125 5,545 6,720

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 19,537 22,226 22,304 21,366 18,472
13

IIIIIIIIII VVVVVVVV tt = VVVVVVVV tt

BB BB VVVVVVVV ii

100

The base year chosen for this report is FY 2012. The index value for each metric in the base year 

would therefore be equal to 100. In the years that follow, index values change as the value of the 

metric in year “t” changes and the value in the base year, “i” remains the same. 

For example, to calculate the index value for patents issued in FY 2013, we divide the number of 

patents issued in FY 2013 by the number of patents issued in the base year (FY 2012) and then 

multiply by 100. Using data from the table on page five of this report, the index value for 

patents issued in FY 2013 is 88.

IIIIIIIIII VVVVVVVV FFFF2013 = 2,049

2,325 100 = 88

Because the index value of 88 is less than 100, we can interpret this as a 12% decrease in the 

number of patents issued between FY 2012 and FY 2013. In FY 2014, the index value for 

patents issued is 95 which we can interpret as a 5% decrease between FY 2012 and FY 2014. 

We then calculate index values for key metrics (e.g., invention disclosures, patents issued, 

invention licenses, and CRADAs) and plot the values in the chart below. For illustrative 

purposes, we also calculate index values for the Federal Intramural Research Budget using data 

from page three of this report. Note that all index values have a value of 100 in the base year, 

FY 2012.

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Index Value (FY 2012 = 100)

Trends in Federal Technology Transfer Activities (FY 2012 - FY 2016)

● Invention Disclosures (red) ● Patents Issued (purple) 

● Invention Licenses (green) ● Traditionial CRADAs (orange)

● Federal Intramural Research Budget (blue)
14

To show the trend for a given metric, a straight line is positioned in the middle of the plotted 

values for that metric.10 For example, in the chart below, index values for patents issued are 

shown in purple and the trend line for patents issued is positioned in the middle of the purple 

points. It is important to note that each trend line is drawn independently of other measures; they 

do not suggest causal relationships, nor do they forecast future trends. A trend line is a simple 

tool that illustrates the general tendency of a measure over a given period.

The trend line plotted for traditional CRADAs has a significantly positive slope which means 

that CRADA activities have greatly increased during this period. The trend line for invention 

disclosures has a slightly negative slope indicating a decline in the number of invention 

disclosures while the trend line for invention licenses has a slightly positive slope indicating a 

slight increase. Trend lines for the number of patents issued and the Federal Intramural Research 

Budget, which includes the budget for intramural programs as well as the budget for FFRDCs, 

have been relatively consistent over these years with slight annual increases and decreases.

Science and Engineering (S&E) Articles

Although intellectual property has traditionally been tracked in terms of the number of patents, 

licenses, and collaborative efforts, most federal research results are transferred through 

publication of S&E articles. Unfortunately, a uniform tracking system for S&E articles across all 

federal agencies does not exist; however, data from Thomson Reuters’ Web of Science database 

can provide insight into the nature of S&E articles published by technology area even though not

all articles published by federal agencies are included in the publications covered by these 

databases. For example, in 2016, Thomson Reuters reports that federal researchers authored or 

coauthored 55,971 articles using a whole-count basis (where each agency gets full credit for each 

article even if the article has co-authors from different agencies).11 By using additional data 

 10 Trend lines in this report are plotted using Microsoft Excel. 11 Data prepared by Science-Metrix. Article counts are from the set of journals covered by the Science Citation 

Index (SCI) and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) classified under Caspar fields using the CHI classification. 

80

90

100

110

120

130

140

150

160

170

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Index Value (FY 2012 = 100)

Trends in Federal Technology Transfer Activities (FY 2012 - FY 2016)

Patents Issued

Federal Intramural Research Budget

Invention Disclosures
15

provided by agencies in their annual reports on technology transfer activities that considers

publications not included in the Thomson Reuters’ databases, the number of publications 

increases to 58,609. 

The Thomson Reuters’ databases provide the additional benefit of identifying publications by 

federal researchers according to science and engineering categories. Using this data, the greatest 

percentage of articles addressed research in Biological Sciences (26%), Medical Sciences (23%), 

Physics (11%), Geosciences (11%), Engineering (10%), and Chemistry (9%).

12

 Articles are classified by the year they entered the database, rather than the year of publication, and are assigned to a 

federal agency based on the institutional addresses listed in the article. Because the CHI classification classifies 

journals accounting for only about 60% of all publications indexed in the Web of Science, the classification was 

expanded to fully cover the database using a two-step approach. The first step was to classify all journals under the 

same fields as those determined for the preparation of the NSF SEI 2018 indicators. The remaining journals were 

then assigned to a unique field using citations to and from journals to determine their most relevant field. Used with 

permission.

12 Articles are credited on a fractional-count basis (i.e., each participating federal agency receives a share of the 

publication proportional to its share of addresses on the publication). Source: Prepared by Science-Metrix using the 

Web of Science database (Thomson Reuters) accessed in July 2017. All rights reserved. Used with permission.
16

S&E Articles Authored by Selected U.S. Federal Agencies, by S&E Fields: CY 201613

 13 Calendar Year
17

Citations within U.S. Patents

Thomson Reuters’ data also provides insight into the commercial relevance of S&E articles 

authored by federal researchers through the number of articles cited in U.S. patents. In FY 2016, 

more than 15,644 articles authored or coauthored by federal researchers were cited in U.S. 

patents.14 Of these, the greatest number of articles addressed research in Biological Sciences

(43%), Medical Sciences (25%), Chemistry (11%), Engineering (9%), and Physics (7%).15

Citation of U.S. S&E Articles Authored by Selected U.S. Federal Agencies, in USPTO 

Patents, by S&E Field: FY 2016

 14 Data prepared by Science Metrix. Cited articles are from the set of journals covered by the Science Citation Index 

(SCI) and Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) classified under Caspar fields using the CHI classification. Cited 

articles are classified by the year of publication and are assigned to a federal agency based on the institutional 

addresses listed in the article. Because the CHI classification classifies journals accounting for only about 60% of 

all publications indexed in the Web of Science, the classification was expanded to fully cover the database using a 

two-step approach. The first step was to classify all journals under the same fields as those determined for the 

preparation of the NSF SEI 2018 indicators. The remaining journals were then assigned to a unique field using 

citations to and from journals to determine their most relevant field. Used with permission. 15 Citations are classified on a fractional-count basis (i.e., for cited articles with collaborating institutions from 

federal agencies, other U.S. institutions, or foreign institutions, each federal agency receives fractional credit based 

on the proportion of its participating institution(s)). Source: Prepared by Science-Metrix using the Web of Science 

(Thomson Reuters) accessed in July 2017 and PatentsView accessed in April 2017. All rights reserved. Used with 

permission.
18

Small Businesses Involved in Active Traditional CRADAs

Part of the Federal Technology Transfer Act (FTTA), codified at 15 U.S.C. § 3710a(c)(4)(A), 

requires federal agencies to give special consideration to small business firms and consortia 

involving small business firms when establishing CRADAs. The definition as to what qualifies 

as a small business is given by the Small Business Administration and varies by industrial sector. 

For this study, we use a measure of 500 employees or fewer to classify a company as a small 

business. Unfortunately, owing to various administrative issues, not all agencies are able to

report small business data at the time of the preparation of this report. A partial set of data is 

available for 10 agencies. This data reveals that out of 6,671 traditional CRADA agreements 

with these agencies, 1,281 (19%) involve small businesses as participants.

Agency

Number of Active

 CRADAs

Involving Small

Businesses

FY 2016

DHS 75

DOC 93

DoD 351

DOE 282

DOT 12

EPA 23

HHS 252

NASA 0

USDA 76

VA 117

Total 1,281
19

Licenses Granted to Small Businesses

In addition to CRADAs, agencies support small businesses through the licensing of technologies. 

Again, owing to various administrative issues, data from only eight agencies are available at the

time of this report. This data reveals that out of 8,381 active licenses granted by these agencies 

in FY 2016, 798 (10%) were issued to small businesses.

Agency

Number of Active

Licenses Granted

to Small Businesses

FY 2016

DHS 0

DOC 14

DOE 255

EPA 17

HHS 112

NASA 243

USDA 152

VA 5

Total 798
20

Startup Companies Supported

Many federally developed technologies are transferred through the actions of startup companies. 

Companies that have been in existence for five years or less and have spun off federally 

developed technologies or have received critical technical support of their core development 

areas from federal laboratories provide an effective means of transferring technologies.

Although most agencies have a long history of working with startup companies, few have 

established systematic methods to identify and track the startup companies they nurture. At 

present, preliminary data from 6 agencies identifies 100 companies that started between the years 

of 2012 and 2016 and have received critical technical support from federal laboratories.

Efforts to Enhance Technology Transfer Outcomes and Entrepreneurship

In addition to individual agency streamlining activities and developing new metrics to quantify 

technology transfer impact, federal agencies have also been involved in activities that have been 

designed to promote awareness and enhance the effectiveness of technology transfer activities. 

The Innovation Corps Program

In 2011, the National Science Foundation (NSF) established the Innovation Corps (I-CorpsTM)16

program to help scientists and engineers focus their attention upon critical business-related issues 

that are fundamental to the commercialization of new and emerging technologies. Originally 

designed to broaden the impact of NSF-funded basic research projects, other federal agencies 

have adopted the successful program to enhance the economic impact of their own technology 

transfer efforts.

At HHS, the National Institute of Health’s (NIH) I-CorpsTM Program accelerates the translation 

of biomedical research to the marketplace by providing training to Small Business Innovation 

 16 See http://sbir.cancer.gov/resource/icorps/

Agency

Number of Startups

Supported

FY 2016

(Preliminary Data)

DHS 0

DOC 51

DOT 0

EPA 14

HHS 16

NASA 19

Total 100
21

Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer (STTR) grantees in the areas of 

innovation and entrepreneurship. Under this program, the NIH and the Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention (CDC) foster the development of early-stage biomedical technologies, 

focus on teaching researchers how to gain a clearer understanding of the value of their inventions 

in the marketplace, and ultimately how to advance their technologies from the research lab into 

the commercial world. The program complements activities within the scope of the parent SBIR 

and STTR grant programs to help accelerate the commercialization of new products and services 

derived from NIH- and CDC-funded technical feasibility studies.

At DOE, the Energy I-CorpsTM program, formerly known as Lab-Corps, pairs teams of 

researchers with industry mentors for an intensive two-month training where the researchers 

define technology value propositions, conduct customer discovery interviews, and develop viable 

market pathways for their technologies. Energy I-Corps is managed by DOE’s National 

Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). NREL leads curriculum development and execution, 

recruits program instructors and industry mentors, and assembles teams from the following 

national labs:

Argonne National Laboratory 

Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory

Idaho National Laboratory

Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

Los Alamos National Laboratory

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 

Sandia National Laboratories

Other agencies have incorporated I-CorpsTM into their programs. DHS, DoD, and NASA partner 

with NSF to send their awardees through the NSF I-CorpsTM programs. Other agencies develop 

their own programs that adapt the curriculum for their research communities: NSA’s I-CorpsTM 

for the Intelligence Community, I-CorpsTM at ARPA-E, and the USDA I-CorpsTM Agricultural 

Research Service pilot program.

Entrepreneur in Residence Programs

Several agencies have established Entrepreneur in Residence (EIR) programs that mentor 

technical researchers on the fundamentals of commercializing new technologies. While these 

programs vary across agencies, the common goal is to provide sound entrepreneurial advice from 

experienced business experts to accelerate technology transfer. Topics that are common to these

programs include methods of establishing market values, managing intellectual property rights, 

performing due diligence, fund raising, and requirements for starting a new business.

DOE's EIR initiative was started in 2007 by the Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable 

Energy to address long-standing concerns that national laboratory inventions were not being 

sufficiently transferred into the marketplace. By placing venture capital-sponsored entrepreneurs 

at key national laboratories, the goal of the program is to accelerate laboratory technology 

transfer by enabling start-up entrepreneurs to work directly with the laboratories and bridge the 

gap between leading scientific and business talent—conducting technology assessments and 

proposing business structures to commercialize promising technologies. Entrepreneurs are 
22

permitted to work directly with laboratory staff for a hands-on look at various inventions and 

potentially viable technologies.

The NIH Office of Technology Transfer began its first EIR program in 2012. The EIRs are 

charged with three key activities: 1) review NIH technologies to assess commercial relevance;

2) work with the private sector to facilitate commercialization of the NIH technologies into 

marketable products; and 3) educate scientists on life science product development and 

commercialization. 

USDA’s Agricultural Research Service (ARS) has seven Technology Transfer Coordinators 

(TTCs) stationed in different geographical areas around the country. Each TTC acts as a type of 

EIR. The TTCs are engaged in numerous activities including planning, administrating, 

coordinating, and evaluating technology transfer activities of their assigned geographic region’s 

research programs to affect the optimum transfer of research for development and 

commercialization. They work closely with ARS researchers to select the most beneficial and 

expeditious mechanism(s) for technology transfer on a case-by-case basis. They participate in 

the planning of research programs and preparing material that illustrates ARS research results 

and accomplishments. 

NIST has also initiated an EIR program in cooperation with the Maryland Technology 

Development Corporation. Through this initiative experienced EIRs and NIST researchers come 

together to identify commercial opportunities for technologies emerging from NIST’s 

laboratories. NIST EIRs are not full-time paid positions; rather, they are guest researchers who 

undertake a variety of tasks to identify the commercial value of NIST technologies and mentor 

and educate NIST researchers on career opportunities in technological entrepreneurship. 

Evaluating Impact

The Interagency Workgroup on Technology Transfer discussing ways to develop impact metrics. 

These discussions include:

1. Working with agencies to develop new metrics to track technology transfer activities 

(e.g., number of intellectual property licenses, number of CRADAs, number of new 

startups created), developing additional metrics that track the goals such as reducing the 

processing time required to complete intellectual property licensing agreements, 

increasing the number of federally funded researchers who receive experiential 

entrepreneurship education, and increasing the percentage of federally funded intellectual 

property and facilities that can be discovered through open and machine-readable data;

and

2. Working with the research community to develop metrics that capture longer-term 

economic impact (e.g., dollars of follow-on capital attracted, revenue generated, jobs 

created, and new products developed by companies commercializing federally funded 

R&D).
23

Chapter 2

Agency Performance in FY 2016

Each federal agency prepares and submits an annual report covering data on technology transfer 

as described in 15 U.S.C. § 3710(f). These reports include details on each agency’s technology 

transfer program and efforts to use technology transfer to advance the agency’s mission and 

promote U.S. competitiveness.17

This chapter provides a comparable summary of the content of these 11 federal agency reports. 

Three main topic areas are addressed: 

• Statistical data on the agency’s technology transfer activity levels for a number of 

measures (e.g., cooperative R&D relationships, invention disclosure and patenting, and 

intellectual property licensing) for the most recently closed fiscal year (FY 2016) and 

several prior years (FY 2012-2016); 

• Reported examples of successful downstream outcomes arising from the agency’s 

technology transfer activities, such as new products or improved industrial processes 

available in the marketplace that arise from the transfer and commercialization of federal

lab inventions; and 

• Streamlining activities at each agency to lower administrative burden and make 

technology more accessible. 

 17 See http://nist.gov/tpo/publications/agency-technology-transfer-reports.cfm
24

Department of Agriculture (USDA)

President Abraham Lincoln coined the phrase “the People’s Department” acknowledging the role 

of USDA in solving problems that benefits all people every day. Thus, well before the coining 

of the modern-day phrase of “technology transfer,” it was the culture of USDA to deliver 

solutions to the people of the United States. Today, USDA broadly defines technology transfer 

as the adoption of research outcomes (i.e., solutions) for public benefit. A seemingly simple 

statement, the process of adoption is complicated, requiring integration of many assets from 

disparate sources in the successful delivery of solutions. “Public benefit” is achieved through 

many mechanisms including public release of information, tools, and solutions (e.g., germplasm, 

plants, and other materials), adoption and enhancement of research outcomes by partners through 

collaborative research, formal cooperative research and development agreement (CRADAs)

authorized by the Federal Technology Transfer Act, direct federal, state, or local technical 

assistance, or through licensing of biological materials or protected intellectual property directly 

to not-for-profit entities and for-profit private sector firms. Additionally, successful adoption of 

USDA knowledge and research outcomes typically requires complementary assets and services 

provided by multiple agencies in USDA, including agencies that are not primarily engaged in 

direct research in the physical and life science arenas.

Private sector involvement in technology transfer adds the benefits of creating new or expanded 

businesses, jobs, and economic prosperity. Science-based innovations from USDA intramural 

research—often developed through public-private partnerships (PPPs)—create new or improved 

technologies, processes, products, and services that benefit the Nation by increasing productivity, 

increasing efficiency (e.g., keeping costs low), and enhancing global competitiveness for the 

U.S. agriculture sector. Thus, technology transfer functions are critical to accelerating the utility 

of public research and development (R&D) investments, creating economic activity, job creation,

and sustainable economic development.

The Agriculture Research Service (ARS) has been delegated authority by the Secretary of 

Agriculture to administer the patent program for ARS, review CRADAs, and administer 

technology licensing programs for all intramural research conducted by USDA. These activities 

are housed in the Office of Technology Transfer.

USDA’s annual technology transfer report is available online at:

https://www.ars.usda.gov/business/Docs.htm?docid=24718.

More information about USDA’s technology transfer activities are available on the following 

websites:

Agricultural Research Service: https://www.ars.usda.gov/

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service: https://www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/home/

Forest Service: http://www.fs.fed.us
25

USDA Invention Disclosures and Patenting

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of invention disclosures received increased by 53%, 

from 160 to 244. The number of patent applications filed decreased by 11%. The number of 

new patents issued decreased by 13% from 69 to 60 in FY 2016. 160 191 117 222

244

122

157

119

125

109

69

65

83

94

60

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

USDA Invention Disclosures and Patenting

New Invention Disclosures Patent Applications Filed Patents Issued

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

New Invention Disclosures 160 191 117 222 244

Patent Applications Filed 122 157 119 125 109

Patents Issued 69 65 83 94 60
26

Patents issued to USDA in FY 2016 covered many technology areas including Biotechnology

(33%), Basic Materials Chemistry (15%), Other Special Machines (11%), and Pharmaceuticals

(11%).18

USPTO Patents Assigned to USDA by Technology Area: FY 2016

 18 Source: Prepared by Science-Metrix using USPTO data indexed in PatentsView in April 2017. Used with 

permission.
27

USDA Licenses

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of total active licenses increased by 15% to 441

licenses in FY 2016. The number of total active invention licenses increased by 9% to 370

licenses. Total active income-bearing licenses increased by 16%, from 379 in FY 2012 to 439 in 

FY 2016, while the total number of income-bearing exclusive licenses increased by 11% to 307.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Licenses, Total Active 384 400 414 424 441

New Licenses 34 25 30 35 33

Invention Licenses, Total Active 341 351 363 359 370

New Invention Licenses 28 19 28 20 27

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 379 397 412 421 439

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 277 291 299 292 307 384400414424441 34 25303533 341351363 359370 28 1928 2027 379397412421439 277291299 292307

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

USDA Licenses

Licenses, Total Active New Licenses

Invention Licenses, Total Active New Invention Licenses

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses
28

USDA Income from Licensing

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, total income from all active licenses increased by 26% to just 

over $4.7 million in FY 2016. The income from invention licenses increased by 21% to $4.5 

million. Total earned royalty income increased by 19% from $3.1 million in FY 2012 to $3.6

million in FY 2016. $3,806

$4,386

$4,928

$5,067

$4,784

$3,671

$4,054

$4,733

$4,842

$4,456

$3,060

$3,354

$3,611

$3,510

$3,633

$0

$1,000

$2,000

$3,000

$4,000

$5,000

$6,000

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

USDA Income from Licensing ($000s)

Total Income, All Active Licenses Invention Licenses Total Earned Royalty Income (ERI)

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Total Income, All Active Licenses $3,806 $4,386 $4,928 $5,067 $4,784

Invention Licenses $3,671 $4,054 $4,733 $4,842 $4,456

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $3,060 $3,354 $3,611 $3,510 $3,633
29

USDA Collaborative R&D Relationships

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of total active CRADAs decreased by 13% to 238

agreements while the number of new CRADAs per fiscal year increased by 22% to 79. Total 

active traditional CRADAs decreased by 24% to 161 agreements. Other collaborative R&D 

relationships decreased by 19% to 11,854.

USDA Efforts to Streamline Technology Transfer Operations

• A template for a Commercial Evaluation License (CEL) was created. The CEL is a 

short-term, non-exclusive license to evaluate the commercial applications of the material 

and the licensed product and any inventions claimed in the licensed patent rights.

• To expedite and streamline the payment of license royalties, USDA’s Office of 

Technology Transfer (OTT) established a pay.gov portal specific for royalty payments.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

CRADAs, Total Active 274 259 267 301 238

New CRADAs 65 86 60 80 79

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 211 211 193 188 161

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 14,691 16,199 16,144 14,206 11,854 274 259 267 301 238 65211 86211 60193 80188 79161 14,69116,199 16,144 14,206 11,854

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

USDA Collaborative R&D Relationships

CRADAs, Total Active New CRADAs

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active Other Collaborative R&D Relationships
30

• In 2016, OTT established an Innovation Fund for ARS scientists to enable and expedite 

commercialization/adoption of their research outcomes. Projects are chosen based on 

their potential for advancement along the technology readiness continuum and moving 

closer to commercialization. 

USDA Downstream Success Stories

Wildlife Services: Changes to Aircraft Lighting Increase Bird Awareness

Collisions between birds and aircraft (also known as bird strikes) are 

expensive, risk human lives, and increase bird mortality. Because 

birds see differently than people, changes to aircraft lighting have 

been proposed as a way to make birds avoid aircraft. USDA’s 

National Wildlife Research Center (NWRC) researchers and partners 

from Purdue University investigated brown-headed cowbirds’ 

responses to aircraft lighting systems tuned to match the birds’ visual 

capabilities. Using a remote-controlled aircraft fitted with 470-

nanometer lights that exhibit the “blue” portion of the human visual 

spectrum, scientists observed that cowbirds showed alert behaviors in less than half the time it took 

them to show alert behaviors with the lights off. However, for approaching aircraft with pulsing 

lights, the cowbirds’ alert responses were delayed as aircraft speeds increased. This was not the case 

with approaching aircraft with nonplusing lights. Also, researchers observed that high ambient noise 

levels delayed the birds’ avoidance of the aircraft, possibly by causing sensory overload and 

distracting the birds. Researchers believe that placing 470-nanometer lights on aircraft or at airports 

may improve some birds’ abilities to detect and avoid aircraft. The approach may also make wind 

turbines, towers, and other large stationary structures involved in bird collisions more detectable.

Plant Protection and Quarantine: Advanced Molecular Diagnostics for the Old-World

Bollworm

The Old-World bollworm is a moth that can attack and damage more than 180 plant species 

including cotton, corn, peanut, sorghum, and tomato. This moth was not thought to be present in 

the New World (i.e. the Americas) until 2012, when specimens were identified from an outbreak 

that started in Brazil. Since that outbreak, new records have been reported in North and South 

America and the Caribbean. This species is difficult to diagnose because it is nearly identical in 

appearance to a common native moth, the corn earworm. These two pests also attack similar 

crops, further complicating detection of the Old-World bollworm. Scientists from the Animal 

and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), Plant Protection and Quarantine Program (PPQ) 

and the Center for Plant Health (CPHST) laboratories in Fort Collins, CO, and Mission, TX, and 

the ARS Southern Insect Management Unit have been developing new methods to identify these 
31

moths. In FY 2016 APHIS verified molecular techniques to diagnose the moths based on slight 

differences in DNA. These published technologies have been developed into protocols for 

diagnosing a single moth and were presented to state and federal scientists at a strategic planning 

meeting for Old World bollworm held in Florida in 2016. The methods have been used by 

APHIS in 2016 to diagnose moth larvae collected during a survey of Puerto Rico in 2015 and to 

identify moth interceptions at U.S. borders to confirm safe trade practices. The APHIS scientists 

are currently testing new technologies to make it possible to diagnose hundreds of moths in a 

single reaction. These methods development and diagnostic activities are helping to exclude 

invasive exotic species from the United States in order to protect crops and natural resources.

Agricultural Research Service: Imaging Device for Meat Safety Inspection

Current meat inspection in slaughter plants for food safety and quality attributes, including 

potential fecal contamination, is conducted through visual examination by human inspectors 

working under conditions that are poorly suited to conventional fluorescence detection methods 

that require ambient darkness. ARS researchers in Beltsville, Maryland, developed a handheld 

fluorescence-based imaging device (HFID) to highlight contaminated food and equipment 

surfaces on a display monitor during use under ambient lighting. This study assessed the 

effectiveness of the HFID to enhance visual detection of fecal contamination on red meat, fat, 

and bone surfaces of beef under varying ambient luminous intensities. Overall, diluted feces 

were detectable on the beef surfaces for all but the brightest ambient light intensities tested in the 

fluorescence images. This technology is patented and under license and commercial 

development by an industry partner and will support and improve meat safety inspection 

programs implemented by U.S. processors and regulatory inspectors.

Foreign Agricultural Service: Global Partnership for Pesticide Standards

Residue data for establishing trade standards (i.e., Codex Alimentarius) pesticide maximum 

residue levels (MRLs) for fruit and vegetable crops are mostly generated in the United States and 

other industrialized nations. Therefore, many of the tropical crops grown in developing 

countries do not have MRLs and accordingly face international trade barriers due to residue 

violations in destination markets. The lack of MRLs for high-valued specialty crops from 

developing countries can have a significant economic impact, especially when exporters are 

excluded from potentially lucrative markets. To help address this problem, FAS is leading a 

Global Residue Project to establish an infrastructure and process whereby field trial residue data 

for crops most commonly grown in developing counties are generated and used to establish 

MRLs. The project is working with stakeholders in 20 partner countries in Africa, Asia, and the 

Western Hemisphere, where national research teams collaborate on joint residue trials, based on

study protocols and technology models developed by the USDA-funded IR4 Project. In 2017 

FAS and the IR-4 Project will host the third Global Minor Use Summit to review progress and 

identify additional joint projects, expand partnerships, and continue transfer of knowledge and 

information about safe crop protection. By transferring these policy concepts and technical skills 

to foreign partners, the Global Partnership for Pesticide Standards has continued complementing 

the IR-4 Project by supplementing U.S.-generated data and, in some cases, completely shifting 

the field trial responsibilities for generating pesticide data to partner countries. In addition to 

economizing U.S. resources for development and commercialization of pesticides, the Global 

Partnership continued to promote common standards among the U.S. and foreign agricultural 

trading partners and, overall, provide modern pest control tools that may be safely used by 

growers world-wide.
32

Department of Commerce (DOC)

Technology transfer plays an important role in DOC’s mission to promote job creation, 

economic growth, sustainable development, and improved standards of living for all Americans. 

DOC works in partnership with businesses, universities, state, tribal and local governments, and 

communities to promote innovation and improve the Nation’s overall competitiveness in the 

global economy. DOC pursues these objectives through policies and programs directed at 

strengthening the Nation’s economic infrastructure, facilitating the development of cutting-edge 

science and technology, providing critical scientific information and data, and managing national 

resources. 

DOC conducts research and development (R&D) in areas of science and technology at the 

laboratory facilities of NIST, NOAA, and NTIA’s Institute for Telecommunication Sciences 

(ITS). Technology transfer, which is a key part of the programmatic activities in these 

laboratories, connects technological advances of DOC’s science and engineering programs to the 

American economy.

In addition to the technology transfer efforts of DOC laboratories, DOC is responsible for 

coordinating technology transfer activities across federal agencies. DOC coordinates the 

Interagency Workgroup for Technology Transfer (IAWGTT) through the facilitation by NIST of

interagency discussion on policy, new approaches to technology transfer, and lessons learned 

from agency transfer programs.19 NIST also serves as the host agency for the Laboratory 

Consortium for Technology Transfer (FLC), which provides a forum for federal labs to develop 

strategies and opportunities for linking technologies and expertise with the marketplace. 

NTIA within the DOC is a founding co-chair for the Wireless Spectrum R&D (WSRD) 

Interagency Working Group (IWG) that was formed in late 2010 to coordinate spectrum-related 

research and development activities both across the federal government and with academia and 

the private sector. Through WSRD, NTIA has been helping to coordinate and inform ongoing 

activities across federal agencies and to facilitate efficient and effective investment in spectrum 

sharing technologies and systems. These activities are consistent with the guiding principles of 

WSRD, which are transparency, smart investment, and the solicitation of opportunities for 

technology transfer across and beyond the federal government.

More information about DOC technology transfer is available on the following websites:

NIST: http://www.nist.gov/tpo/index.cfm

NOAA: http://techpartnerships.noaa.gov/ 

ITS: http://www.its.bldrdoc.gov

 19 Agencies participating in the IAWGTT, established pursuant to Executive Order 12591 of April 10, 1987, include 

the Department of Agriculture, Department of Commerce, Department of Defense, Department of Energy, 

Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Homeland Security, Department of the Interior, 

Department of Transportation, Department of Veterans Affairs, Environmental Protection Agency, and National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration.
33

DOC Invention Disclosures and Patenting

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of new inventions disclosed increased by 7% to 64

disclosures in FY 2016. The number of patent applications filed decreased by 7% to 25 and the 

number of patents issued increased by 23% to 16.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

New Invention Disclosures 60 41 47 61 64

Patent Applications Filed 27 26 25 32 25

Patents Issued 13 21 19 20 16
34

Patents issued to DOC in FY 2016 covered many technology areas including Measurement

(15%), Electrical Machinery, Apparatus, Energy (15%), Basic Communication Processes (9%), 

Telecommunications (9%), and Micro-Structural and Nano-Technology (9%).

20

USPTO Patents Assigned to DOC by Technology Area: FY 2016

 20 Source: Prepared by Science-Metrix using USPTO data indexed in PatentsView in April 2017. Used with 

permission.
35

DOC Licenses

The number of total active licenses increased by 39% from 41 in FY 2012 to 57 in FY 2016.

New licenses increased by 150% to 15. All licenses were invention licenses. Total active 

income-bearing licenses increased by 43% to 33, while income-bearing exclusive licenses 

increased by 100% to 20.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Licenses, Total Active 41 38 38 46 57

New Licenses 6 7 7 13 15

Invention Licenses, Total Active 41 38 38 46 57

New Invention Licenses 6 7 7 13 15

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 23 26 26 31 33

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 10 13 14 16 20 41 3838 46 57

6

77

13

15

41

3838

46

57

6

77

13

15

23

2626

31

33

10

13

14

16

20

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DOC Licenses

Licenses, Total Active New Licenses

Invention Licenses, Total Active New Invention Licenses

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses
36

DOC Income from Licensing

DOC reported that all income from licensing comes from invention licenses. During the fiveyear period, from FY 2012 to FY 2016, there was a 40% decrease in total income from all active 

licenses, from $248 thousand in FY 2012 to $149 thousand in FY 2016. $248 $151 $220 $164

$149

$248

$151

$220

$164

$149

$248

$151

$220

$164

$149

$0

$50

$100

$150

$200

$250

$300

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DOC Income from Licensing ($000s)

Total Income, All Active Licenses Invention Licenses Total Earned Royalty Income (ERI)

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Total Income, All Active Licenses $248 $151 $220 $164 $149

Invention Licenses $248 $151 $220 $164 $149

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $248 $151 $220 $164 $149
37

DOC Collaborative R&D Relationships

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of total active cooperative research and 

development agreements (CRADAs) increased by 22% to 2,940 agreements while the number of 

new CRADAs per fiscal year increased by 12% to 2,607. Total active traditional CRADAs 

increased by 118% to 335 and other collaborative R&D relationships increased by 18% to 3,273.

DOC Efforts to Streamline Technology Transfer Operations

NIST has undertaken several efforts to streamline and simplify the technology transfer process. 

NIST revised its standard CRADA to expedite review of these documents and reduce the overall 

size of these documents by approximately one-third. NIST also implemented several new 

licensing programs to encourage participation by small businesses. These programs lay out 

financial terms in advance to ease concerns by small businesses about overall costs. NIST is 

conducting detailed analysis of the flow of documents to understand where significant delays 

occur within the system. In many cases, these delays are with the partner and NIST does not 

have direct control; however, by continuing efforts to identify and understand issues experienced 

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

CRADAs, Total Active 2,410 2,428 2,359 2,751 2,940

New CRADAs 2,323 2,289 2,111 2,548 2,607

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 154 206 233 365 335

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 2,782 2,963 2,981 3,125 3,273 2,410 2,428 2,359 2,7512,940 2,323 2,289 2,111 2,548 2,6072,7822,963 2,981 3,125 3,273

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DOC Collaborative R&D Relationships

CRADAs, Total Active New CRADAs Other Collaborative R&D Relationships
38

by partners, NIST expects to identify new ways to optimize technology transfer practices. In FY 

2016, the transaction time taken for execution of a CRADA increased, and NIST is making 

efforts to address this negative outcome, including addressing administrative burdens, training 

for key staff members, and improving coordination with research staff. The average CRADA 

approval time was 104 days. Additionally, NIST is working to ensure timely protection of 

intellectual property. The average number of days between the receipt date of an invention 

disclosure and the filing date of the first non-provisional patent application was 442 days. 

DOC Downstream Success Stories

NIST: Single-Photon Detector for Potential Encryption and Sensing Apps 

Individual photons of light now can be detected far 

more efficiently using a device patented by NIST 

scientists who have overcome longstanding 

limitations with one of the most commonly used

type of single-photon detectors. Their invention 

could allow higher rates of transmission of 

encrypted electronic information and improved 

detection of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.

The team, which also includes scientists working at the California Institute of Technology and 

the University of Maryland, has patented a method to detect the photons that arrive when the 

gates are either open or closed. The NIST team had developed a highly sensitive way to read 

tiny signals from the detector, a method that is based on electronic interferometry, or the 

combining of waves such that they cancel each other out.

The new detector can count individual photons at a very high maximum rate—several hundred 

million per second—and at higher than normal efficiency, while maintaining low noise. Its 

efficiency is at least 50% for photons in the near infrared, the standard wavelength range used in 

telecommunications. Commercial detectors operate with only 20 to 30% efficiency.

NIST: Precision Medicine Diagnostics 

NIST efforts to support accurate diagnostic testing so that 

cancer treatments can be tailored to the tumor DNA and 

other characteristics particular to individual patients. The 

work in this field continues to gain momentum as the 

agency mounts a multi-laboratory studies to evaluate 

candidate reference materials for benchmarking 

measurements of circulating tumor DNA, so-called liquid 

biopsies.

The comparative exercise, sometimes referred to as an 

inter-laboratory “round robin,” benefits from a new threeyear CRADA with SeraCare Life Sciences, located in Milford, Massachusetts. Under the 

agreement, SeraCare will supply its circulating DNA reference material technology to NIST to 

help further development and refinement of digital measurement methods. NIST will distribute 

Credit: National Human Genome Research Institute
39

these materials for testing at laboratories in the National Cancer Institute’s Early Detection 

Research Network and to other research and testing organizations.

Reliably accurate measurements are critical to the successful introduction and adoption of liquid 

biopsies for clinical applications, which include monitoring therapeutic progress and detecting 

drug resistance mutations.

NIST: Nanocontainers Useful for Drug Delivery 

What if doctors could deliver anti-cancer drugs directly to 

tumors without making patients sick? Bringing this 

dream of targeted drug delivery closer to reality for 

pharmaceutical manufacturers, researchers at NIST have 

received a patent for a method to create precisely sized 

nanometer-scale capsules.

The NIST method employs microfluidics, the use of 

fluids at the microscopic level, to create precise nanoscale 

spherical capsules. Made of lipids, the kinds of 

biomolecules that also comprise fats, the spherical 

capsules are known as liposomes. The inside of a 

liposome could hold drugs, and the outside could be coated with receptors that bind to specific 

cancer cells. The method can produce liposomes with typical diameters of 100-400 nanometers, 

or billionths of a meter. This size range is useful for attaching to cells, whose size is typically 

one to 10 micrometers, or millionths of a meter.

Once this technique was developed, researchers were able to create a variety of liposomes of 

many useful sizes and the potential drug-delivery applications became clear. “This research and 

the resulting patent also have implications for the on-demand formulation of drugs in a way that's 

applicable to personalized or precision medicine,” said Laurie Locascio, who was the director of 

NIST's Material Measurement Laboratory at that time.

NIST: Portable Test Solution for Laser Trackers 

A collaboration between NIST researchers and a private-sector firm has led to development of a 

commercial device to fill a critical need in industry: field verification of laser tracking systems.

Laser trackers are state-of-the-art instruments capable of 

measuring the dimensions of objects as large as 120 meters in 

length to high accuracy and with uncertainties as low as 60 

micrometers—about half the width of a human hair. Lasertracker measurements are responsible for ensuring the 

functionality of millions of dollars in products each day, and are 

used, for example, in precision measurement of the size, shape, 

and alignment of aircraft wings during assembly. Performance 

testing of the tracker systems, which can cost about $200,000, is 

difficult because it requires long, high-accuracy, portable 

Credit: A. Jahn, W.N. Vreeland, M. Gaitan, 

L.E. Locascio/NIST
40

reference artifacts that retain their exact dimensions and characteristics over multiple sites and 

uses.

Thanks to a successful CRADA between NIST's Engineering Physics Division and Brunson 

Incorporated, a U.S. manufacturer of metrology equipment, such an artifact—the first of its 

kind—is now a reality. Brunson Incorporated provided the funding, product design, and 

manufacturing, and PML provided state-of-the-art measurement expertise.

NIST invented the first laser tracker in 1987, and since then has continued research in 

measurement applications, standardization, uncertainties, and testing. This commercialized 

product is the latest of many significant achievements in improving the understanding, and 

therefore the functionality, of laser trackers.

NOAA: CRADA Chart New Territory for Ocean Science

NOAA Research and NOAA Fisheries have 

teamed up with academic and private sector 

partners to test innovative technologies that, 

if successful, will enable researchers to 

gather information in areas of the ocean 

virtually off limits to standard research 

vessels.

Scientists will be using a novel research 

platform that resembles a windsurfer, called 

a Saildrone, developed by Saildrone, Inc. 

Scientists and engineers equipped two of 

these autonomous, wind- and solar-powered 

vessels with other newly designed technologies. 

Their goal is to collect needed oceanographic 

data and information for endangered and commercially important species living in remote areas 

of the Bering Sea. “As pioneers in this new research frontier we're seeking to discover more 

cost-effective ways to augment our existing research efforts and gather additional biological 

information in places that are difficult to navigate with a full-sized research vessel,” said 

Douglas DeMaster, research and center director, NOAA Fisheries' Alaska Fisheries Science 

Center.

The mission unites scientists and engineers from NOAA, the University of Washington, the Joint 

Institute for the Study of the Atmosphere and the Ocean, Saildrone, Inc., Simrad AS/Kongsberg 

Maritime, and Greeneridge Sciences, Inc. The marine mammal related research is possible due 

to the generous support of the Marine Mammal Commission.

“This advance in technology and science is the result of a sustained partnership between the 

NOAA laboratories and the University of Washington and reflects the talent and quality of the 

engineers and scientists involved in the project. Understanding climate change in the Arctic 

requires new tools and innovative measurements and we are all pleased to be part of that effort. 

We look forward to the results of this summer's campaign, as well as future measurement 

The Saildrone research platform is equipped 

with technologies to collect oceanographic data.

Photo credit: Saildrone Inc.
41

campaigns in the Arctic,” said Thomas Ackerman, director, Joint Institute for the Study of the 

Atmosphere and Ocean at the University of Washington.

NOAA: The NOAA Big Data Project 

NOAA’s Big Data Partnership (BDP) was established in April 2015 through CRADAs between 

NOAA and Amazon Web Services, Google, IBM, Microsoft and the Open Cloud Consortium. 

The BDP is investigating how the value inherent in NOAA’s data may be leveraged to broaden 

their utilization and dissemination through the use of modern cloud platforms and associated 

technologies. The CRADA collaborators work with NOAA experts to identify and deliver those 

datasets of interest, around which they can build business cases to justify their investments

NOAA’s Next Generation Weather Radar (NEXRAD) weather radar data were among the first 

data to be delivered. The National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) transferred 

the complete NEXRAD Level II historical archive to four interested BDP collaborators. 

Amazon Web Services (AWS) was the first to make freely available the complete archived Level

II data through its AWS platform, with The Climate Corporation as a business partner and data

consumer. AWS also collaborated with Unidata/University Corporation for Atmospheric 

Research (UCAR) to establish a real-time NEXRAD data feed, thereby providing on-demand 

dissemination of both archived and current data seamlessly through the same access mechanism 

by October 2015. Through this cloud platform alone, the utilization of the NEXRAD data by 

volume has increased by 130% over the past usage patterns observed at the National Centers for 

Environmental Information (NCEI), while the load on NCEI systems has decreased by 50%.

Additional NOAA datasets including fisheries catch data, numerical weather prediction model 

output, advanced weather radar products, and geostationary satellite data are at various stages of 

discussion and development. NOAA and its collaborators are beginning to realize the potential of 

this collective effort among federal government, private industry, and academia, including 

stimulating new business opportunities and novel applications.

NOAA: SAIC Introduces New Generation of Commercial Tsunami Buoy Systems

by Rob Lawson, SAIC Senior Director International Tsunami Buoy Program21

Following 10 years of supporting the evolving tsunami buoy network, Science Applications 

International Corp. (SAIC), in collaboration with NOAA, will soon be deploying commercially 

available fourth generation (4G) buoy systems worldwide. As a leader in commercial tsunami 

buoy systems manufacturing, SAIC is helping to provide the world’s tsunami warning centers 

with access to affordable technology and critical data. 

Working with NOAA, SAIC develops, tests, and implements commercial tsunami buoy systems 

under a NOAA-license agreement. Under this license, SAIC has produced more than 35 secondgeneration buoy systems based on the NOAA Deep-ocean Assessment and Reporting of 

Tsunamis II (DART® II) system, and two types of third-generation systems based on the Easyto-Deploy (ETD) DART® technology. 

SAIC’s second- and third-generation buoy systems are currently operational in maritime 

countries worldwide, including Australia, Chile, China, India, Japan, Russia, and Thailand, and 

 21 See: https://www.oceannews.com/featured-stories/september-feature-story-saic
42

are gathering actionable data for its users and NOAA. Recently, SAIC provided developmental 

4G payloads and bottom pressure recorders to NOAA in support of a 4G research effort off the 

coast of Chile. 

Now, as SAIC enters another decade of work with NOAA, the company is manufacturing more 

than 85% of the world’s commercially deployed tsunami buoys, helping to make the concept of a 

globally interconnected, tsunami buoy network a reality. 

NOAA: Successful Completion of NE Fisheries Science Center/Envera CRADA 

In 2016 NOAA's Milford Laboratory and Envera LLC completed research under their CRADA 

agreement to explore large-scale production trials of Milford Laboratory probiotic strain OY15 

for potential commercialization. Probiotic strain OY15 is a marine bacterium isolated from an 

oyster (Crassostrea virginica) digestive tract and shown to possess probiotic activity. The 

availability of this genome sequence will facilitate the study of the mechanisms of probiotic 

activity as well as virulence capacity.

Under the CRADA, Envera provided the Milford Laboratory with freeze-dried and spray-dried 

formulations of Milford Probiotic Strain OY15, which were analyzed in the lab to see if they 

stimulate immune functions as well as live OY15. In addition, larval bioassays comparing these 

two formulations to live OY15 have been run. Future adjustments to the concentrations of these 

formulations will aid in confirming their probiotic effects on survival of oyster larvae and ideally 

lead to the commercialization of the Milford Probiotic Strain OY15. 

NTIA: Telecommunication Standards

Models used to predict wireless propagation are fundamental to enabling spectrum sharing. The 

International Telecommunication Union – Radio Communication Sector (ITU-R), and 

international treaty organization, has as its primary objective to ensure interference free 

operations of radiocommunications systems. The ITU-R publishes internationally standardized 

propagation prediction models that are used to harmonize spectrum assignments internationally 

and to manage space-related spectrum assignments. Increasing spectrum crowding demands 

increased accuracy and granularity of these models, which are developed through the 

participation of technical committees from all the treaty nations. 

Of particular interest at present are improving our understanding of air-to-ground propagation, 

world refractivity mapping, and the effects of sunspot number recalculation, all of which are 

critical to satellite communication systems. The ITS chair of ITU-R Study Group 3 Working 

Party 3K led the examination of over 70 input documents into the final 25 technical documents 

that were considered by ITU-R Study Group 3 during 2016 meetings. ITS authored four of the 

18 technical contributions submitted by the U.S.

Strong unbiased standards are fundamental for widespread competitive advancement of new 

technologies. This is particularly of interest to the public safety community, which is gaining 

access to the expanded capabilities of a dedicated LTE broadband network through the First 

Responder Network Authority (FirstNet). The 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) sets the 

standards for commercial cellular equipment, which have not previously included standards for 

many features critical to first responders. Intense participation by ITS staff in 3GPP) standards 
43

development process on behalf of FirstNet resulted in Proximity Services and Group 

Communications requirements being included in 3GPP Release 12 and Mission Critical Push to 

Talk requirements being included in 3GPP Release 13, which was frozen in mid FY 2016. These 

features are critical to ensuring that LTE can meet public safety’s requirements and are a 

prerequisite to allowing FirstNet to offer mission-critical voice (MCV) on the new Band Class 14 

nationwide interoperable public safety communications network when these capabilities become 

available.

NTIA: Table Mountain Research

The Table Mountain Field Site and Radio Quiet Zone supports fundamental research in the 

nature, interaction, and evaluation of telecommunication devices, systems, and services. Each 

year, private companies, universities and other organizations conduct research at Table Mountain 

under CRADAs. 

• In FY 2016, several companies used the Table Mountain site under a CRADA to safely 

test and demonstrate LADAR technologies under development in atmospheric conditions 

and at distances relevant to potential applications, to fully test the functionality of new 

antenna designs during product development, and to safely and accurately test an 

Adaptive Tactical Laser System (ATLAS) compensated beacon adaptive optics (CBAO) 

system under development. Applications for these technologies include detection and 

tracking of wind shear and wake vortices, remote wind measurements for the offshore 

wind energy industry, mission-critical communications, electronic warfare, direction 

finding/geolocation, and sensing of hazardous liquids and gases.

• For the past ten years, the University of Colorado’s Research and Engineering Center for 

Unmanned Vehicles safely and accurately tested collective and autonomous sensing and 

communication technologies for small unmanned aircrafts used for atmospheric science 

applications such as the study of tornado genesis.

NTIA: Video Quality Research

NTIA hosts the Consumer Digital Video Library (CDVL) to provide material for research and 

development of new techniques and encoding methods (codecs) for video transmission and 

delivery. This library is made available to resolve the impediment to new product and standards 

development caused by a lack of royalty-free test material. The video clips, some developed by 

NTIA in house and some contributed by industry and academia, are used to test codecs, to 

evaluate new display technologies, or for validation testing of new standards. For example, THE 

Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T) Study Group 12 has used CDVL clips for 

research into the development of parametric models and tools for multimedia quality assessment. 

ITU-T Recommendations are international voluntary standards that aid US industry to compete 

internationally. The new ITU-T recommendations currently in development will propose 

methods of estimation of perceived quality of transmitted video under different conditions. Such 

recommendations are used by internet service providers and wireless carriers to optimize 

network parameters for video transmission and provide customers the best Quality of 

Experience. Similarly, the Motion Picture Experts Group (MPEG) has an interest in using the 

CDVL video clips for validation testing of new video coding standards, which will eventually 

succeed the MPEG video codecs in use today, By choosing specific videos and making them 
44

available for MPEG testing, we encourage MPEG to develop high quality codecs that will enable 

greater compression with no loss of quality to mitigate increasing wireless bandwidth demands. 

NTIA also develops and makes available Video Quality Measurement (VQM) tools for use by 

industry and academia for research into new techniques for transmitting video. The rapid 

evolution of digital video compression, storage, and transmission technology presents a difficult 

network performance measurement task. To avoid immediate obsolescence, new performance 

measurement technology developed for digital video systems must be technology independent 

and non-proprietary. The VQM tools meet this need. These software products are no longer 

patented or licensed, in accordance with the Government’s increasing emphasis on Open Data. 

Making these software tools available as an open source benchmark supports rapid development 

of commercial digital video quality measurements based on perceived picture quality but able to 

operate in-service to adjust network conditions on-the-fly using the actual video being 

transmitted.
45

Department of Defense (DoD)

The Defense Laboratory Office (DLO) provides overall policy guidance for and oversight of 

Department-wide technology transfer efforts. DLO ensures, to the maximum extent practicable, 

that DoD developed technologies demonstrating commercial viability are integrated into the 

private sector; that technologies developed outside of the DoD that demonstrate national security 

utility are transferred into the DoD acquisition process; and that those technologies

demonstrating both commercial and national security applications are made available to the DoD 

as well as industry and academia.

DoD is unique in applying the principles, practices, and tools of technology transfer in the 

execution of its mission. DoD funds and develops mission-focused technology, and technology 

transfer statutory authorities enable it to promote and facilitate the commercialization of that 

technology for both military and civilian purposes. Concurrently, DoD is a technology buyer as 

it strives to purchase new technology embodied in products and systems to meet the challenges 

faced by our warfighters. In many instances, technology transfer and technology transition are 

becoming a seamless path to fielding new technology critical to responding to the new and 

dynamic threats of asymmetric warfare, the global war on terrorism, and the ever-expanding role 

of civil assistance and disaster recovery worldwide. In the 1980’s, when much of the technology 

transfer legislation was enacted, the federal government, including DoD, was the principle 

funding source for research and development (R&D). Consequently, technology transfer was 

viewed as a “spin out” to the marketplace, a stimulus to the domestic economy, and a return on 

investment for taxpayer funded R&D. Today, the majority of U.S. R&D is industry funded. 

This shift in funding has led to a greater emphasis on technology transfer as a collaborative effort 

between DoD labs and their partners in industry, academia, and state and local government.

Each of the Military Services, DoD Agencies, and Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) 

maintain technology transfer websites to inform the public and make available general 

information. The websites are:

DoD research & Engineering enterprise: http://www.acq.osd.mil/chieftechnologist/index.html

U.S. Army Research Laboratory: http://www.arl.army.mil/main/Main/default.cfm?Action=6

Office of Naval Research: https://www.onr.navy.mil/
46

DoD Invention Disclosures and Patenting

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of new inventions disclosed decreased by 19% to 

874 disclosures in FY 2016. The number of patent applications filed decreased by 7% to 941.

The number of patents issued during decreased by 37% to 665 patents. 1,078 1,032 963 781

874

1,013

942

916

884

941

1,048

648

670

623

665

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DoD Invention Disclosures and Patenting

New Invention Disclosures Patent Applications Filed Patents Issued

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

New Invention Disclosures 1,078 1,032 963 781 874

Patent Applications Filed 1,013 942 916 884 941

Patents Issued 1,048 648 670 623 665
47

Patents issued to DoD in FY 2016 covered many technology areas including Measurement

(13%), Other Special Machines (11%), Computer Technology (9%), Telecommunications (8%), 

and Semiconductors (5%), Transport (5%), and Electrical Machinery, Apparatus, Energy (5%).

22

USPTO Patents Assigned to DoD by Technology Area: FY 2016

 22 Source: Prepared by Science-Metrix using USPTO data indexed in PatentsView in April 2017. Used with 

permission.
48

DoD Licenses

Total active licenses decreased by 1% from 520 licenses in FY 2012 to 515 licenses in FY 2016,

while new licenses increased 189% to 127. Total active invention licenses declined by 17% to 

358, while new invention licenses increased by 30% to 57. Total active income-bearing licenses 

declined by 46% to 194, and income-bearing exclusive licenses increased by 82% to 218. DoD 

was not able to report income-bearing licenses exclusive licenses for FY 2013 - FY 2015.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Licenses, Total Active 520 527 430 560 515

New Licenses 44 59 24 11 127

Invention Licenses, Total Active 432 425 297 446 358

New Invention Licenses 44 59 6 69 57

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 356 264 223 213 194

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 120 n.a. n.a. n.a. 218
49

DoD Income from Licensing

In FY 2016, total income from all active licenses decreased by 12% from $7 million in FY 2012 

to $6.2 million in FY 2016. Income from invention licenses decreased by 21% to $5.2 million

and total earned royalty income declined by 2% to $6.2 million. $7,055 $21,575 $11,703

$9,448

$6,205

$6,552

$20,859

$10,890

$8,482

$5,199

$6,335

$20,438

$7,845

$6,099

$6,205

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DoD Income from Licensing ($000s)

Total Income, All Active Licenses Invention Licenses Total Earned Royalty Income (ERI)

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Total Income, All Active Licenses $7,055 $21,575 $11,703 $9,448 $6,205

Invention Licenses $6,552 $20,859 $10,890 $8,482 $5,199

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $6,335 $20,438 $7,845 $6,099 $6,205
50

DoD Collaborative R&D Relationships

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, DoD reported the number of total active cooperative research 

and development agreements (CRADAs) increased by 30% to 3,125 agreements, while the

number of new CRADAs per fiscal year increased by 40% to 1,061. The number of total active 

traditional CRADAs increased by 73% to 2,297 agreements. There were 452 other collaborative 

relationships reported in FY 2016.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

CRADAs, Total Active 2,400 2,682 2,762 2,148 3,125

New CRADAs 757 769 671 793 1,061

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 1,328 2,682 2,281 1,601 2,297

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 0 606 581 1,389 452
51

DoD Downstream Success Stories

Air Force: Roll-Out Solar Array

The primary source of power generation for spacecraft is solar power, and the solar panels used 

in space are many times larger than the satellite or payload itself. The wingspan of geostationary 

communication satellites is about 150 feet; however, the launch vehicle that carries the satellite 

to orbit has an internal diameter of less than 15 feet. This causes challenges for launching solar 

arrays into space since they must be stowed in the narrow confines of launch vehicle fairings and 

then deployed on orbit. Coupled to the tight launch confines is the exorbitant launch expense. 

Currently, the approximate cost to launch satellites is $10,000 per pound. These two factors 

result in the limited total power available to spacecraft payloads.

Since all spacecraft require power to operate, reducing the weight and stowed volume of the 

solar array greatly reduces the overall system cost and increases the total power for the mission. 

To tackle these challenges, the Air Force Research Laboratory Space Vehicles Directorate 

(AFRL/RV)—in partnership with NASA; Deployable Space Systems, Inc.; LoadPath, LLC; and 

Hall Composites—developed the roll-out solar array (ROSA), which uses novel, passively 

deployed, composite structural booms and a flexible solar cell blanket. ROSA’s innovative 

architecture provides six-time improvement in stowed power density, three times higher specific 

power, and four times higher stiffness, all while lowering the array cost by 25%. The 

outstanding improvement in performance enables ROSA to supersede spacecraft on-orbit power 

limits, which leads to substantially higher communication bandwidth for commercial 

applications and opens up new classes of DoD missions.

The technology transfer partnership was initiated using a Small Business Innovation Research 

(SBIR) contract with Deployable Space Systems, LLC, to improve the stowed volume and 

deployed on-orbit performance of solar arrays. LoadPath, LLC, a small business cooperative 

research and development partner with AFRL/RV, developed the boom fabrication methodology 

and provided the test data that was critical to demonstrating the capabilities of ROSA. NASA 

provided modeling support and transition to space exploration missions. 

The multi-partner effort formed by the partnership led directly to the testing, demonstration, and 

commercialization of ROSA, with widespread adoption of the technology leading to broad 

economic impacts and transitioning to Space Systems Loral to replace its existing arrays for 37 

geostationary orbit/low Earth orbit (GEO/LEO) communications satellites in production.

Army: Open Campus

The Army Research Laboratory's (ARL) Open Campus is a collaborative endeavor with the goal 

of building a science and technology ecosystem that encourages groundbreaking advances in 

basic and applied research areas of relevance to the Army. The initiative allows ARL to tap 

regional resources in order to gain knowledge and expertise from intellectual markets that have 

been underrepresented as a means to quicken the technology maturation process and allow the 

Army to maintain technology overmatch in critical areas. Through the Open Campus 

framework, ARL scientists and engineers work collaboratively with visiting scientists in ARL's 

facilities and as visiting researchers at collaborators' institutions. Ultimately, the Open Campus 

initiative hopes to create an enhanced defense research environment that fosters discovery and 
52

innovation through collaboration on fundamental research. Advantages include:

• Reducing barriers to facilitate collaboration with academia, industry, and small 

businesses;

• Academia, industry, and small business access to ARL's specialized research staff and 

unique technical facilities;

• Staffing using novel approaches;

• Offering a career path for students and scientists; and

• Arranging on-site collaborator presence by leveraging Enhanced Use Lease agreements.

Thus far, two facilities have been established under the Open Campus model:

• ARL-West, opened in April 2016, is headquartered at the University of Southern 

California in Los Angeles and focuses on Human Information Interaction; and

• ARL-South, established in November 2016, is headquartered at the University of Texas 

at Austin and will initially focus primarily on materials and manufacturing including 

additive manufacturing, biosciences, energy, and power. 

Army: HyperX Parallel Memory/Processor Network Chip for Communications 

Equipment

Evolving from hyperspectral image processing software created by Dr. Paul Wilson while 

employed by the U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Armaments Center 

(CCDC AC) in the 1990s, the commercialization of the HyperX processor chip spanned more 

than a decade. The HyperX processor chip is a low-power, scalable, and embedded processor 

platform that may become the world’s processing standard for advanced communication and 

image/video devices. Capable of storing, processing and retrieving massive amounts of data, 

HyperX combines the high computational performance of application-specific integrated circuits, 

the reconfiguration performance of programmable technology, and the “ease of use” of generalpurpose processors. These goals are achieved in a low-power processor less than a square 

centimeter in size.

From 2000 to 2012, a series of SBIR contracts between ARDEC and Coherent Logix (CLX) 

transformed Dr. Wilson’s innovative software into a groundbreaking multicore parallel 

processing technology. Other technology transfer tools, such as a 2011 DoD Memorandum of 

Understanding, transitioned the technology to other locations. Throughout this time, Dr. Wilson, 

Michael Doerr (CLX Chief Executive Officer), and Dr. Robert Reuss (Defense Advanced 

Research Projects Agency, Program Manager for HyperX) worked diligently to advance the 

technology. Today the HyperX processor chip is the cornerstone of CLX’s portfolio of 

commercial products, with 29 related patents. Among the multiple commercial products now 

with embedded Hyper technology are ixMax, the world’s first carrier-class cognitive radio 

network, and small cell consumer and commercial wireless communications equipment from 

Public Wireless. As the power and popularity of mobile devices grows, HyperX has the promise 

to meet increasing commercial and military needs for faster data processing with lower power 

consumption.
53

Army: Hardened Alternative Trailer System

The Hardened Alternative Trailer System (HATS) grew out of increasing numbers of forced 

entry, small-arms, and ballistic attacks impacting personnel in and around U.S. embassies. 

Existing containerized housing units offered little-to-no force protection and required uparmoring in the field, a costly and unreliable means of addressing federal forced entry and blastresistant requirements. HATS modules were developed and tested to exceed threat-level 

requirements and to be fully compatible with conventional International Organization for 

Standardization (ISO) freight container dimensions. The HATS modularity enables standardized 

shipping and handling, and the ability to stack units at site destinations to create multi-level 

building complexes. This hardened turnkey approach permits rapid implementation of secure, 

cost-effective modules to serve as housing, offices, and safe havens for U.S. personnel abroad.

In just two short years (2011-2013), the HATS technology moved from concept to initial 

implementation. U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center Geotechnical and 

Structures Laboratory (ERDC-GSL) engineering capabilities were recruited to address the 

concept initiated by the Department of State, Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DoS-DS). In 2012, 

the ERDC-GSL team collaborated to design, prototype, and blast test HATS to meet DoS-DS 

standards. Advancing rapidly to address demands for HATS demonstration units, the team had 

security concerns about how to release the sensitive design specifications and future updates to 

achieve high-quality manufacturing. By devising a technology transfer solution, the team 

protected the HATS design and method of production in 2013 under a first patent application; 

developed a licensing process to prequalify applicant manufacturing capabilities; found licensees 

through the use of novel resources; and used the resulting license agreements as a means to assert 

quality control and transfer ongoing design changes to manufacturers. In 2013, a first license 

was executed, and the first contracting occurred for delivery of 38 HATS units.

By 2015, technology transfer efforts resulted in eight non-exclusive licenses with Charleston 

Marine Containers, ARMAG Corporation, HWH Protective Structures, MBI Global/CLS, Power 

Systems & Controls, Griffin Incorporated, Quality Manufacturing Group, and LoneStar Marine 

Shelters. To date, 211 HATS units have been contracted through the licensees, representing an 

estimated $53 million of HATS licensee sales revenue, with installation locations now including 

Peshawar, Pakistan; Juba, South Sudan; Damascus, Syria; and Adana, Turkey. HATS modules 

have successfully provided an affordable, commercially available, physical force protection 

system to enhance the survivability of U.S. embassy and industry personnel in hostile threat 

situations. Transfer of the HATS technology has yielded a new product and market for the 

licensees and has satisfied ERDC-GSL’s mission to develop innovative technologies for 

survivability and protective structures on behalf of national interests.

Army: Zmapp Therapeutic Monoclonal Antibody Cocktail

In August 2014, within days of being stricken by the Ebola 

virus, two American medical workers received an 

experimental drug that had never been tested on humans. 

ZMapp saved their lives. The recovery of physician Kent 

Brantly and aid worker Nancy Writebol is a testament to the 

critical work done at the U.S. Army Medical Research 

Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID), where research scientists developed one of the 
54

three monoclonal antibodies that comprise ZMapp. The antibody was licensed to Mapp 

Biopharmaceutical of San Diego in October 2009, five years before the unprecedented Ebola 

outbreak in 2014. Since then, MappBio received a $25.9 million contract from the HHS to 

support accelerated development of ZMapp; and Phase I, Class II clinical trials are now 

underway in West Africa.

The license agreement between the Army and MappBio was the first in the DoD, and perhaps the 

country, to leverage the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Tropical Disease Priority 

Review Voucher (PRV) program. As a technology transfer tool, the potential shared proceeds 

from a PRV represent one of the largest upsides in licensing ever negotiated. 

Terms developed for the MappBio agreement regarding a potential PRV are now standard in all 

tropical disease licenses negotiated by the Army Medical Research and Development

Command’s (MRDC) Technology Transfer Office. Considerations include determining the value 

of the potential voucher and the relative contributions of the licensee and licensor, which are 

unique to each negotiation. This technology transfer has exceeded all partners’ expectations. 

MappBio has transitioned from a company of nine employees to a world leader in biotechnology, 

while at USAMRIID and the MRMC Technology Transfer Office, interest in Army Ebolarelated technology has soared, resulting in many licensing agreements and establishing the lab as 

a national and international resource. At the end of the day, it is about saving lives. Ebola 

patients and healthcare providers now have hope that there is an end to the 60% to 90% fatality 

rate of the deadliest virus on the planet.

Navy: METBENCH Calibration Management System

On April 16, 2014, the Naval Surface 

Warfare Center, Corona Division (NSWC 

Corona) signed a non-exclusive patent 

license agreement with American 

Technical Services, Inc. (ATS) of Norco, 

California. The agreement transferred the 

Navy’s METBENCH Calibration 

Management System, a net-centric, 

browser-based information technology 

that automates standardized equipment calibration procedures and collects measurement data 

across the fleet. The historic cross-licensing agreement was the first of its kind for the U.S. 

Navy, creating a two-way exchange between ATS and the Navy of their respective calibration 

technologies. It also was the first PLA for NSWC Corona-designed technology. 

The NSWC Corona team was principally responsible for the successful technology transfer

activities that overcame fundamental challenges inherent to the lab’s existing technology transfer

culture. The team not only smoothly transferred METBENCH to the private sector, but also 

expanded the lab’s emerging intellectual property (IP) and technology transfer culture.

For the Navy, the transferred technology promises major savings by reducing resources needed 

to regularly calibrate innumerable pressure gauges, contact switches, temperature indicators, 

infrared cameras, night vision goggles, radios, weapons systems and more. U.S. sailors perform 
55

about 10,000 calibrations each year, and the Navy utilizes roughly 1.85 million pieces of 

calibration test equipment. The METBENCH technology increases collected data quality, 

eliminates technical errors, and decreases calibration times, with near real-time calibration 

guidance, asset tracking, and readiness reporting. 

For ATS, the transfer instantly expanded company horizons from its Navy contractor focus to a 

vast commercial marketplace. Any sector, from pharmaceuticals to manufacturing, that uses 

electronic and physical measurement tools contains potential ATS customers. Ubiquitous in 

both private and public realms, equipment calibration is a multibillion-dollar industry.

Navy: Explosive Ordinance Disposal Robotics

Explosive Ordnance Disposal Robotics (EODR) is a system architecture for interoperability and 

operator control capability for unmanned ground vehicles (UGV) designated for explosive 

ordnance disposal duties. The Navy’s Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Pacific (SSC 

Pacific) has developed several robotics-related software systems, including a common operator 

interface software framework called the Multirobot Operator Control Unit (MOCU) and a 

software library for the Joint Architecture for Unmanned Systems interoperability standard. 

SSC Pacific also maintained a Robotics Systems Pool that made the UGV platforms and 

technology available for transfer via Limited Purpose CRADA with industry, academia, and state 

and local governments for R&D purposes. In July 2009, SSC Pacific signed a CRADA with 

RE2 Robotics, Inc. of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Results quickly supported a full CRADA 

between the two partners, which was executed in August 2009 and effective through August 

2012. The SSC Pacific-RE2 exchange excelled in its seamless integration of the two partners’ 

robotics expertise, based on mutual respect and willingness to achieve “interoperability” not only 

in robotics, but in the steps taken to transition the valuable technologies to industry and back to 

the military.

Both RE2 Robotics and SSC Pacific significantly contributed to the broader validation of open 

architecture for EODR UGV technologies. Their back-and-forth effort was critical to what 

ultimately became a paradigm shift in Navy and DOD robotics acquisition processes, from a 

process focused on unique solutions from a single company to one more focused on costeffective open architecture and interoperability.

Navy: Multi-Robot Operator Control Unit (MOCU)

The Navy has developed an unmanned vehicle and sensor operator control interface capable of 

controlling and monitoring multiple sets of heterogeneous systems simultaneously. The 

modularity, scalability, and flexible user interface of the Multi-Robot Operator Control Unit 

(MOCU) enables control of a wide range of vehicles and sensors in varying mission scenarios. 

MOCU currently controls all SSC- Pacific developmental vehicles including land, air, sea, and 

undersea vehicles, the Spartan Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD) 

unmanned surface vehicle (USV), the iRobot PackBot, and the Family of Integrated Rapid 

Response Equipment vehicle and sensors. Recently, a team consisting of both Department of 

Navy personnel and industry professionals collaborated to validate the integration of the MOCU 

with explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) robotic systems. The collaborative effort targeted 

multiple problems that decrease the field performance of EOD robots, and ultimately the safety 
56

of the U.S. warfighter. The effort resulted in an agile robotic system that employs an open 

architecture, enables multi-manufacturer innovation, allows for forward and backward 

compatibility, and reduces the cost of EOD robots. The effort represents a shift in Navy and 

DoD acquisition processes from focusing a unique solution from one company, to focusing on a 

cost-effective open architecture that is interoperable with multiple solutions. MOCU validation 

under the CRADA was a key factor in MOCU becoming the required OCU for the Navy’s 

Advanced EOD Robotic System program of record.
57

Department of Energy (DOE)

DOE is one of the largest supporters of technology transfers within the federal government. The 

Department plays a key role in moving new technologies developed in research labs across the 

country into the commercial marketplace, fueling the innovation engine that powers the U.S. 

economy. Bridging the gap between research and development (R&D) and commercial 

deployment is crucial to DOE’s mission to enhance the United States security and economic 

growth through transformative science and market solutions. By creating globally competitive 

industries in the U.S., the DOE enables significant cost-savings for industries and consumers and 

creates jobs for Americans.

The DOE's National Laboratories addresses the critical scientific challenges of our time—from 

combating climate change to discovering the origins of our universe—and possess unique 

instruments and facilities, many of which are found nowhere else in the world. They address 

large scale, complex R&D challenges with a multidisciplinary approach that places an emphasis 

on translating basic science to innovation. Among the many things that the National Laboratories 

do, some include the following:

• Conduct research of the highest caliber in physical, chemical, biological, and 

computational, and information sciences that advances our understanding of the world 

around us;

• Advance U.S. energy independence and leadership in energy technologies to ensure the 

ready availability of clean, reliable, and affordable energy;

• Enhance global, national, and homeland security by ensuring the safety and reliability of 

the U.S. nuclear deterrent, helping to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass 

destruction, and securing the nation’s borders; and

• Design, build, and operate distinctive scientific instrumentation and facilities, and make 

these resources available to the research community.

DOE oversees the construction and operation of some of the Nation’s most advanced R&D 

facilities, located at National Laboratories and universities. These state-of-the-art facilities are 

shared with the science community worldwide and offer some technologies and instrumentation 

that are available nowhere else. In fiscal year 2016, these facilities were used by over 33,000 

researchers from universities, national laboratories, private industry, and other federal science 

agencies.23

 23 Department of Energy, Office of Science. User Facilities. http://science.energy.gov/user-facilities/
58

DOE laboratories and facilities that are actively engaged in technology transfer include:

Office of Science: 

• Ames Laboratory (Ames), 

• Argonne National Laboratory (ANL), 

• Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL), 

• Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (FERMI), 

• Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), 

• Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), 

• Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), 

• Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL), 

• SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory (SLAC), 

• Thomas Jefferson National Accelerator Facility (JLAB)

National Nuclear Security Administration: 

• Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), 

• Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), 

• Sandia National Laboratories (SNL), 

• Savannah River Site, 

• National Security Campus (formerly the Kansas City Plant), 

• Y-12 National Security Complex, Pantex Plant, Nevada National Security Site (formerly 

the Nevada Test Site)

Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy: 

• National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)

Office of Nuclear Energy: 

• Idaho National Laboratory (INL)

Office of Fossil Energy: 

• National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL)

Office of Environmental Management: 

• Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL)

Science and engineering are not linear. DOE’s system of National Labs, user facilities, research 

centers and shared research facilities, makes the pursuit of discovery—and the many solutions 

that result—both a collaborative enterprise and a shared national resource. Collaboration with 

industry, academia, and other federal and state agencies is essential to develop, demonstrate, 

deploy and commercialize the output from DOE’s broad R&D investments. 

The Office of Technology Transitions (OTT) mission is to expand the commercial impact of the 

DOE’s research and development portfolio to advance the economic, energy, and national 

security interests of the Nation. OTT develops DOE’s policy and vision for expanding the 

commercial impact of its research investments and streamlines information and access to DOE’s 
59

national labs and sites to foster partnerships that will bring innovations from the labs into the 

marketplace.

More information about DOE’s technology transfer activities is available on the following 

website: https://energy.gov/technologytransitions/office-technology-transitions.

DOE Invention Disclosures and Patenting

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of new inventions disclosed increased by 6% to 

1,760 disclosures in FY 2016. The number of patent applications filed increased by 7% to 999. 

The number of patents issued increased by 27% to 856 patents in FY 2016.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

New Invention Disclosures 1,661 1,796 1,588 1,645 1,760

Patent Applications Filed 933 944 1,144 949 999

Patents Issued 676 713 822 755 856
60

Patents issued to DOE in FY 2016 covered many technology areas including Electrical 

Machinery, Apparatus, Energy (14%), Measurement (11%), Chemical Engineering (8%), 

Materials, Metallurgy (7%), Biotechnology (6%), and Computer Technology (6%).24

USPTO Patents Assigned to DOE by Technology Area: FY 2016

 24 Source: Prepared by Science-Metrix using USPTO data indexed in PatentsView in April 2017. Used with 

permission.
61

DOE Licenses

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of total active licenses increased by 2% to 5,410

licenses in FY 2016 while new licenses decreased by 18% to 621 licenses. The number of total 

active invention licenses decreased by 34% to 943 licenses while the number of new invention 

licenses decreased by 24% to 145. Income-bearing licenses increased by 19% to 3,963 while the 

number of exclusive income-bearing licenses decreased by 33% to 231.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Licenses, Total Active 5,328 5,217 5,861 6,310 5,410

New Licenses 757 568 573 648 621

Invention Licenses, Total Active 1,428 1,353 1,560 1,336 943

New Invention Licenses 192 153 171 155 145

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 3,340 3,709 4,215 4,577 3,963

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 344 199 141 98 231 5,328 5,2175,8616,310 5,410 757 568 573 648 621 1,428 1,353 1,560 1,336 943 192 153 171 155 145 3,3403,7094,2154,577 3,963 344 199 141 98231

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DOE Licenses

Licenses, Total Active New Licenses

Invention Licenses, Total Active New Invention Licenses

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses
62

DOE Income from Licensing

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, DOE reported that total income from all active licenses 

decreased by 24% to $31.1 million in FY 2016. The income from invention licenses decreased 

by 24% to $27.4 million. Total earned royalty income decreased 43% to $16.3 million in FY 

2016.

$40,849

$39,573

$37,885

$33,137

$31,149

$36,103

$36,068

$32,869

$28,966

$27,364

$28,735

$27,669

$23,384

$21,245

$16,273

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

$40,000

$45,000

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DOE Income from Licensing ($000s)

Total Income, All Active Licenses Invention Licenses Total Earned Royalty Income (ERI)

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Total Income, All Active Licenses $40,849 $39,573 $37,885 $33,137 $31,149

Invention Licenses $36,103 $36,068 $32,869 $28,966 $27,364

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $28,735 $27,669 $23,384 $21,245 $16,273
63

DOE Collaborative R&D Relationships

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of total active cooperative research and 

development agreements (CRADAs) declined slightly from 742 in FY 2012 to 739 in FY 2016. 

The number of new CRADAs per fiscal year increased by 34% to 246. All of DOE’s active 

CRADAs were reported to be traditional CRADAs.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

CRADAs, Total Active 742 742 698 732 739

New CRADAs 184 142 162 188 246

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 742 742 698 732 739

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 0 0 0 0 0 742 742 698732 739 184 142162188 246 742 742 698732 739

00000

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DOE Collaborative R&D Relationships

CRADAs, Total Active New CRADAs

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active Other Collaborative R&D Relationships
64

DOE Downstream Success Stories

Ames Laboratory: Titanium Powder Processing Gains International Customer Base 

Titanium powder created with DOE’s Ames 

Laboratory-developed gas-atomization technology 

has hit the market. Praxair, Inc., headquartered in 

Danbury, CT, now offers fine, spherical titanium 

powder for additive manufacturing and metal 

injection molding of aerospace, medical and 

industrial parts. It marks the first-time large-scale 

amounts of titanium powder are available to industry 

with a potential for low-cost, high-volume 

manufacturing.

Titanium’s strength, light weight, biocompatibility 

and resistance to corrosion make it ideal for use in 

parts ranging from aircraft wing structures to 

replacement knee joints and medical instruments. 

Using ultra-fine, high-purity spherical titanium powder to 3-D print or mold these parts generates 

10 times less metal waste than traditional casting of parts. However, ultra-fine titanium powder 

was nearly impossible to produce from the molten state because liquid titanium is readily 

contaminated by dissolved gases and cannot be contained by normal ceramic melting crucibles, 

which it can rapidly erode, to the point of spilling through.

The Ames Laboratory’s invention of an in-stream melt heating guide tube was critical to 

boosting the melt temperature by at least 100 ̊C, allowing adaptation of water-cooled ‘clean’ 

melting technologies, normally used to melt and cast strong, reliable aerospace titanium parts. 

This new ‘hot nozzle’ made possible precise feeding of highly energetic close-coupled atomizers 

for efficient production of fine titanium powders. Development of the hot-shot pour tube was 

supported by DOE’s Office of Science and Office of Fossil Energy. The specific work on 

titanium powder was supported by the Iowa State University Research Foundation, the State of 

Iowa Regents Grow Iowa Values Fund, the US Army through the Quad City Manufacturing Lab

(QCML), and finally funding from Praxair. Strategic Partnership Projects were negotiated with 

both the QCML and Praxair.

Two members of the Laboratory’s research team created a spinoff company, Iowa Powder 

Atomization Technologies (IPAT), and exclusively licensed Ames Laboratory’s titanium 

atomization patents. IPAT worked to further optimize the titanium atomization process and 

along the way won several business and technology awards for their efforts, including DOE’s

Next Energy Innovator competition in 2012.

In 2014, IPAT was acquired by Praxair, a Fortune 250 company and one of the world’s largest 

producers of gases and surface coatings. In 2016, Praxair announced they had begun to market 

titanium powder.

A titanium bolt and the corresponding 

amount of titanium powder necessary 

to create it.
65

Brookhaven National Laboratory: Optically Active Nanostructures 

Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) and Northrop Grumman (NG) launched a major 

initiative under a CRADA to discover, develop, and demonstrate techniques for the fabrication 

of arbitrarily designed 2D and 3D arrays from diverse optically functional nanoparticles (NP) 

using a macromolecular (DNA) assembly platform, a methodology that has been developed at 

the BNL Center for Functional Nanomaterials (CFN). 

Don DiMarzio is an engineering fellow at NG and a senior scientist within the company’s 

advanced research, development, design, and demonstration group NG Next, where he studies 

nanomaterials and radio-frequency metamaterials. He is also an adjunct professor at Stony 

Brook University, where he teaches a nanotechnology class. Since March 2016, he has been 

collaborating with CFN physicist Oleg Gang to investigate nanostructures whose self-assembly 

is directed through DNA scaffolds. Don DiMarzio utilized a broad range of advanced 

characterization labs at CFN. 

Oleg Gang has been developing this DNA-based technique for a decade, and his group pioneered 

the fabrication of new nanoparticle-based 3D materials and the development of the by-design 

nano-assembly methods. Through incorporation of optically active nanoparticles into designed 

assembled architectures this collaboration seeks to establish novel methods for targeted 

fabrication of materials with desired light emitting and light modulating properties. 

Recently, this BNL-NG collaboration resulted in a publication that describes a new approach for 

the assembly of precisely organized nanoparticle meso-clusters as it has been demonstrated 

through a comprehensive characterization at the CFN.25 Brookhaven recently had the pleasure 

of hosting a visit from Tom Pieronek, Vice President, Basic Research at NG Aerospace Systems. 

We look forward to developing further collaborations in the future.

Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory: Electromagnetic boom and environmental 

cleanup technologies

Natural Science, LLC and Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (Fermilab) announced an 

exclusive field-of-use license agreement that grants Natural Science rights to Fermilab’s 

electromagnetic boom and environmental cleanup technologies for use in conjunction with 

magnetizable oil.

Through this agreement, Natural Science can utilize and develop electromagnetic oil 

recovery boom technologies across a broad range of applications, including on-and-offshore oil remediation and control management systems as well as produced water 

hydrocarbon remediation. Through this exclusive field-of-use agreement, Natural Science 

customers will now have access to innovative technology that is environmentally safe and

outstrips current solutions in terms of efficiency.

The electromagnetic mop system rests on the fact that micron sized magnetite particles will 

mix with oil more readily than water when these filings are spread on an oil-water mixture. 

The particles form a unique and preferential bond with the oil due to a combination of 

forces, forming a loose colloidal suspension. The filings are magnetic, so they can be 

 25 See https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsnano.7b02671
66

moved by a typical magnet. This allows one to use magnetic fields to manipulate, trap, and 

remove the oil in an environmentally safe manner with high efficiency. Natural Science is 

applying the licensed technology to an electromagnetic boom system that will replace the 

standard (and inefficient) passive boom and skimmer systems used today.

“Extracting crude oil from water has always been a difficult and inefficient process, despite 

the fact that the two liquids don’t readily mix,” said John Nelson of Natural Science. “Our 

system can extract over 90% of the oil from the surrounding water, which represents a 

substantial gain over traditional systems.”

“This license agreement, with one of the most recognized laboratories in the world, 

represents our commitment to finding the best technologies and delivering the best solutions 

to our customers,” said David Cathey of Natural Science. “Given the nature of our product, 

we feel our technology will quickly become an industry standard for oil spill remediation.”

Kansas City National Security Campus: Polyphenylene Sulfide Powders

In an effort to maximize partnership activities with 

outside industry and academia, DOE’s Kansas City 

National Security Campus (KCNSC) created a series 

of science and engineering-based Consortia aligned 

with technology roadmaps around targeted technical 

areas. The science-based manufacturing 

environment of the current and not too distant future 

requires increased early cooperation, interaction, and 

partnerships.

KCNSC technical leaders identified technologies 

that will need to be developed or expanded over the 

next 10, 15, or 20 years. These technologies include 

next generation radar, metal and polymer based 

additive manufacturing, reverse engineering, and 

augmented reality, among others. Each university or industry partner is selected to create 

strategic partnerships that will develop technology to increase weapon safety, capability, and 

functionality, while reducing cycle time and cost. 

One of the “game changing” technologies identified for expansion by the KCNSC is Polymer 

Additive Manufacturing (PAM). KCNSC strategically selected specific university, laboratory,

and industry partners for its PAM consortium, because of the considerable amount of 

fundamental, basic, and applied research required. The PAM consortium provides rapid 

development from concept to the manufacturing floor with a less expensive alternative to metals 

in certain circumstances. The KCNSC works with a myriad of polymeric materials that are used 

in tooling, fixtures, and war reserve parts, and it has the ability to rapidly scan objects and use 

Polymer AM to reproduce these objects on-site and on-demand. Typically referred to as Rapid 

Prototyping, this technique can be used very effectively to provide quick answers to evolving 

technical questions about processes or products.

Scanning electron microscope (SEM) image of pillar 

microstructure of silicone elastomer printed using 

stereolithography, a polymer additive process.
67

As one of the broader public-private consortia, KCNSC’s PAM Consortium worked closely with 

university collaborators and a vendor to develop polyphenylene sulfide (PPS) powders with 

appropriate particle sizes for use in low-temperature Powder Bed Fusion, also known as 

Selective Laser Sintering processing. These materials have great potential for use in the 

electronics industry as encapsulating materials designed for component packaging and sealers.

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory: Spray-on DNA Bar Codes

Foodborne illnesses kill roughly 3,000 Americans 

each year and about one in six is sickened, 

according to the Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention. Yet most contaminated foods are never 

traced back to their source. That is because existing 

methods to track tainted food along its supply chain 

from table to farm are highly inefficient, 

jeopardizing the health of millions and costing the 

food industry billions. A typical process to trace 

food includes interviewing consumers and suppliers 

and examining every detail of the supply chain, a 

tedious method that takes weeks at best to complete.

DOE’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) researchers, in collaboration with the 

startup company DNATrek through an exclusive license, have developed a cost-effective and 

highly efficient method to accurately trace contaminated food back to its source. LLNL

originally designed the technology, known as DNATrax, to safely track indoor and outdoor 

airflow patterns. One of the unexpected capabilities of DNATrax was being able to apply it to 

food products. The technology was first developed for biosecurity applications.

DNATrax are particles comprised of sugar and non-living and non-viable DNA that can serve as 

an invisible barcode. It is an odorless and tasteless substance that has been approved by the Food 

and Drug Administration as a food additive, safe for consumption. It can be thought of as a 

microscopic barcode that is sprayed on food at the farm or processing plant. If the food turns out 

to be contaminated when it reaches the store or dinner table, DNATrax can be lifted off the food 

and analyzed in the lab using polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to identify the source.

It is anticipated that DNATrax can be used to assist in training to determine if articles of personal 

protective equipment (PPE) such as hazmat suits used by emergency responders and health care 

workers to treat Ebola patients have been breached. DoD’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency

funded this Federal Work for Others research project.

Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory: Edison Award for X-ray Imaging Invention

Three scientists at DOE’s Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory (PPPL) have invented a new 

extreme ultraviolet (EUV) imaging apparatus for EUV spectroscopy, EUV microscopy, EUV 

lithography and x-ray imaging. This new imaging apparatus will make significant contributions 

to EUV lithography at wavelengths in the range from 10 to 15 nm, which is presently being 

developed for the manufacturing of the next-generation of computer processors and other semiconductor integrated circuits. 

DNATrax sprayed on food

DNATrax sprayed on food.
68

The optimization of EUV lithography for the manufacture of next-generation integrated circuits 

is a subject of intense research in industry and laboratories worldwide. The new EUV imaging 

apparatus is considered to be the next generation of computer chip manufacturing because the 

EUV light, called soft X-rays, allows designers of computer chips to place 100 times more 

components, like transistors, in the same area of tiny computer chips. The linear distance 

between components is also 10 times shorter, which means the speed of the chip could be 10 

times faster. 

The physicists who invented this device, Manfred Bitter, Kenneth Hill, and Philip Efthimion,

won an Edison Patent Award in the imaging systems category for an imaging apparatus from the 

New Jersey Research Council for their work.
69

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)

Research at HHS is conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the 

Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH). 

The NIH has as its mission to conduct and support biomedical research to improve the public 

health. The NIH Office of Technology Transfer (OTT) is responsible for identifying, evaluating, 

protecting, and marketing technologies derived in NIH intramural laboratories. OTT transfers 

these technologies through licenses to the private sector, where they can be further developed 

into products used in the prevention, diagnosis, or treatment of disease.

Effectively measuring the public health outcomes that result from such technologies is 

challenging and complex. Traditionally, efforts to measure the effect of technology transfer 

activities focus on outputs such as the number of patents and licenses or the amount of royalties 

generated; however, this approach does not depict the full scope of activities and may distort the 

importance of ensuring that novel biomedical inventions are commercialized.

NIH’s annual technology transfer report is available online at:

https://www.ott.nih.gov/reportsstats/annual-reports

More information about HHS technology transfer activities is available on the following 

websites:

CDC: http://www.cdc.gov/od/science/technology/

NIH: http://www.ott.nih.gov/

FDA: http://www.fda.gov/techtransfer
70

HHS Invention Disclosures and Patenting

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, HHS reported the number of new inventions disclosed 

decreased by 9% to 320 disclosures in FY 2016. The number of patent applications filed 

increased by 15% to 269. The number of patents issued increased by 73% to 579 patents.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

New Invention Disclosures 352 320 351 321 320

Patent Applications Filed 233 230 216 222 269

Patents Issued 335 428 453 501 579

352

320

351

321

320

233

230

216

222

269

335

428

453

501

579

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

HHS Invention Disclosures and Patenting

New Invention Disclosures Patent Applications Filed Patents Issued
71

Patents issued to HHS in FY 2016 covered many technology areas including Pharmaceuticals

(39%), Biotechnology (35%), Analysis of Biological Materials (9%), and Organic Fine 

Chemistry (8%).

26

USPTO Patents Assigned to HHS by Technology Area: FY 2016

 26 Source: Prepared by Science-Metrix using USPTO data indexed in PatentsView in April 2017. Used with 

permission.
72

HHS Licenses

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of total active licenses increased by 19% to 1,750

licenses in FY 2016 while new licenses increased by 20% to 278. The number of total active 

invention licenses increased by 58% to 1,721 licenses while the number of new invention 

licenses increased by 15% to 221. Total active income-bearing licenses increased by 3% to 837 

while income-bearing exclusive licenses decreased 4% to 23 licenses.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Licenses, Total Active 1,465 1,426 1,555 1,767 1,750

New Licenses 231 184 212 279 278

Invention Licenses, Total Active 1,090 1,069 1,186 1,354 1,721

New Invention Licenses 192 152 117 232 221

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 809 809 845 843 837

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 24 25 24 11 23
73

HHS Income from Licensing

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, total income from all active licenses increased by 20% to 

$132.8 million in FY 2016. The income from invention licenses increased by 21% to $130.7

million. Total earned royalty income decreased 1% to $110.2 million. $110,576 $116,448$137,249 $151,727

$132,833

$108,308

$103,664

$133,814

$147,512

$130,701

$110,930

$116,601

$116,765

$114,102

$110,193

$0

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

$140,000

$160,000

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

HHS Income from Licensing ($000s)

Total Income, All Active Licenses Invention Licenses Total Earned Royalty Income (ERI)

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Total Income, All Active Licenses $110,576 $116,448 $137,249 $151,727 $132,833

Invention Licenses $108,308 $103,664 $133,814 $147,512 $130,701

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $110,930 $116,601 $116,765 $114,102 $110,193
74

HHS Collaborative R&D Relationships

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of total active cooperative research and 

development agreements (CRADAs) increased by 56% to 590 agreements while the number of 

new CRADAs per fiscal year increased by 44% to 134. Total active traditional CRADAs 

increased by 60% to 391. There were 147 other collaborative research and development (R&D)

relationships reported in FY 2016.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

CRADAs, Total Active 377 427 532 400 590

New CRADAs 93 104 98 112 134

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 245 313 378 202 391

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 0 114 154 150 147
75

HHS Efforts to Streamline Technology Transfer Operations

Launch of New Online Tool Streamlines NIH CRADA Process 

In 2013, with seed money from the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention (CDC), a project team comprised of staff from the NIH, CDC, and the 

Federal Drug Administration (FDA) worked with NCI’s Center for Biomedical Informatics & 

Information Technology (CBIIT) to create an online, automated agreement builder, called 

CRADA Builder, that allows technology transfer staff to create custom draft agreements tailored 

to the specific needs of the collaboration. At the same time, a working group refreshed the 

Public Health Service template CRADA language with more clearly stated, concise language, 

which in turn was used to populate the CRADA Builder system. As a result of this enterprise 

effort, CRADA Builder was launched in September 2015.

The NIH CRADA Subcommittee has approved several CRADAs generated from CRADA 

Builder. The tech transfer specialists who have used the tool report it to be more efficient than 

beginning a CRADA with a model template and expressed that having a customized draft 

agreement streamlines negotiations. CRADA Builder saves the specialist’s time, provides a 

standardized method of building a CRADA, and minimizes problems with version control.

CRADA Builder is currently available for use by specialists at the NIH, FDA and CDC. The 

NCI shared the code with NIST. NIST, via its contractor, is developing an improved version of 

the tool for use by the Federal Laboratory Consortium on a secure platform that will be made 

available to other federal agencies.

Human Brain Collection Core at NIMH

NIH’s National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) modified the existing Material Transfer 

Agreement (MTA) template for the Human Brain Collection Core to streamline programmatic 

operations. This new MTA template contains monitoring and annual reporting provisions to 

more effectively capture metrics and distribution language that minimizes the burden associated 

with recipients’ transfer of materials to other research organizations.

Streamlining Availability of Plasmids at NINDS

NIH’s National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NINDS) Technology Transfer 

Office (TTO) has streamlined the process by which its researchers obtain materials from a major 

plasmid repository by pre-approving transfers associated with established terms and conditions 

known to be acceptable. Previously, the technology transfer office confirmed the accuracy of 

orders with researchers prior to approving the associated agreement, which was manually 

accomplished through the repository’s website. These two steps introduced a variable delay into 

the overall process. After consulting with and receiving concurrence from NINDS researchers 

responsible for a majority of repository orders, these steps were eliminated. Utilizing the new 

process resulted in a time savings for technology transfer staff of nearly a week in a four-month 

trial, faster receipt of the reagents by the scientists, and zero incorrectly processed orders. 

NINDS TTO provides the researchers with bi-annual reminders of the terms and conditions of 

the pre-approved agreements.

 
76

HHS Downstream Success Stories

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: Autocidal Gravid Ovitrap 

CDC’s Autocidal Gravid Ovitrap (AGO) mosquito trap has been 

successfully used by mosquito control programs for mosquito 

surveillance and control. The patented AGO attracts and catches female 

Aedes aegypti mosquitoes looking for a place to lay eggs. Field trials in 

which the AGO trap has been installed in most homes in a community 

have shown it reduces mosquito populations and rates of infection. 

Smaller scale field trials were so successful that CDC and the Puerto 

Rico Department of Health are implementing large-scale installation of AGO traps throughout 

several communities to help reduce mosquito populations and the viruses they spread.

The CDC Technology Transfer Office and CDC staff worked with a commercial partner, 

SpringStar, Inc., to mass produce the trap and expand its use in Puerto Rico. Phase I SBIR 

efforts were successful, and the partner secured Phase II SBIR funding to continue work on the 

AGO trap. The Technology Transfer and Intellectual Property Office at the National Institute of 

Allergy and Infectious Diseases, which manages patenting and licensing for the CDC, also 

negotiated a non-exclusive license with another commercial partner to expand public availability 

of the technology.

National Cancer Institute: Screening Methods for Cervical Pre-cancer 

Multiple collaboration agreements negotiated in FY 2016 with external partners (for-profit and 

not-for-profit) will facilitate the development of low-cost human papillomavirus (HPV) 

screening and triage tools for the detection of cervical pre-cancer and human papillomavirus 

(HPV) management protocols for implementation in low-resource settings. Since persistent 

infections with HPV can lead to cervical carcinomas, the development of HPV vaccination and 

HPV testing is leading to major changes in cervical cancer prevention programs worldwide. 

These agreements involve NCI’s Division of Cancer Epidemiology & Genetics and include the 

transfer of cervical specimens from large epidemiological studies.

National Cancer Institute: Nanotechnology Startup Challenge Winners 

The NCI partnered with the Center for Advancing 

Innovation (CAI) to launch the Nanotechnology Startup 

Challenge in Cancer or NSC2. The Challenge was centered 

on commercially viable, nanotechnology cancer-related 

inventions conceived by the NCI. Once accepted into the 

Challenge, international teams competed by selecting one 

of these intramural inventions and creating a business plan 

to launch a startup. Alternatively, teams could elect to 

bring other commercially viable, nanotechnology cancerrelated inventions into the challenge that are not from NCI. 

The primary goal was to stimulate the creation of start-up businesses to advance development 

and commercialization of these nanotechnology inventions. NSC2 launched in October 2015, 

and winners were announced in July 2016. The winners are now in various phases of launching 

their startups, including incorporation, negotiating a license for the technology and raising 
77

funding. The NSC2 was the third NIH Startup Challenge and is based upon the award-winning 

model created by the Breast Cancer Startup Challenge, and the more recent Neuro Startup 

Challenge.

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: Fighting Zika 

Zika dominated the news in 2016. The Zika virus is a mosquitoborne flavivirus that was identified in humans in 1952 in Uganda 

and the United Republic of Tanzania. From the 1960s to 1980s, 

human infections were found across Africa and Asia, typically 

accompanied by mild illness. In October 2015, Brazil reported an 

association between Zika virus infection and microcephaly. By 

late spring 2016, it was confirmed that Zika virus infection during 

pregnancy is a cause of congenital brain abnormalities, including 

microcephaly; and that Zika virus is a trigger of Guillain-Barré 

syndrome.

The urgent need for diagnostics, vaccines, and treatments for Zika virus infection led to a surge 

in NIAID-related research and partnership activities, and NIAID’s Technology Transfer and 

Intellectual Property Office (TTIPO) rose to the challenge. During FY 2016 TTIPO completed 

36 agreements and filed two patent applications to help advance Zika research and medical 

countermeasures development projects at NIAID. TTIPO also worked with HHS and CDC to 

make scarce Zika samples rapidly available to the global research community using one of 

NIAID’s biological materials repositories.

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: Dengue Vaccine

Dengue virus is a mosquito-borne flavivirus present worldwide in tropical and semitropical 

regions. It is estimated that 500 million infections occur annually, resulting in more than two

million cases of severe dengue and 21,000 deaths. An effective vaccine is a public health 

priority. Dr. Stephen Whitehead and others at NIAID’s Laboratory of Infectious Diseases (LID) 

have developed a tetravalent live attenuated dengue virus vaccine, TV003, which was shown to 

elicit a robust antibody and cellular immune response after just one dose.

In 2016, TV003 protected all 21 volunteers who received the vaccine from Dengue infection in a 

virus challenge study, while all 20 placebo recipients developed challenge infection. The 

Butantan Institute, a non-profit producer of immunobiologic products for Brazil, is sponsoring a 

placebo-controlled, multi-center Phase 3 trial in over 16,000 subjects. This technology was 

licensed to five licensees, including the Butantan Institute, covering worldwide development and 

commercialization. In FY 2016, TTIPO continued to market this technology and added two 

more non-exclusive licensees, enhancing the commercialization in Taiwan, India, South East 

Asia, Middle East, Australia and New Zealand.
78

National Institutes of Health: Encochleated Drugs to Treat Infections

This Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) was the first of what is 

anticipated to be several clinical trial CRADAs between NIH and Matinas BioPharma Holdings, 

Inc. The partnership led to the development of a unique CRADA model agreement to examine 

safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of a proprietary encochleated delivery platform for orally 

administered drugs. Encochleated drugs are resistant to premature enzyme degradation and, 

potentially, can be targeted to the site of infection, thereby reducing effective dosages and 

toxicity. Under this CRADA encochleated drugs are being studied to treat fungal, bacterial, or

viral infections. Matinas is providing encochleated formulations of anti-infective medications 

and funding to NIH in support of this important research objective.

National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases: Ebola Vaccine Development

Under a Research Collaboration Agreement initiated in 2008, NIAID’s Vaccine Research Center 

(VRC) and Okairos Srl, a Switzerland-based biotechnology company, collaborated to develop 

vaccine candidates to combat Ebola virus infection. The Ebola vaccine candidate cAd3-EBOV 

is a chimpanzee adenovirus that expresses isolated, modified Ebola glycoproteins. As the 2014 

Ebola Virus outbreak began to reach historic proportions, the VRC expedited its clinical 

development plans and joined efforts with GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), which acquired Okairos Srl

in 2013. Other partners quickly joined the VRC to accelerate development of the sorely needed 

vaccine through trials in the United States, the United Kingdom, Switzerland, and Mali. The 

urgency of the situation in west Africa demanded that the technology transfer team generate

creative and pragmatic solutions to enable the rapid start of clinical trials.

Within two months, all agreements enabling the start of Phase I clinical trials were completed. In 

many cases, unique agreements were drafted to avoid anticipated delays. For example, early on 

a Material Transfer Agreement (MTA) was utilized to jump-start preparations for the conduct of 

a clinical trial of cAd3-EBOV in the United Kingdom. This allowed the trial to begin 

immediately after negotiation of the clinical trial agreement. Further, as GSK agreed to have 

more cAd3-EBOV clinical product manufactured through a contract research organization, a 

specialized MTA was created for VRC to transfer the necessary materials for cGMP 

manufacturing. The vaccine has great promise in meeting public health needs, including the 

ongoing crisis in east Africa. 

National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases: Point of Care Diagnostic 

Platform
79

A diagnostic platform that uses peptide nucleic acids to bind the target RNA or single strand 

DNA has been developed at NIH’s National Institute 

of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases 

(NIDDK). The proof of concept test was targeted to 

HIV viral load measurement. License applications 

were received from four companies, each planning 

to incorporate the NIDDK technology with its own 

proprietary operating system. The technology may 

be deployable in minimally resourced areas as well 

as developed countries.
80

Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

The DHS’s Office of Research and Technology Applications (ORTA) resides within the Science 

and Technology Directorate. The ORTA develops and institutes policies to facilitate technology 

transfer in accordance with 15 U.S.C. § 3710 in consultation with and assisted by the Office of 

the General Counsel’s Technology Programs Law Division supporting the Science and 

Technology Directorate (S&T) and DHS more generally. These policies are applicable 

throughout DHS and its laboratories. The ORTA’s responsibilities include the following:

• Standardizes, reviews, negotiates, and approves DHS’s cooperative research and 

development agreements (CRADAs), licensing, and other technology transfer agreements;

• Prepares application assessments for selected research and development (R&D) projects in 

which the DHS Laboratory is involved and may have commercial applications;

• Provides and disseminates information on federally owned or originated technologies 

which have potential application to state and local governments and private industry;

• Prepares and provides an annual report to Congress and the President through submission 

to NIST;

• Develops training programs on technology transfer and intellectual property for DHS 

employees; and

• Establishes and implements a royalty and rewards policy.

More information about DHS technology transfer activities is available on the following website:

http://www.dhs.gov/technology-transfer-program.

Transition to Practice (TTP)

The DHS S&T also administers the Transition to Practice Program (TTP). Established in 2012, 

the program bridges the gap between federally funded research and the marketplace, addressing 

the Valley of Death problem.

27 TTP is unique in that the program selects technologies from 

various federal laboratories, including DOE’s National Laboratories, DoD’s affiliated 

laboratories, FFRDCs, University Affiliated Research Centers (UARC), and universities 

receiving federal funding for R&D activities (such as through the National Science Foundation). 

This enables TTP to leverage prior R&D funding that these technologies have received from 

various federal agencies and ensure that the products of this R&D are commercialized and reach 

the users who need them, rather than “sit on the shelf”.

TTP technologies go through a structured technology transfer process designed to increase their

technology maturity and market readiness. In addition to providing funding specifically intended 

for transition activities, TTP offers researchers training and resources on commercialization and 

entrepreneurship, access to a large network of investors, private sector companies, and 

 27 The “Valley of Death” refers to the difficulties entrepreneurs and developers face when trying to fund new, highrisk, early stage technologies and products. Transfer recipients of federal technologies often face the Valley of Death 

because technologies from federal labs tend to have a low readiness level and require additional funding to support 

further development and integration costs. For a discussion of the “Valley of Death” see 

https://www.nist.gov/property-fieldsection/panel-culture-innovation
81

government operators, and opportunities to collaborate with these potential partners and users to 

pilot the technologies. The program also includes technical assessments and evaluation of the 

technologies as well as market validation and targeting. Through outreach efforts, including 

multiple Technology Demo Days a year across the country, the TTP program then introduces 

these technologies to investors, developers, and integrators who can license the technologies and 

turn them into commercially viable products.

More information about TTP activities is available on the following webpage:

https://www.dhs.gov/science-and-technology/csd-ttp.
82

DHS Invention Disclosures and Patenting

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, DHS reported the number of new inventions disclosed 

decreased by 58% from 40 disclosures to 17 disclosures in FY 2016. The number of patent 

applications filed increased by 50% to 15 and there were three patents issued in FY 2016. 40 20 36 15 17 10

4

5

7

15

0

4

3

4

3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DHS Invention Disclosures and Patenting

New Invention Disclosures Patent Applications Filed Patents Issued

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

New Invention Disclosures 40 20 36 15 17

Patent Applications Filed 10 4 5 7 15

Patents Issued 0 4 3 4 3
83

Patents issued to DHS in FY 2016 covered three technology areas: Other Special Machines

(67%), Computer Technology (16%), and Measurement (17%).

28

USPTO Patents Assigned to DHS by Technology Area: FY 2016

 28 Source: Prepared by Science-Metrix using USPTO data indexed in PatentsView in April 2017. Used with 

permission.
84

DHS Licenses

In FY 2016, DHS executed one new license agreement and managed five active license 

agreements. Out of the five active agreements, one was income-bearing.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Licenses, Total Active 0 0 2 4 5

New Licenses 0 0 0 3 1

Invention Licenses, Total Active 0 0 2 4 5

New Invention Licenses 0 0 0 3 1

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 0 0 1 4 1

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 0 0 0 0 0
85

DHS Income from Licensing

Licensing income increased from $3,000 in FY 2014 to $12,000 in FY 2016.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Total Income, All Active Licenses $0 $0 $3 $5 $12

Invention Licenses $0 $0 $0 $0 $12

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $0 $0 $3 $5 $12 $0$0 $3 $5 $12 $0$0$0$0 $12 $0$0 $3 $5 $12

$0

$2

$4

$6

$8

$10

$12

$14

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DHS Income from Licensing ($000s)

Total Income, All Active Licenses Invention Licenses Total Earned Royalty Income (ERI)
86

DHS Collaborative R&D Relationships

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of total active CRADAs increased by 265% from 94

to 343 agreements. The number of new CRADAs per fiscal year increased by 115% to 114 new 

agreements in FY 2016. Total active traditional CRADAs increased by 206% to 272

agreements. Other collaborative R&D relationships increased by 545% to 71.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

CRADAs, Total Active 94 114 158 230 343

New CRADAs 53 76 88 98 114

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 89 91 121 200 272

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 11 6 31 30 71 94 114 158 230 343 53 768898114 8991 121 200 272 11

6

31

30

71

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DHS Collaborative R&D Relationships

CRADAs, Total Active New CRADAs

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active Other Collaborative R&D Relationships
87

DHS Downstream Success Stories

Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office: Algorithm Improvement Program

DHS’s Algorithm Improvement Program has created a tool that the Countering Weapons of 

Mass Destruction Office (CWMD), industry, and academia can to use to improve isotope 

identification algorithms for radiation detection and identification systems as well as to compare 

the results between a government algorithm and industry using well-known scoring criteria. This

tool, the Algorithm Development Kit (ADK), provides a method that allows one to measure the 

performance of one detector and then predict the performance in another with a lower energy 

resolution. The ADK provides radionuclide data (i.e., source strength and shielding variations) 

that is normally unavailable or too expensive to be collected by industry or academia. The kit

sets up an environment where the performance of any detector can be run against, and then 

compared against, a set of high-quality benchmark radiation spectrum that scores the vendor’s 

algorithm on an absolute scale. 

CWMD has established thirteen CRADAs with Radiation Detection Equipment vendors and 

another with one academic institution. Since this is a pre-release of the ADK package to 

industry, all feedback received from CRADA participants has helped CWMD make 

improvements and provide a better user interface for the ADK.

As an example of the ADK success, a participant was able to add 35 new radionuclides to their 

algorithm library as a result of participating in the CRADA. This will not only improve the 

CRADA participant’s radionuclide identification capabilities in their products, but it also lifts the 

commercial sector so that when CWMD procures commercial off-the-shelf products, better 

performing systems are available. 

Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office: Replay Tool Program

In February 2016, CWMD established a requirement for all new acquisitions of Radiation 

Detection Equipment to provide a Replay Tool to CWMD specification. A Replay Tool is a 

computer software tool that replicates the function of a detection device in the field. Given the 

same input as a device in the field, a Replay Tool will produce the same results on a computer in 

the laboratory. A Replay Tool allows the government to replay old data and to use synthetic data 

to analyze the performance of a radiation detector system over a far larger range than what is 

possible from testing as well as the ability to optimize the performance for the environment in a 

fielded system. 

CWMD established CRADAs with seven different radiation detection equipment vendors in 

order to help the vendors apply the technical requirements to their specific Replay Tool and to 

ensure the government generated requirements were correct. The results of the CRADAs 

showed that there was little economic impact to Radiation Detection Equipment vendors and that 

all Replay Tool specifications requirements were well-developed.

Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office: Plastic Scintillator Program

The Plastic Scintillator CRADAs were established with the only two United States polyvinyl 

toluene (PVT) scintillator crystal manufacturers. PVT gamma sensors are used in radiation 

detection equipment that are used by Customs and Border Protection (CBP) at land, sea, Express 
88

consignment courier facilities (ECCF), International mail facilities (IMF), and Preclearance

airports points of entry to the United States to detect gamma radiation. The purpose of the PVT 

gamma detector screening of commerce is to detect and interdict nuclear and radiological threats 

entering the United States; however, their performance is degraded after cycles of cold weather 

common on the northern border. The purpose of the CRADAs was for government experts and 

PVT manufactures to work together to better understand the problem, improve the PVT 

longevity in the field and improve or revise the manufacturing process of the PVT. 

The Plastic Scintillator CRADA’s have provided an unprecedented level of collaboration 

between the government and industry. The early results are showing the possibility for new and 

improved PVT gamma detectors for radiation detection.

In addition, DHS is working with DOE’s NSDD (Nuclear Smuggling Detection and Deterrence) 

Office to leverage the knowledge of both government agencies since NSDD supports similar 

detectors overseas. DHS and NSDD have established an Interagency Integrated Program Team 

(IPT) Charter. This interagency coordination will further benefit the industrial development of 

viable solutions.

National Protection and Programs Directorate: Cyber Information Sharing and 

Collaboration Program

DHS’s Cyber Information Sharing and Collaboration Program (CISCP) enables information 

exchange and the establishment of a community of trust between the federal government and 

critical infrastructure owners and operators. CISCP aims to foster collaboration with owners and 

operators by leveraging all areas of DHS’s National Cybersecurity and Communications 

Integration Center (NCCIC). This collaboration can assist stakeholders with assessing cyberrelated threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences so that stakeholders can prevent, mitigate, or 

recover from cyber incidents.

NCCIC/CISCP Successes

• In FY 2016, a record 97 Indicator Bulletin products and CISCP Forum Posts were 

published. Of note, 76 of the 97 products were based on stakeholder submitted data. 

• In March 2016, the CISCP coordinated a request for assistance from a CISCP member 

seeking support from another CISCP member regarding their abuse notification website. 

CISCP coordinated approvals for both CISCP members to initiate communications. This 

example highlights how the CISCP program was able to preserve anonymity and expedite 

a request for information on behalf of another CISCP member.

• In November 2016, CISCP received a non-stakeholder request for information regarding 

possible targeting of companies involved in the Dakota Access Pipeline. CISCP shared 

the information with an Information Sharing and Analysis Center (ISAC) and to a 

Distributed Denial of Service protection entity. This effort allowed organizations to 

evaluate their security posture and close potential vulnerabilities in their perimeters. 

• In April 2016, CISCP coordinated a Locky Ransomware Indicator Bulletin (IB-16-

10045E) that had inputs from multiple critical infrastructure stakeholders. Multiple 
89

organizations detected and reported Locky activity while NCCIC analysts worked to 

share Indicators of Compromise with CISCP members. The collaborative product 

allowed CISCP to share indicator information within hours of discovery.

• In August 2016, approximately 45 CISCP stakeholders participated in the inaugural 

Legal Discussion Working Group (LDWG). The LDWG facilitated information sharing 

with the DHS Office of General Counsel and CISCP stakeholder legal teams focusing on 

the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015, cybersecurity legal issues, policy, 

and CRADA inquiries. 

Science and Technology Directorate: Open Source Tactical Geospatial Intelligence 

Plugfest

In September 2016, DHS’s Science and Technology Directorate (S&T) conducted the first in a 

planned series of “Plugfests” to demonstrate the utility of commercial satellite systems to 

provide Open Source Tactical Geospatial Intelligence (OSTGI) for border security missions. 

This Plugfest was a live demonstration of integrated systems and data focused on the ability of 

commercial Satellite Automatic Identification Systems (S-AIS) to enhance maritime domain 

awareness (MDA). Nine companies from the United States, Canada, and Europe participated at 

the Multi-Agency Collaboration Environment (MACE) in Herndon, Virginia. This Plugfest used 

live data from 28 commercial AIS satellites and notional DHS operational scenarios to enable 

vendors and Government stakeholders to consider the potential tactical utility of S-AIS to 

enhance maritime surveillance operations. This event supported the following key end users: 

CBP, United States Coast Guard (USCG), Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A), and Office 

of Operations Coordination (OPS).

Science and Technology Directorate: Collaboration with Test Article Developers

The S&T’s Transportation Security Laboratory (TSL) conducts formal tests of detection 

performance of explosives detection systems used for airline passenger checked luggage 

screening. The TSL as well as the private sector design explosive surrogates, non-hazardous 

"mimics” of explosives that are used for field testing and certain types of evaluation. Through 

CRADAs with two companies, the TSL provided independent physical and chemical 

measurements of surrogates developed by these private sector partners to the companies. This 

information is used to validate their own formulations. These collaborations are ongoing and 

expected to continue through FY 2017.

Science and Technology Directorate: Enabling Development of New Screening 

Technologies 

Based on original research conducted at the TSL, a patent entitled “Method for identifying 

materials using dielectric properties through active millimeter wave illumination,” was issued in 

February 2015. This patent describes a methodology of interrogating anomalies detected with 

millimeter wave imaging systems to determine if anomalies are benign or threat materials. In FY

2016, the TSL continued work towards implementation of this patent on commercially available 

millimeter wave imaging systems and presented information on the patent at meetings and 

workshops. Interest in licensing the technology has been received from multiple system 

developers working on screening equipment used in airports, security check points, etc.
90
91

U.S. Coast Guard: Diesel Outboard Development

By partnering with industry on diesel outboard engine 

technology development, the Coast Guard’s Research, 

Development, Test and Evaluation Program’s Research and 

Development Center (RDC) was able to save nearly $350

thousand in prototype procurements for technology 

demonstrations. Additionally, since this technology is emergent 

to the market, RDC was able to help industry put real end-user 

operational hours on the engines and track performance over 

time. This provided critical understanding to marine engine 

CRADA partners that helped them improve the technology. It 

provided the Coast Guard with an understanding of the 

technology's capabilities and limitations. 

Overall, it has been a highly beneficial collaboration for both the 

private sector and government. Industry’s innovative adaptation 

of diesel engine technology to outboard engines could help 

position the Coast Guard to becoming a single fuel surface fleet, 

resulting in many operational, maintenance, and logistical 

benefits, as well as significant long-term cost savings. This work supported the following end 

users: DoD, law enforcement (including CBP, USCG, and the Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement program (ICE)), and commercial market developers.

U.S. Coast Guard: Robotic Aircraft for Maritime Public Safety 

The Coast Guard’s RDC, through its 

continuing research into the application 

of unmanned aircraft system technology 

for Coast Guard missions, partnered with 

DHS S&T in the development of a 

Robotic Aircraft for Maritime Public 

Safety (RAMPS) project to test and 

evaluate small unmanned aircraft 

systems for potential use by first 

responders in the maritime community. 

The goal of this project was to better 

understand the risks, benefits and 

limitations of operating existing small 

unmanned aircraft in a marine 

environment. The RDC partnered with industry through CRADAs to conduct a series of 

technology demonstrations to evaluate realistic maritime security and first responder scenarios. 

These technology demonstrations were conducted at the Navy-operated Webster Field facility in 

Southern Maryland in partnership with the Navy Unmanned Aerial System Test Directorate 

(UASTD). This supported the following end users: federal, state, local and Tribal Public Safety 

and Law Enforcement (including CBP, USCG, & ICE).

CRADA partners AeroVironment launch a Wasp AllEnvironment UAS from CGC Chock during their demonstration 

week. USCG photo.

Two Mercury Marine 175HP sparkignited diesel outboard engines 

installed on Training Center 

Yorktown’s 25’ Response Boat-Small 

for test and evaluation. USCG photo.
92

This collaboration provided benefit to both government and industry. The RDC and DHS S&T 

were able to evaluate unmanned aircraft systems in a realistic maritime environment to better 

understand their potential utility in aiding Coast Guard, DHS component, and first responder 

missions. Additionally, it provided the industry partners with an opportunity to test their product 

in a maritime environment, which many had not had the opportunity to do, and to refine their 

designs. 
93

Department of the Interior (DOI)

Technology transfer for DOI includes a range of activities designed to disseminate scientific and 

technical information and knowledge between the DOI and other federal and non-federal entities. 

It includes but is not limited to publications, exchange of scientific and technical information, 

protecting and licensing intellectual property rights, and sharing—or otherwise making 

available—for scientific or technical purposes the expertise and specialized scientific material 

and resources which the DOI manages. In general, technology transfer activities within DOI are

consistent with its mission to protect and manage the Nation’s natural resources and cultural

heritage; to make available scientific and other information about those resources; to honor trust

responsibilities to Tribes; and to supply energy for the future.

This section describes the actions DOI took in FY 2016 to advance technology transfer. These 

range from helping develop new technologies such as nanofiltration membranes to reduce 

contaminants in potable water to testing and demonstrating the U.S. Geological Survey’s 

(USGS) ShakeAlert System to broadcast early warning of temblors in earthquake-prone areas. 

These activities demonstrate the innovation, expertise and dedication of the DOI’s employees, 

including its many scientists and engineers, to help reduce risks to public health, safety and the 

environment from natural and man-made hazards. 

The FY 2016 enacted budget for DOI included $963.5 million for research and development. 

Much of the funding was for applied research ($764.5 million), while basic research and basic 

development received $53.8 million and $145.2 million, respectively. The programs supported 

through these funds generate large amounts of knowledge, information, and technology, which 

help DOI meet its mission objectives and are transferred to resource managers, stakeholders, and 

the general public.

DOI’s bureaus have varying levels of involvement with scientific and technical research and 

innovation, and technology transfer. In FY 2016, as in previous years, the majority of 

technology transfer activities reported by DOI under the Federal Technology Transfer Act were

undertaken by USGS because it is the largest research and development organization within 

DOI, both in terms of budget and personnel. Typically, USGS accounts for over 70% of DOI’s

(research and development (R&D) budget. 

The DOI’s scientists, engineers, and other technical personnel advance the state of knowledge 

related to the DOI’s resources and ensure that this information is accessible to resource 

managers, private industry, and the general public. The vast majority of DOI’s technology 

transfer activities use traditional technology transfer mechanisms such as publications of peer 

reviewed papers and reports, webpage postings, fact sheets, and presentations at meetings and 

conferences. In 2016, USGS and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) personnel authored or 

co-authored over 9,500 reports, books, fact sheets, and other publications, including 

approximately 3,500 scientific publications. The other bureaus, while also active in publishing 

and distributing scientific, technical, and engineering results, do not systematically track these 

products, so their contributions are not included in these counts. 
94

Bureaus also use other conventional approaches to share scientific and technical resources and 

expertise with each other, universities and other entities to address resource management issues. 

For example, seven DOI bureaus are active participants in the network of seventeen Cooperative 

Ecosystem Studies Units (CESUs), a collaboration among more than 400 partner organizations, 

including 15 federal agencies and nearly 400 non-federal partners (including universities, Tribes 

and tribal organizations, state agencies, museums, aquariums, arboretums, and conservation 

organizations). Each CESU is hosted by a university.

Bureaus that are active in research and development, or have research capabilities that 

complement U.S. commercial interests, may also utilize technology transfer agreements 

authorized by the Federal Technology Transfer Act to join forces with non-federal partners. 

Such agreements allow the Department’s bureaus and private sector industries to pool their 

expertise and resources to jointly create and advance technologies that could help fulfill agency 

missions while helping U.S. industries innovate and commercialize technologies, which can 

strengthen our national economy and create jobs. 

DOI's annual technology transfer report is available online at: 

https://www.doi.gov/techtransfer/annual-doi-reports-on-technology-transfer.

More information about DOI technology transfer activities is available on the following website: 

https://www.doi.gov/techtransfer/
95

DOI Invention Disclosures and Patenting

From FY 2012 to FY 2016, DOI reported the number of new inventions disclosed decreased by 

20% to eight disclosures. The number of patent applications filed increased by 33% to four. 

One patent was issued in FY 2016, down from three in FY 2012.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

New Invention Disclosures 10 9 6 7 8

Patent Applications Filed 3 8 4 8 4

Patents Issued 3 4 2 3 1

10

9

6

7

8

3

8

4

8

4

3

4

2

3

1

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DOI Invention Disclosures and Patenting

New Invention Disclosures Patent Applications Filed Patents Issued
96

The patent issued to DOI in FY 2016 covered three technology areas: Civil Engineering (75%),

Chemical Engineering (13%), and Environmental Technology (12%).29

USPTO Patents Assigned to DOI by Technology Area: FY 2016

 29 Source: Prepared by Science-Metrix using USPTO data indexed in PatentsView in April 2017. Used with 

permission.
97

DOI Licenses

From FY 2012 to FY 2016, the number of total active licenses decreased by 15% to 22 licenses 

in FY 2016. There were zero new licenses in FY 2016. The number of total active invention 

licenses decreased by 17% to 20 licenses, and the number of income-bearing exclusive licenses 

decreased by 33% to eight licenses. 

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Licenses, Total Active 26 20 18 20 22

New Licenses 1 3 0 3 0

Invention Licenses, Total Active 24 20 16 18 20

New Invention Licenses 1 3 0 3 0

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 22 16 14 18 17

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 12 4 5 7 8 26 20 18 20 22

1

3

0

3

0

24

20

16

18

20

1

3

0

3

0

22

16

14

18

17

12

4

5

7

8

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DOI Licenses

Licenses, Total Active New Licenses

Invention Licenses, Total Active New Invention Licenses

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses
98

DOI Income from Licensing

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, total income from all active licenses increased by 9% to $83

thousand in FY 2016. The income from invention licenses increased by the same amount, as all 

income received came from invention licenses. Total earned royalty income increased by 26% 

to $82 thousand in FY 2016. $76

$96

$58

$106

$83

$76

$96

$58

$106

$83

$65

$96

$58

$106

$82

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DOI Income from Licensing ($000s)

Total Income, All Active Licenses Invention Licenses Total Earned Royalty Income (ERI)

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Total Income, All Active Licenses $76 $96 $58 $106 $83

Invention Licenses $76 $96 $58 $106 $83

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $65 $96 $58 $106 $82
99

DOI Collaborative R&D Relationships

From FY 2012 to FY 2016, DOI reported the number of total active cooperative research and 

development agreements (CRADAs) increased by 130% from 379 to 873 agreements. The 

number of new CRADAs per fiscal year increased by 80% to 511 new agreements in FY 2016. 

Traditional CRADAs increased by 32% to 37. Other collaborative R&D relationships increased 

by 13% to 319.

DOI Efforts to Streamline Technology Transfer Operations

In FY 2016, the DOI continued to build on actions initiated since FY 2011 to institutionalize 

technology transfer programs within DOI. These actions also enable all bureaus to more 

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

CRADAs, Total Active 379 476 601 825 873

New CRADAs 284 376 423 586 511

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 28 21 35 38 37

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 283 322 292 318 319
100

effectively and efficiently implement the FTTA and related legislation while maintaining focus 

on their missions. These actions included:

• Increased coordination and cooperation amongst DOI’s bureaus through presentations, 

where bureaus with greater experience with instruments made available through the FTTA

shared their knowledge with bureaus with less experience. These sessions also illustrated 

the benefits of using these instruments to leverage the resources made available to bureaus 

to pursue their mission;

• Increased accessibility to resources to advance technology transfer through improvements 

to DOI’s technology transfer website. This site, which is updated continually, provides 

information on relevant bureau programs and activities; opportunities for other agencies, 

and private and nonprofit institutions to cooperate with DOI’s scientists, engineers and 

technical personnel; links to information on best practices related to technology transfer for 

novice and experienced practitioners; and other training related information; and

• Development of DOI policy and procedural guidance for offering and administering prize 

competitions, following intense interest within bureaus to use prize competition authority 

under the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 to advance innovations to 

fulfill mission goals.

DOI Downstream Success Stories

National Park Service: Device to Facilitate Water Quality Measurement in High 

Biofouling Environments

National Park Service (NPS)’s Gulf Coast Inventory and 

Monitoring Network has entered into a CRADA with In-Situ, Inc., 

to develop and test an NPS employee’s invention and evaluate its 

potential for commercial manufacture and sale. The device 

enables currently available datasondes, which are devices used to 

measure water quality, to greatly increase the length of unmanned 

or continuous monitoring deployments in biofouling 

environments. It may also increase accuracy under turbulent flow 

conditions. The device modifies the calibration chamber of the 

sondes so that instrument/sensor drift, rather than water quality 

conditions, drives recalibration frequency requirements. By 

extending service intervals, this device may reduce operational 

costs by 50% or more.

The NPS and the company are collaborating to produce beta test instruments and initiate their 

deployment to collect data and conduct analysis at sites with high biofouling or sediment issues 

in differing conditions, such as warm marine, cold marine, and fresh water lake and river 

environments.

Modified datasonde.

Credit: Joe Meiman, NPS
101

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement: University Partnerships—

Minority Higher Education Program

The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSMRE) continues to work on 

building mutually beneficial partnerships with minority serving colleges and universities under 

its Minority Higher Education Program (MHEP). This includes collaborating with its MHEP 

partners on training and education programs and providing guidance and direction to ensure that 

the intended results are achieved. In addition to traditional training within the surface mining

community, OSMRE’s Technical Innovation and Professional Services program continued its 

collaborative partnership with Adams State University (ASU), a Hispanic Serving Institution in 

Alamosa, Colorado, through a cooperative agreement with ASU, recognizing that cooperation on 

resources and knowledge, as well as the advancement of the Clean Energy Economy, would 

benefit the government, ASU, its students, and the public. The agreement guides the parties in 

pursuit of common objectives to enhance education, job opportunities, and access to “real world” 

experience.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Aquatic Animal Drug Approval Program

The Aquatic Animal Drug Approval Program (AADAP) within the Fish and Aquatic 

Conservation (FAC) Division currently has four CRADAs in place. Individual CRADAs have 

been established with AquaTechnics, Inc. (Sequim, WA), Merck Animal Health (Summit, NJ), 

Aquatic Life Sciences (Ferndale, WA), and Frontier Scientific (Logan, UT). These agreements 

permit the parties to identify research opportunities that support development of new aquatic 

animal drugs, broaden the U.S. technology base, and support accomplishment of FWS scientific 

mission objectives. For example, in 2016, AADAP developed a research study protocol to 

define the objectives, design, procedures, and methods used for an FDA-acceptable research 

study evaluating the target animal safety of 17α-methyltestosterone, a chemical used for gender 

manipulation in rainbow trout fry. The protocol was submitted and accepted by FDA and made 

available with funding support via one of the above-described CRADAs. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Crushed Ivory Design Challenge Prize

The Service announced winners of its Crushed Ivory Design Challenge in May 2016, which 

invited entrants to propose visual concepts for powerful public displays of crushed ivory from 

the U.S. ivory crushes in order to raise public awareness about the illegal ivory trade and its 

negative consequences for elephant conservation. The winners include Kelly Lance of 

Monterey, California, and Jacqueline Nott of Auburn, California. 
102

U.S. Geological Survey: Geomagnetism 

The Geomagnetism Program monitors 

and records the Earth’s magnetic field 

by taking measurements at 14 

Geomagnetic Observatories located 

throughout the United States and its 

territories (Guam and Puerto Rico). 

[See map on this page.] The 

Program’s newest observatory in 

Deadhorse, Alaska, was built and is 

operated through a public-private 

partnership under a technical 

assistance agreement. This 

observatory allows the Geomagnetism 

Program to expand its coverage in the 

auroral zone and Alaska. The 

geomagnetic data produced by this observatory fills a critical geographic gap in the collection of 

magnetic data, and is now available to the general public and global scientific community in realtime. This additional observatory provides the USGS and the scientific community with an 

improved understanding of geomagnetic currents in the northern latitudes.

U.S. Geological Survey: Microbial inhibition of fungal pathogens of snakes

Snake fungal disease (SFD) is an emerging infection 

caused by the fungus Ophidiomyces ophiodiicola (O.o.). 

Fungal diseases, including SFD, have been linked to fatal 

infections and population declines in many types of wild 

animals. Since many species of wildlife provide 

important services, such population declines can have 

negative effects on the environment and human health. 

For example, snakes consume large numbers of rodents 

that can damage agricultural crops and transmit diseases 

to humans. They also serve as prey for many birds and 

thus are essential components of the food web.

Currently, the major roadblock in mitigating the impacts 

of fungal infections is a lack of effective tools to manage 

the diseases. The USGS is a leader in investigating the 

reasons behind the recent emergence of fungal infections in wildlife and is helping wildlife 

managers develop strategies to protect vulnerable animals. This is accomplished through 

collaborations with outside agencies that have expertise in various methods for controlling fungi 

that can cause disease. For example, USGS is working with researchers at the University of 

Massachusetts to identify microorganisms, and substances produced by microorganisms, that can 

inhibit the growth of O.o. This work helps our understanding of how the beneficial bacteria that 

naturally live on snakes and in the environment, might be able to protect snakes from deadly 

fungal diseases, and may also help wildlife managers develop strategies for conserving rare 

snake species. 

The eastern massasauga (Sistrurus 

catenatus) is a federally threatened species 

of snake that is being affected by fungal 

skin infections in some areas. Credit: Rori 

Paloski, Wisconsin Department of Natural 

Resources
103

Department of Transportation (DOT)

DOT is the federal steward of the Nation’s transportation system. DOT consists of multiple 

modal Operating Administrations, which carry out mission-related Research, Development, and 

Technology (RD&T) programs in support of the DOT strategic goals: Safety, State of Good 

Repair, Economic Competitiveness, Quality of Life in Communities, and Environmental 

Sustainability. In 2004, the Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) was 

charged by its enabling legislation30 with coordination of DOT-wide RD&T and technology 

transfer activities. In the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014 (P.L. 113-76), RITA was 

elevated to the Office of the Secretary and given a new name—the Office of the Assistant 

Secretary for Research and Technology.

DOT defines technology transfer as the process of transferring and disseminating transportation 

related scientific information to stakeholders who may apply it for public or private use. DOT’s 

current approach to technology transfer is diverse and unique to each mode of transportation. 

Each modal Operating Administration conducts mission-specific deployment activities tailored 

to its mode and type of research. Agency specific technology transfer activities may be found at:

https://www.transportation.gov/research-technology.

Technology Transfer activities are executed by DOT agencies and their laboratories:

• Federal Aviation Administration (FAA): The FAA’s federal laboratory is the William J. 

Hughes Technical Center located at the Atlantic City International Airport, New Jersey;

• Federal Highway Administration (FHWA): Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center 

(McLean, VA);

• Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology (OST-R): John A. Volpe 

National Transportation Systems Center (Volpe Center, Cambridge, MA); and

• National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA): Vehicle Research and Test 

Center (VRTC, East Liberty, OH).

DOT’s annual technology transfer report is available online at:

http://www.transportation.gov/open/research-facilities

More information about DOT technology transfer activities is available on the following

websites:

FAA: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ang/offices/tc/initiatives/ttp/

FHWA: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/everydaycounts/

OST-R: https://www.rita.dot.gov/

 30 P.L 108-426, November 30, 2004 (118 Stat. 2423).
104

DOT Invention Disclosures and Patenting

In FY 2016, DOT reported zero invention disclosures or patent applications. One new patent 

was awarded. In FY 2016, the one patent issued to DOT was within the category of Civil 

Engineering.

31

 31 Source: Prepared by Science-Metrix using USPTO data indexed in PatentsView in April 2017. Used with 

permission.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

New Invention Disclosures 2 13 3 0 0

Patent Applications Filed 1 5 0 5 0

Patents Issued 4 1 1 1 1
105

DOT Licenses

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, DOT reported that there were two active licenses in FY 2016, 

the same number reported in FY 2012. All active licenses are reported to be income-bearing 

licenses. There were zero new invention licenses reported in FY 2016.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Licenses, Total Active 2 3 1 2 2

New Licenses 0 1 0 1 2

Invention Licenses, Total Active 2 3 1 2 0

New Invention Licenses 0 1 0 0 0

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 2 3 1 2 2

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 0 0 1 0 0
106

DOT Income from Licensing

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, DOT reported that total income from all active licenses 

increased by 114% from $7 thousand in FY 2012 to $15 thousand in FY 2016. All income 

reported is earned royalty income. DOT reported zero income from invention licenses in the past

five years.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Total Income, All Active Licenses $7 $9 $23 $12 $15

Invention Licenses $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $7 $9 $23 $12 $15 $7 $9 $23 $12 $15 $0$0$0$0$0 $7 $9 $23 $12 $15

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DOT Income from Licensing ($000s)

Total Income, All Active Licenses Invention Licenses Total Earned Royalty Income (ERI)
107

DOT Collaborative R&D Relationships

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, DOT reported the number of total active cooperative research 

and development agreements (CRADAs) increased by 134% from 29 to 68 agreements. New 

CRADAs increased by 83% to 22 new agreements in FY 2016. Total active traditional 

CRADAs increased significantly to 62 agreements in FY 2016, from just three agreements in FY 

2012. Other collaborative research and development (R&D) relationships also increased 

significantly from 14 agreements in FY 2012 to 152 in FY 2016.

DOT Efforts to Streamline Technology Transfer Operations

DOT’s technology transfer program, housed within the Office of the Assistant Secretary for 

Research and Technology (OST-R), is responsible for coordinating, documenting, and 

supporting technology transfer activities across the Department. Technology transfer activities 

focus on research collaboration, knowledge transfer, information dissemination and the practical 

application of research. Specific efforts include: 

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

CRADAs, Total Active 29 40 51 48 68

New CRADAs 12 8 10 9 22

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 3 3 7 48 62

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 14 26 30 35 152 29 40 51 48 68 12

8

10

9

22

33

7

48

62

14

26

30

35

152

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

DOT Collaborative R&D Relationships

CRADAs, Total Active New CRADAs

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active Other Collaborative R&D Relationships
108

• Tracking the progress of technologies that have been adopted and implemented by internal 

and external stakeholders. Progress is often described through success stories; 

• Developing training materials to help R&D personnel incorporate various technology 

transfer practices into their research programs. For example, a Transportation Tech 

Transfer Primer was created to help R&D personnel think about stakeholder maps and

efforts that may foster adoption and implementation of research outputs32; 

• Aligning DOT’s acquisition, research, and technology transfer processes through an 

interagency working group charged with developing cross-functional training materials for 

contracting officers and their technical representatives; and

• Incorporating technology transfer into DOT’s Research, Development, and Technology 

Strategic Plan, FY 2017 - FY 2021.

DOT Downstream Success Stories

Federal Aviation Administration: Fire Testing Next Generation Engineering Material 

Arresting System 

Federal Aviation Administration’s 

(FAA) CRADA between Airport 

Safety Research & Development and 

Zodiac ESCO Inc., enabled fire 

testing of the next generation 

Engineered Material Arresting System 

(EMAS). This CRADA has 

developed ways to improve runway 

safety areas at commercial service 

airports. The project evaluates how 

two prototype EMAS blocks burned 

in the presence of a fuel fire, assessed 

fire propagation through the material, and examined what type of Airport Rescue Fire Fighting 

(ARFF) response will be needed to extinguish this type of fire. 

Federal Highway Administration: Collaborative Partnership Supports Continued 

Advancement of Innovation

On May 25, 2016, FHWA’s Center for Accelerating Innovation (CAI) and the American 

Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO), through the AASHTO 

Innovation Initiative (AII), executed a Memorandum of Understanding to provide a framework 

for the advancement of innovation deployment activities and to foster a culture of innovation 

within the highway community. The Memorandum of Understanding relies on FHWA’s Every 

Day Counts (EDC) program which evaluates and identifies market-ready technologies for 

potential deployment in future EDC cycles. FHWA entered into a Cooperative Agreement with 

AASHTO in September 2016 to further achieve these goals.

 32 See http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/57000/57400/57403/Transportation_TechTransfer_Primer.pdf

FAA Airport Safety Firefighter extinguishing fire during evaluation 

per Advisory Circular requirements
109

Federal Highway Administration: Incentivizes State-Based Innovation Deployment

U.S. DOT’s Federal Highway Administration launched the State Transportation Innovation 

Council (STIC) in 2013. The STIC represents an established group of representatives from 

various levels of the highway community in each state tasked with comprehensively and 

strategically considering the implementation of innovations. The STIC places the states in the 

“driver’s seat” to select innovations that best meet unique program needs and quickly implement 

them.

In 2016, STIC enabled the Department of Public Works & Transportation in Prince Georges 

County, MD, to complete, adopt, and institutionalize standard drawings for low-cost bridge 

structures. The drawings include beam details for bridges spanning from 40 to 80 feet. This led 

to benefits in saving construction time and enabling bridges to be traffic ready almost 

immediately after being erected. 

The Pennsylvania STIC enhanced dialogue between State and local leaders and promoted stateof-the-art safety practices and resources. The STIC and local governments collaborated on a Salt 

and Snow Management Course that trained 600 participants on innovative winter maintenance 

techniques, demonstrated the effectiveness of high-friction surface treatment in high-crash 

locations, and reached out to 445 local public agencies to understand their top transportation 

issues.

Federal Highway Administration: ASCT Improves the Traffic Flow at Intersections

Conventional traffic signal systems use 

preprogrammed timing schedules that do not 

adjust to traffic conditions and can contribute to 

traffic congestion and delay. FHWA’s adaptive 

signal control technology (ASCT) research 

program supported both development and 

deployment of this technology which improves 

signal timing to accommodate variability in 

traffic. 

Topeka, Kansas installed ASCT on its 21st Street corridor and the technology is estimated to 

save drivers 123,000 gallons of gasoline and 191,000 pounds of CO2 per year. Crashes also 

dropped nearly 30% along the corridor during the system’s first year of operation. Since 2009, 

over 176 ASCT systems have been implemented, and many other agencies are considering the 

technology. Through FHWA’s ASCT deployment efforts of providing the knowledge, training 

and support to the owner agencies, it influenced technology firms to continue the development of 

ASCT systems. There are eight ASCTs vendors and more are forming. Sixty-one agencies are 

in various stages of implementing ASCT at 63 locations.

From conventional to adaptive traffic control.

i l
110

Federal Highway Administration: Traffic Incident Management Training 

The FHWA-sponsored Border Technology Exchange Program, 

coordinated by the Office of International Programs, 

collaborated with the Strategic Highway Research Program 2 

(SHRP2) and stakeholders (AZ and TX DOTs) to train nearly 

one thousand fire, law-enforcement, emergency-management 

and transportation officials from local Mexican entities in 

Traffic Incident Management, which is critical to standardizing 

procedures of effective and safe cross-border transportation 

movements. Collaboratively, they have conducted nearly a 

dozen of the modified versions of the “National Traffic Incident 

Management Responder Training” in various cities in Mexico. 

SHRP 2’s modified training sessions have featured a Spanish 

version of the popular video “Manage to Survive” developed by 

the International Association of Chiefs of Police in cooperation 

with FHWA. 

Since it first launched in 2013, the training has been very well received and has gathered wide 

coverage from local media. A better trained emergency management force saves lives, money, 

and time, and given the volume of cross-border activity between the U.S. and Mexico, this 

standardized approach to Traffic Incident Management directly impacts the safety of U.S. 

citizens and businesses. 

Maritime Administration: Building Energy Simulation Tools for Use in the Shipboard 

Environment

DOT’s Maritime Administration 

(MARAD) is collaborating with the 

DOE’s National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory (NREL) and the Naval 

Surface Warfare Center (Carderock 

and Philadelphia Divisions) on 

ongoing research. The Maritime 

Prescreening Assessment of 

Conservation Technologies (MPACT) project utilized the U.S. 

Marine Corps’ Expeditionary 

Energy Concepts (E2C) program to 

demonstrate the functionality of land-based energy efficiency technologies at-sea, and then 

paired the resulting field-demonstration test data with advanced modeling capabilities to assess 

the technology’s energy savings potential across a range of shipboard operational scenarios. In 

the first technology demonstration, the M-PACT team evaluated the maritime suitability and 

energy savings potential of a variable refrigerant flow (VRF) system to enhance the U.S. Navy’s 

ability to optimize ship operational reach and tactical performance. 

The research teams evaluated the accuracy of the modified version of E2C by comparing results 

to direct measurements taken over a six-week period onboard MARAD’s Training Ship (TS) 

National Traffic Incident 

Management Responder Training in 

Ciudad Juarez, Chihuahua, Mexico

DOT's Maritime Administration Training Ship - Kennedy
111

Kennedy. E2C performed as intended while the ship was under way, which resulted in a jointresearch and collaboration success. Data were collected during the TS Kennedy’s annual sixweek winter cruise, which took place from January 10 to February 17, 2016.
112

Department of Veteran Affairs (VA)

VA is the cabinet level agency whose mission statement strives to fulfill President Lincoln’s 

promise:

“To care for him who shall have borne the battle and for his widow, and his 

orphan.”

The VA works to meet that promise through the service and honor of the men and women who 

are America’s Veterans, by holding all employees to the core values of Integrity, Commitment, 

Advocacy, Respect and Excellence. VA has three administrative elements whose goals are to 

provide encompassing and integrated care for our Nation’s veterans and their families.

• Veterans Health Administration (VHA), whose mission is to honor America’s Veterans 

by providing excellent health care that improves their health and well-being.

• Veterans Benefits Administration, whose mission is to provide benefits and services to 

the Veterans and their families in a responsive, timely and compassionate manner in 

recognition of their service to the Nation.

• National Cemetery Administration, whose mission is to honor Veterans and their eligible 

family members with final resting places in national shrines and with lasting tributes that 

commemorate their service and sacrifice to our Nation.

As of September 30, 2016, VA employed 19.4% of the cabinet level agency federal workforce 

(373,152 of 1,923,064); these employees stayed with the agency an average of 10 years and are 

located throughout the continuous United States, Hawaii, Alaska, Puerto Rico, Guam, the 

Philippines and Virgin Islands. VHA has 330,988 full or part time paid employees, while the 

National Cemetery Administration has 1,849 and the Veterans Benefits Administration has 

22,002 employees. This highly diverse workforce of professionals provides the intellectual 

engine for VA’s Technology Transfer Program (TTP).

VHA is both the largest VA administration and the largest integrated health care system in the 

United States, providing care at 1,233 health care facilities, including 166 VA Medical Centers 

and 1,053 outpatient sites of care of varying complexity, serving more than 8.9 million veterans 

each year. Veteran patients using VHA programs come from conflicts ranging from World War 

II through Operation Iraqi Freedom and Operation Enduring Freedom and have highly diverse 

healthcare needs. To meet these needs, VHA has developed robust partnerships with academic 

affiliates and a national intramural research and development program. Both efforts are designed 

to promote the creation and use of cutting-edge treatments and technologies within the VA.

Technology Transfer in the VA

VA’s Technology Transfer Program (TTP) started as an arm of the Rehabilitation Research 

R&D Service which specializes in providing wheelchair improvements. TTP currently operates 

within VA’s Office of Research and Development but provides services throughout the agency. 

TTP has three main areas of focus: 1) protection and commercialization of intellectual property 

(IP); 2) facilitating technology transfer and cooperative research and development activities 

between academic partners, local VA Medical Centers (VAMC’s), and industry; and 3) 
113

educating investigators within VA about their rights and obligations regarding IP management 

and cooperative research activities.

A significant difference between VA Technology Transfer and other federal technology transfer 

programs are the number of stakeholders having partnership with VA TTP. VA TTP works in 

partnership with the VA Office of General Counsel, investigators and leadership within 

VAMC’s, National Cemetery Administration, academic affiliates, non-profit corporations, 

contract attorneys and businesses. 

The VA conducts basic and applied clinical research to discover new treatments and therapies for 

diseases which affect our Nation’s Veterans at more than 100 VAMC’s, each of which is a 

federal laboratory. The majority of investigators at these laboratories also have appointments 

with their local academic affiliate, usually a medical school. Consequently, the majority of VA 

inventions are jointly owned by VA and its academic affiliates. 

Most jointly owned inventions are managed under cooperative agreements with these affiliates. 

The agreements allow the VA or the affiliates to take the lead in commercializing jointly owned 

inventions. 

TTP cooperates with local academic affiliates in the patenting and licensing of jointly owned 

technologies.

• TTP works closely with the Office of General Counsel (OGC) Specialty Team Advising 

Research (STAR) attorneys on IP management issues and cooperative research 

agreement review. 

• TTP receives invention disclosures and conducts a review and evaluation of the 

inventions. This evaluation is then provided to STAR attorneys who issue a 

determination of rights (DOR) decision to the inventors regarding the government’s 

interest in such invention. 

• After the DOR is issued, TTP seeks patent protection where appropriate, and may begin 

efforts to find commercialization partners for any VA owned invention. 

• TTP also works closely with local VA-affiliated nonprofit research and education 

corporations (NPC). NPCs were authorized by Congress to provide flexible funding 

mechanisms for the conduct of research and education at VA facilities nationwide. 

Currently there are over 80 NPCs. 

Research agreements, including CRADAs, are initiated by the local VAMC with the negotiation 

and administration of such agreements being handled by a local NPC. TTP and STAR 

collaboratively provide a review of such research agreements prior to signature.

In FY 2016, the VA TTP developed the mission motto “BRAVE—Bringing Research 

Advancements to Veterans and Everyone” and determined that there were two key programmatic 

improvements which had to be immediately addressed to meet our mission of becoming 

BRAVE:
114

1. Developing and maintaining communications, managing the flow of documentation 

and providing timely information; and

2. Identifying those operations which have the greatest opportunities for improvement 

and developing improvement plans for implementation.

Improving communications and operations were the focus of continuous improvement in FY

2016.

More information about VA technology transfer activities is available on the following website: 

http://www.research.va.gov/programs/tech_transfer/default.cfm.
115

VA Invention Disclosures and Patenting

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of new inventions disclosed decreased by 23% from 

310 to 239 disclosures in FY 2016. The number of patent applications filed increased by 11% to 

104. The number of patents issued increased by 86% to 54 patents.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

New Invention Disclosures 310 282 289 217 239

Patent Applications Filed 94 106 116 116 104

Patents Issued 29 31 37 54 54
116

Patents issued to VA in FY 2016 covered many technology areas, including Medical Technology

(39%), Pharmaceuticals (35%), Biotechnology (11%), Organic Fine Chemistry (5%), and 

Analysis of Biological Materials (4%).

33

USPTO Patents Assigned to VA by Technology Area: FY 2016

 33 Source: Prepared by Science-Metrix using USPTO data indexed in PatentsView in April 2017. Used with 

permission.
117

VA Licenses

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, VA reported the number of total active licenses increased by 

32% from 197 to 261 licenses while new invention licenses declined by 88% to one. Incomebearing licenses increased by 367% to 42 while income-bearing exclusive licenses increased by 

289% to 35. 

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Licenses, Total Active 197 194 197 200 261

New Licenses 8 9 3 3 1

Invention Licenses, Total Active 197 194 197 200 260

New Invention Licenses 8 9 3 3 1

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 9 13 14 16 42

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 9 10 9 11 35
118

VA Income from Licensing

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, VA reported that total income from all active licenses decreased 

by 19% from $391 thousand to $316 thousand in FY 2016. Income from invention licenses and 

earned royalty income were the same as income from all active licenses. $391 $389 $336 $494

$316

$391

$389

$336

$494

$316

$391

$389

$336

$494

$316

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

VA Income from Licensing ($000s)

Total Income, All Active Licenses Invention Licenses Total Earned Royalty Income (ERI)

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Total Income, All Active Licenses $391 $389 $336 $494 $316

Invention Licenses $391 $389 $336 $494 $316

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $391 $389 $336 $494 $316
119

VA Collaborative R&D Relationships

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, VA reported that the number of total active cooperative 

research and development agreements (CRADAs) increased 73% from 1,510 to 2,613

agreements. The number of new CRADAs per fiscal year decreased by 4% to 502 new 

agreements in FY 2016. Total active traditional CRADAs increased by 65% to 2,359

agreements in FY 2016. No other collaborative research and development (R&D) relationships 

were reported.

VA Efforts to Streamline Technology Transfer Operations

Revision of “VA Directive 1200.18 Determination of Rights for Inventions and Disclosures”

One of the first lines of communication to partners and stakeholders are those documents 

defining VA Technology Transfer Policy (TTP). VA TTP’s parent document entitled, “VA 

Directive 1200.18 Determination of Rights for Inventions and Disclosures” had been in effect 

since November 1, 2008, without edits or revisions. To provide clarity in the current process, a 

revised directive was placed into the concurrence process in FY 2016. This new directive 

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

CRADAs, Total Active 1,510 2,181 2,317 2,305 2,613

New CRADAs 542 453 517 509 502

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 1,430 1,982 2,126 2,113 2,359

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 0 0 0 0 0 1,510 2,181 2,317 2,305 2,613 542 453517 509 502 1,430 1,9822,126 2,1132,359

00000

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

VA Collaborative R&D Relationships

CRADAs, Total Active New CRADAs

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active Other Collaborative R&D Relationships
120

updated and clarified policy and defined scope. A major change in scope increased the reporting 

requirements to the following groups within the agency:

Employees or Government employee means any officer or employee, civilian or military, of VA. 

Part-time, without compensation (WOC) employees and part-time consultants are included.” 38 

CFR §1.651(b). Additionally, the term “employee” or “Government employee” includes any 

“special Government employee” as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 202; an individual working for VA 

pursuant to an IPA (5 U.S.C. §§ 3371-3375); a WOC (38 U.S.C. § 7405(a)(1)); or a consultant (5 

U.S.C. § 3109).

Invention Disclosures

The start of the intellectual property process is the disclosure of the invention to VA TTP. This 

is done by the investigator submitting an invention disclosure form (ID) and the inventor 

certification form (IC).

The process improvement in FY 2016 was the reformatting of both the VA ID and VA IC forms 

and their placement onto the VA Technology Transfer Internet website www.research.va.gov. 

The VA TTP has an organizational email for electronic Inquires related to Invention Disclosures 

or Inventor Certification, vattid@va.gov, where all ID and IC submissions are to be sent. The 

management and monitoring of this tool has been a key business improvement in FY 2016.

Once these forms have been submitted to VA TTP, a Technology Transfer Specialist (TTS) 

evaluates the technology and forwards their recommendations to the legal counterparts at VA 

STAR. Another FY2016 process improvement involved placing dedicated legal staffers on the 

invention disclosure management process to aid in reducing backlogs and tracking down ID’s 

which had languished in the system without a determination of rights. The combination of new 

forms, staff oversight and improved communication with partners virtually eliminated the 400 

plus backlog of unaddressed IDs in the system. Plans for ongoing improvement include 

monitoring of determination times by Technology Transfer Specialists; a proposal to take the 

entire Determination of Rights (DOR) process into TTP and create an online ID and IC process 

which will reduce the number of partial and incomplete submissions received by TTP. These 

steps should both eliminate backlogs and reduce the time it takes to issue DORs.

Patent Management Improvements

In FY2016, VA TTP assigned a dedicated staffer to review both USPTO databases and academic 

affiliates annual reports to identify domestic patents which were not reported to VA. This 

information was used to update the Wellspring Sophia database used by VA TTP. To meet 

Federal Laboratory Consortium (FLC) standards, all identified patents were placed onto the VA 

TTP Internet site along with a synopsis. These steps were also applied to FY 2015, FY 2014 and 

FY 2013 U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and affiliate identified patents. Next steps for 

improving patent reporting will include foreign patents from VA inventors, and adding to the 

website patent reporting in FY 2012 and before. The other improvement planned for FY 2017 

was to monitor and manage the academic affiliate reporting on patents to assure that VA is 

named on all patents which they have rights to.
121

Coordination of IP Management with Affiliates

While Intellectual Property at the VA is an agency-wide initiative, historically, biomedical and 

rehabilitative researchers have been the primary users of the TTP. Most of these individuals also 

have dual appointments with their academic affiliate. To assure that a consistent process for 

managing IP with academic affiliates was used, the VA began negotiating Cooperative 

Technology Administration Agreements (CTAAs) with the majority of its larger academic 

affiliates in FY2000. These CTAAs described mechanisms for handling jointly-owned 

inventions, including a formula for sharing revenue and expenses from patenting and licensing 

activities. Under the CTAA, the affiliate always has the right to take the lead in developing an 

invention, except for inventions made pursuant to a VA CRADA.

TTP has developed a new Invention Management Agreement (IMA), which is designed to 

replace the CTAAs. The IMA is compliant with current federal regulations and will ensure VA’s 

contribution to commercialization of new technologies is recognized. TTP is in active 

negotiations with all 79 current affiliates to transition from the existing CTAA to the new IMA 

agreement, with the goal of transitioning all affiliate agreements from CTAAs to IMAs by the 

end of FY 2018.

In Fiscal Year 2016 the VA’s TTP requested annual reporting from its 66 academic affiliates 

who had active CTAAs. Forty of those programs responded (for a 60.6% response rate), and 

five of those respondents had a reply of no activity. Two of these affiliates CTAA’s are 

consolidated, which impacts the numbers of unique institutions reporting to the VA. 

Historically, academic programs have used their unique internal processes to create responses for 

annual reporting information. A key business process improvement planned in FY2016 has been 

the creation and distribution of a standardized format for reporting. This will allow the academic 

affiliates to accurately and systematically report intellectual property activities (patents 

issued/applied for, licensing activities, invention disclosures, revenues and general workload) to 

VA TTP. This form should reduce reporting of IP which is not attributed to the VA by its 

partners and improve data management. 

CRADA Streamlining

VA Medical Centers conduct hundreds of clinical trials each in collaboration with 

pharmaceutical companies, other federal entities including the National Institutes of Health, and 

universities. These trials seek to find new therapies that will improve Veteran’s health. The VA 

has executed over 400 CRADAs per year over the past five years. Over 70% of these CRADAs 

are clinical trial CRADAs. VA has negotiated 19 Master CRADAs primarily with large 

pharmaceutical companies for clinical studies. These agreements can be signed at the local level 

with minimal review by central office staff. This year VA updated three of these Master

CRADAs and finalized one new agreement. Currently an additional five new Master CRADAs 

are in negotiation. Master CRADAs are important in that they expedite and facilitate the 

negotiation process on these complicated agreements ultimately benefiting VA’s ability to 

conduct research and participate in clinical studies. VA has also executed 26 Master 

Confidential Disclosure Agreements (CDA) which deal with the protection of information shared 

between entities at any level of Clinical or Biomedical discovery. Having Master CDAs in place 

helps to expedite the negotiation process between VA and other entities and shorten the timeline 

to start new research programs. Another streamlining improvement which was implemented in 
122

2010 was the CRADA registry, which allows nonprofits to directly submit new CRADAs. Other 

questions related to CRADA activity are addressed electronically by sending an email to 

vhacottc@va.gov.

VA Downstream Success Stories

Suicide Soft Door

At the Sheridan VA Medical Center (VAMC), Lisa 

Garstad doesn’t wear a lab coat and goggles. 

Performing research is not included in her official 

VA work duties. In fact, her Medical Center is so 

small that it does not have an established research 

program or affiliated research relationship.

However, Garstad saw a need and created a 

solution with the Soft Suicide Prevention Door 

(SSPD), a lightweight door formed of foam and 

covered in fireproof vinyl that has magnetic 

hinges. The SSPD is designed to pull off of its 

hinges after 20 pounds of pressure is applied to it, 

thereby eliminating door anchor points and significantly reducing the possibility that the door 

could be used in a suicide attempt.

Garstad is a rare “garage inventor” at the VA; most VA inventions are developed by employees 

with established research relationships within their VAMC and/or an academic affiliate. She 

joined the Sheridan VAMC in November 2006 as a Patient Safety Risk Manager. Shortly after 

she arrived, she was tasked with bringing the hospital’s acute mental health facility into 

compliance with the “Environment of Care” checklist, a set of guidelines designed to reduce the 

number of suicides in acute mental health units.

When Garstad walked into Sheridan’s mental health facility, one of the most urgent issues she 

encountered was in the bathroom. Bathroom interiors pose many serious hazards as there are 

multiple mounted fixtures that provide anchor points. Many suicide incidents occur in 

bathrooms each year.

Constantly monitoring patients in this room was not practical as it is important to respect 

patients’ privacy while finding ways to ensure their safety. Regular doors were still too much of 

a risk, however; there were too many anchor points where someone could intentionally injure 

themselves. Garstad felt that it was necessary to provide some type of door covering in order for 

patients to feel more at ease. Thin curtains were suggested as an alternative to solid doors, but 

Garstad wanted to do better. She felt that a comfortable, livable environment was important for 

these patients’ recovery.

Determined to find a better alternative when faced with a lack of commercial solutions, Garstad 

started working with the Sheridan Public Affairs Specialist, Jackie Van Mark, who suggested 

Lisa Garstad, Co-Inventor of the Soft Suicide 

Door
123

that the doors be made with a foam core and suspended by using VelcroTM hinges. Thus, the 

idea for the Soft Suicide Prevention Door (SSPD) was born.

Their prototype performed very well; it provided a solid barrier so that patients would have 

privacy in their rooms but lacked anchor points and would not sustain weight. The Sheridan 

VAMC was thrilled with the SSPD and wanted to install them throughout its mental health unit, 

so Garstad and Van Mark began to look into how to mass produce and market their invention. 

Van Mark contacted the VA’s TTP and submitted an invention disclosure. The SSPD design 

was quickly processed by TTP and was soon patent-pending.

In order to get the SSPD to the market as soon as possible, TTP looked for potential licensing 

opportunities and found Kennon Products, Inc. (Kennon). Kennon, a U.S. manufacturing 

company, was interested and worked closely with Garstad and Van Mark to finalize the design. 

New features, such as magnetic hinges, were added and the heavy duty, waterproof vinyl is now 

printed with large images that both beautify the environment and appeal to the patients of the 

acute mental health units.

The SSPD was awarded the 2009 Design Award from the National Center for Patient Safety. 

TTP and Kennon finalized an exclusive license agreement, royalties from which are still being 

paid today.

The SSPD is currently in use at the Sheridan VAMC. It was installed throughout the facility’s 

acute mental health unit as both standard and shower doors. Despite regular use, they have only 

needed to be replaced once in the past decade. The SSPD is also a multi-use tool; it has been 

used by staff at the VAMC as a mat and by security teams as a shield.
124

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

EPA’s Federal Technology Transfer Act (FTTA) Program was established to promote 

collaboration between private sector and federal researchers. EPA offers exceptional 

opportunities to develop and commercialize new technologies. Through the authority given to 

EPA by the FTTA, EPA facilitates the transfer of new technologies to the marketplace while 

protecting the intellectual property rights of all parties.

Partners in the FTTA Program have the benefit of collaborating with world-class EPA scientists 

involved in leading-edge research. Collaboration enhances the quality of research projects and 

helps move environmental technologies into the marketplace, resulting in better protection of 

human health and the environment.

EPA’s annual technology transfer report is available online at:

http://www2.epa.gov/ftta/epa-reports-congress-technology-transfer.

More information about EPA technology transfer activities is available on the following website:

http://www2.epa.gov/ftta
125

EPA Invention Disclosures and Patenting

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, EPA reported the number of new inventions disclosed

decreased by 67%, from 18 disclosures in FY 2012 to 6 in FY 2016. The number of patent 

applications filed decreased by 90% to one. The number of patents issued decreased by 82% to 

three patents.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

New Invention Disclosures 18 8 5 7 6

Patent Applications Filed 10 7 9 4 1

Patents Issued 17 16 5 7 3 18

8

5

7

6

10

7

9

4

1

17

16

5

7

3

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

EPA Invention Disclosures and Patenting

New Invention Disclosures Patent Applications Filed Patents Issued
126

Patents issued to EPA in FY 2016 covered many technology areas including Chemical 

Engineering (28%), Mechanical Elements (16%), Organic Fine Chemistry (17%), Transport 

(17%), Analysis of Biological Materials (11%), and Measurement (11%).

34

USPTO Patents Assigned to EPA by Technology Area: FY 2016

 34 Source: Prepared by Science-Metrix using USPTO data indexed in PatentsView in April 2017. Used with 

permission.
127

EPA Licenses

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, EPA reported that the number of total active licenses decreased 

by 17% from 42 to 35 licenses in FY 2016 while the number of new licenses increased by 300% 

to eight. All active licenses were invention licenses. The number of exclusive income-bearing 

licenses declined by 21% to 31 while the number of exclusive income-bearing licenses declined 

by 30% to seven. 

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Licenses, Total Active 42 40 40 37 35

New Licenses 2 2 6 0 8

Invention Licenses, Total Active 42 40 40 37 35

New Invention Licenses 2 2 6 0 8

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 39 35 33 31 31

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 10 9 8 7 7
128

EPA Income from Licensing

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, EPA reported that total income from all active licenses 

decreased by 36% from $727 thousand to $466 thousand in FY 2016. All income from licenses 

came from invention licenses. Total earned royalty income increased 132% from $201 thousand 

in FY 2012 to $466 thousand in FY 2016. $727 $193

$439

$232

$466

$727

$193

$439

$232

$466

$201

$193

$439

$232

$466

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

$800

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

EPA Income from Licensing ($000s)

Total Income, All Active Licenses Invention Licenses Total Earned Royalty Income (ERI)

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Total Income, All Active Licenses $727 $193 $439 $232 $466

Invention Licenses $727 $193 $439 $232 $466

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $201 $193 $439 $232 $466
129

EPA Collaborative R&D Relationships

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, EPA reported that the number of total active cooperative 

research and development agreements (CRADAs) increased by 12% to 103 agreements from a 

previous 92 in FY 2012. The number of new CRADAs per fiscal year increased by 100% to 44

new agreements in FY 2016. Total active traditional CRADAs decreased by 13% to 55

agreements in FY 2016. No other collaborative research and development (R&D) relationships 

were reported.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

CRADAs, Total Active 92 112 129 97 103

New CRADAs 22 51 35 23 44

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 63 55 52 50 55

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 0 0 0 0 0
130

EPA Downstream Success Stories

EPA: Tracking Microbial Sources of Water Contamination

According to the EPA’s National Water Quality Inventory Report to Congress, fecal bacteria are 

one of the leading causes of U.S. surface water impairment. The presence of fecal bacteria at 

elevated levels originating from human and other animal wastes in community water systems, at 

recreational beaches, and shellfish harvesting areas is correlated to negative public health 

outcomes ranging from the more common mild gastrointestinal illness to the rare and more 

severe illness or even death. 

To protect human health, in 1972 Congress passed the Clean Water Act, mandating the EPA to 

provide the public with technologies to monitor for fecal pollution. The scientific community 

responded with the development of technologies ranging from chemical indicators to canine 

monitoring. EPA scientists recently sought an innovative approach through the study of fecal 

bacterial communities at a molecular level. The result was the development of novel genetic 

based technologies that can measure human and cattle fecal pollution levels in surface water 

samples. The Microbial Source Tracking (MST) methods are technologies aimed at identifying 

and, in some instances, quantifying fecal animal sources of contamination in environmental 

waters. 

The EPA’s U.S. Patents 7,572,584, 8,058,000, and 8,574,839 describe genetic technologies that 

can estimate the concentration of human, cattle, pig and dog fecal pollution in environmental 

water samples. Due to nationwide fecal pollution concerns and more than 290 peer-reviewed 

scientific citations, there is a growing demand by academic, state, and municipal government 

laboratories to implement EPA MST technologies. To accommodate interest from nonprofit 

entities, the EPA developed a new strategy whereby technology can be simultaneously 

transferred to commercial partners while making it available to noncommercial entities. This 

was accomplished through two new license formats in addition to the commercial license. 

To date, 13 licenses have been awarded to university research laboratories, leading to important 

scientific advancements in the MST field and a better understanding of EPA technology 

performance. Three private companies have applied for and been granted commercial licenses. 

EPA: Reducing Energy Consumption of Commercial Buildings

In 2016, EPA completed work on a CRADA with Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) aimed at 

helping to reduce the energy use of commercial buildings in Canada. In 2008, as part of an 

investigation into various methods used globally for assessing energy use in commercial 

buildings, the Canadian government approached EPA with a proposal to base its new energy 

benchmarking initiative on the ENERGY STAR® methodology and EPA’s ENERGY STAR 

Portfolio Manager® benchmarking tool.

Portfolio Manager is a free, interactive online energy, water, waste, and greenhouse gas (GHG) 

benchmarking tool in which more than 50,000 account holders have assessed the performance of 

nearly 500,000 buildings. It allows building owners and operators to efficiently track and assess 

the energy, water, waste, and GHG performance of their buildings, and to compare their energy 
131

performance with those of their peers based on data from reference buildings in the United

States. 

In 2011, NRCan signed a CRADA with the U.S. EPA to facilitate the necessary updates to the 

Portfolio Manager tool to add value and accuracy for Canadian users. In the new tool that was 

built, Canada-specific enhancements included, but were not limited to:

• Energy performance scales for Canadian buildings (including offices and K-12 schools 

initially, followed by hospitals, retail stores, and others);

• Canadian weather data;

• Canadian conversion factors to convert site energy entered by users into source energy 

used in metrics calculations;

• Canadian greenhouse gas emission factors;

• Capabilities to enter data or retrieve results in metric units; and

• French language capabilities.

The new tool was launched in July 2013 and subsequent work focused on continuing to develop 

additional new functionality. In the time after the launch of the new Portfolio Manager tool, 

CRADA researchers performed enhancements in a number of areas. The first enhancement was 

metrics development. When the new tool was launched, it included 1-100 ENERGY STAR 

Scores for only Canadian office buildings and K-12 schools. In the time after the initial launch 

of the tool, significant effort was spent to develop, program, and release additional scores for 

hospitals, warehouses, medical office buildings, food retail stores, and senior care facilities. A 

second area of focus was Portfolio Manager security. Specifically, several enhancements were 

made to accommodate the needs of NRCan’s users, including adding reminders to reset 

passwords, and warnings associated with document uploads. Finally, new functionality was 

developed to facilitate training of users within the tool by allowing them to select from five

different types of sample buildings to populate their account. In addition to these highlights, 

researchers made other mutually beneficial enhancements to the database, user interface, and 

web services employed by both U.S. and Canadian users. 

EPA: Managing Municipal Solid Waste

More sustainable approaches to solid waste management can be accomplished using a life-cycle 

analysis that considers cost and energy flows through a system analysis. This type of analysis 

helps communities to understand the environmental tradeoffs of different management options. 

A tool developed by EPA’s Office of Research and Development calculates the material and 

energy flows from the collection, transport, processing, composting, combustion and landfilling 

of commercial and residential waste. The tool also calculates the economics using full cost 

accounting of managing materials. It has received international and national recognition as the 

leading tool for use in helping communities identify more sustainable and resilient management 

options considering both economics and environmental tradeoffs. 

Through a CRADA with Covanta Energy, the interface of the tool was upgraded to enable users 

to calculate the life cycle environmental tradeoffs, material and energy flows, and the full costs 

associated with how to manage materials in municipal solid waste. The user interface of the tool 

was completed in 2016, which was the culmination of several years of effort to develop a beta 
132

version of a second-generation tool. The data from testing landfills is included in the dataset for 

the tool along with changes in process design and operation for municipal solid waste 

management.

Covanta’s interest in the tool is that if a scientific and peer-reviewed tool is available, then 

communities, as well as industrial and commercial generators of waste, will better understand the 

tradeoffs and potential benefits of waste to energy in addition to providing more accurate 

information on all management options for more efficient and effective environmental 

management. 

The CRADA also supported direct measurement of methane, mercury, and other landfill gas 

emissions from landfills. A source of criteria and hazardous air pollutants, landfills are 

considered the most challenging source to measure because of their size and ever-changing 

nature, due to changes in waste composition, design, and operations. Comparatively few direct 

measurements have been completed and the CRADA added substantially to the body of publicly 

available data. This data is crucial to support development of tools like that described above. 
133

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)

Even revolutionary technology can face a long road on its way to commercial success. The 

camera in every cell phone, for example, runs on a sensor originally developed at NASA, but it 

took nearly two decades for the technology to achieve its dominance in the field of digital 

imaging. Innovations often require multiple generations of inventors, engineers, and 

entrepreneurs to go from lab to store shelf—a process that NASA’s Technology Transfer 

Program (T2) specializes in facilitating.

Since its founding by the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 , NASA has worked to 

ensure that the results of its space and aeronautics activities benefit the whole of humanity. To 

that end, the T2 program serves as the Nation’s curator of aerospace technology assets, 

identifying and protecting inventions and ensuring they are distributed to individuals, academia, 

and industry as widely as practicable. The program processes more than 1,500 new technologies 

created by NASA innovators each year, assessing each for its commercial potential and patenting 

those that are particularly promising. It manages the agency’s technology portfolio, negotiates 

license agreements, and handles requests for NASA software. 

T2 also communicates the societal benefits of NASA’s work to the public through its annual 

Spinoff publication, which has featured more than 2,000 successfully commercialized space 

technologies since its first issue in 1976.

NASA’s increased marketing and promotion of its various technology portfolios has led to a 

dramatic spike in public and government interest in NASA technology for secondary 

applications. Managing this increased interest requires constant and continuous process 

improvements across all areas of the technology transfer pipeline—from new internal tools to 

help NASA innovators publish their discoveries and inventions to websites and mobile 

applications the public can use to discover and acquire NASA technology. T2 develops and 

maintains these tools while also conducting public outreach through media, conferences, and 

other interactions with government, university, and commercial organizations.

Program Achievements in 2016

Thanks in large part to recent T2 initiatives, NASA technology has never been more easily 

accessible or more easily transferred from government to private use. Fiscal Year 2016 saw 

improvements to: tools to help NASA innovators disclose and track their new technologies, 

agency patent strategy and licensing practices, software release processes, and public outreach.

Invention Disclosure

NASA employees are required to disclose their inventions , though for various reasons it is a 

perennial challenge to ensure they are aware of this requirement and follow through with action. 

This year, in order to increase the number of agency invention disclosures, T2 launched a highly 

successful inventor’s notebook initiative to help promote awareness of the disclosure process and 

requirements. The initiative put sought-after, high-quality, hard-back notebooks in the hands of 

NASA innovators, which through design and branding now remind them daily to report new 
134

technologies. Additionally, the program coordinated training for nearly 2,500 civil servants on 

their requirements to report. 

NASA also continued regular improvements to the newly-launched Innovator Dashboard, a webbased tool for tracking what happens to technologies after their disclosure. The dashboard gives 

innovators a one-stop shop for tracking information that before now was spread out in many 

places: for example, whether a technology was patented by the agency, resulted in licenses or 

commercial spinoffs, or was published.

Finally, in 2017, T2 was undertaking an overhaul of the disclosure process that will enable 

inventors to pursue different pathways depending on whether they are civil servants or 

contractors—with different paths for small businesses, large entities, and grantees—and the end 

goal of the disclosure (e.g. software release, technology transfer, intellectual property protection, 

contract requirement, etc.).

Patent Strategy and Licensing

NASA’s consolidated, coordinated marketing approach has matured over the course of several 

years, during which time (since 2011) patent licensing has increased by 293%. Fiscal year 2016

saw an increase in patent licensing of 29% over the previous year. Currently, there are about 450 

active licenses for NASA-patented technologies, with roughly 100 new licenses being executed 

each year.

T2 continues to manage the patent filing process through policy statements, direction to 

individual centers, and routine budget and strategy meetings with agency patent counsel. 

Through this management, the centers are coordinated and strategic in their intellectual property 

management, filing only patents with known commercial potential and actively managing the 

portfolio to keep it relevant to industry.

NASA is still the only federal agency with a consolidated intellectual property portfolio 

marketing approach. Centered around a web portal, each center uses matching collateral and a 

routine publication schedule to promote technologies developed at that site. The entire portfolio 

is managed through a single, public-facing, fully searchable repository 

(http://technology.nasa.gov/patents) that is always up to date. Every one of the thousand-plus 

technologies in this database has a corresponding fact sheet in HTML and PDF formats 

containing a plain-language description of the technology, lists of its advantages and 

applications, and NASA contacts for further information.

T2’s outreach strategy also includes a coordinated approach to industry conferences. In 2016 the 

program created a new exhibit and sent it to nine agency-level showcases.

There are also thousands of formerly patented technologies that NASA has gifted into the public 

domain—again, with a central, searchable database developed by T2 within the last few years 

(https://technology.nasa.gov/publicdomain). Anyone can pursue product development using 

these technologies for free, with no requirement to contact NASA. Of notable value among 

these patents are many space-based technologies (e.g., propulsion) that will help foster 

America’s growing commercial space sector.
135

Software Release

Today more than ever people are using NASA software to solve their technical challenges. In 

2016 software release—that is, acquisitions of software following a request and NASA 

approval—increased by 25%, part of an overall 145% increase since 2011.

A key element of NASA’s software release success is the software catalog, which is updated 

annually. The release this year was amplified with a comprehensive media campaign and 

resulted in web traffic of over 7.5 million visitors to the T2 website in a 48-hour period and 167 

news stories within the first week. As with the patent portfolio, the public can browse a central 

repository for NASA software (http://software.nasa.gov) that contains the agency’s publicly 

released codes—all of which are available free of charge and can be downloaded from the site 

via an automated request system. This catalog, first released in 2014, was the first of its kind 

among all agencies of the federal government, which is the world’s largest creator of custom 

code. 

One new initiative in 2016 was the release of the internal-facing Software Release System, 

which provides the agency’s software developers a dashboard to track their code as it moves 

through the approval process. This system streamlines and standardizes the review process for 

software across all ten field centers and increases efficiency by allowing for parallel processing 

of approvals, replacing a manual, serial process. The new system also improves our ability to 

track metrics, enabling program specialists to identify and correct problems in the release process 

to be identified and corrected in a timely manner. 

NASA’s software release practices have become a model for other federal agencies, showing 

them how to capture, track, review, and release code to the public.

NASA’s annual technology transfer reports are available online at: 

http://technology.nasa.gov/analytics/

More information about NASA technology transfer activities is available on the following 

website: http://www.nasa.gov/offices/oct/home/index.html
136

NASA Invention Disclosures and Patenting

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of new inventions disclosed decreased by 6% from 

1,656 in FY 2012 to 1,554 disclosures in FY 2016. The number of patent applications filed 

decreased by 1% to 129. The number of patents issued decreased by 21% to 103 patents in FY 

2016.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

New Invention Disclosures 1,656 1,627 1,701 1,550 1,554

Patent Applications Filed 130 150 140 129 129

Patents Issued 131 118 120 123 103 1,656 1,627 1,701 1,550 1,554 130 131 150 118 140 120 129 123 129

103

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

NASA Invention Disclosures and Patenting

New Invention Disclosures Patent Applications Filed Patents Issued
137

Patents issued to NASA in FY 2016 covered many technology areas including Measurement

(18%), Transport (13%), Computer Technology (6%), Telecommunications (5%), and Control

(5%) Electrical Machinery, Apparatus, Energy (5%), Mechanical Elements (5%), and Materials, 

Metallurgy (5%).

35

USPTO Patents Assigned to NASA by Technology Area: FY 2016

 35 Source: Prepared by Science-Metrix using USPTO data indexed in PatentsView in April 2017. Used with 

permission.
138

NASA Licenses

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, NASA reported that the number of total active licenses 

increased by 31% from 346 in FY 2012 to 452 licenses in FY 2016 while new licenses increased

by 224% to 107. The number of total active invention licenses increased by 31% to 387 while 

the number of new invention licenses increased by 246% to 97. Total active income-bearing 

licenses increased by 61% to 245 while the number of income-bearing exclusive licenses 

increased by 40%, from 10 to 14.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Licenses, Total Active 346 332 349 375 452

New Licenses 33 38 51 74 107

Invention Licenses, Total Active 296 281 297 321 387

New Invention Licenses 28 31 45 69 97

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 152 160 176 193 245

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 10 11 9 12 14
139

NASA Income from Licensing

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, NASA reported that the total income from all active licenses 

decreased by 7% from $3.4 million in FY 2012 to $3.1 million in FY 2016. The income from 

invention licenses decreased by 7% to $2.8 million. Total earned royalty income decreased 18% 

from $3.3 million in FY 2012 to $2.7 million in FY 2016. 

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

Total Income, All Active Licenses $3,375 $2,183 $2,095 $3,395 $3,149

Invention Licenses $2,967 $1,644 $1,729 $2,828 $2,750

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $3,333 $2,132 $2,063 $3,250 $2,746
140

NASA Collaborative R&D Relationships

The National Aeronautics and Space Act provides NASA with the unique authority to enter 

into a wide range of "other transactions," commonly referred to as Space Act Agreements. 

NASA uses Space Act Agreements to engage in collaborative research projects with various 

partners to advance NASA’s mission and program objectives, including international 

cooperative space activities. Space Act Agreements differ from traditional cooperative 

research and development agreements (CRADAs) and therefore in this report, Space Act 

Agreements are included under the category “Other Collaborative Agreements.” 

In FY 2016, NASA reported 12 active traditional CRADAs. The number of Space Act 

Agreements increased 26% from 1,756 agreements in FY 2012 to 2,204 in FY 2016.
141

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

CRADAs, Total Active 0 0 1 8 12

New CRADAs 0 0 1 7 5

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 0 0 1 8 12

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 1,756 1,990 2,091 2,113 2,204
142

Other Performance Measures Deemed Important by the Agency

Software Release

NASA reports the following software release data.

NASA Downstream Success Stories

In 2016, NASA once again produced another issue of the agency’s flagship publication, Spinoff. 

This year’s book captured the stories of 50 companies from across 22 states. Spinoff content is 

refreshed regularly on the publication’s website and routinely featured on NASA’s homepage. 

Spinoff features are promoted to T2’s 250,000 social media followers, which contributes to the 

routine readership of two to three million unique Spinoff website visitors per month.

Examples of successful technology transfer stories recently featured in Spinoff include:

CMOS Sensors Enable Phone Cameras, HD Video

In the 1990s, Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) engineer Eric Fossum invented what would 

become NASA’s most ubiquitous spinoff—digital image sensors based on complementary metal 

oxide semiconductors (CMOS). These were significantly smaller and more efficient than the 

charge-coupled-device imagers of the day and eventually enabled tiny, battery-friendly cell 

phone cameras, high-definition video cameras—such as those offered by San Mateo, Californiabased GoPro—and social media as we know it. By 2015, the CMOS market reached nearly $10 

billion.

GPS Correction Technology Lets Tractors Drive Themselves

With a license for software created by JPL to stream corrected GPS data and a contract to receive 

data from JPL’s global network of reference stations, Moline, Illinois-based John Deere released 

StarFire receivers that let tractors drive themselves, were affordable, did not require a local radio 

tower, and could be used all over the world. Automated guidance reduces the time and resources 

needed to care for fields and increases crop yield and quality.

Reconfigurable Radio Tracks Flights Worldwide

NASA was looking for a new high-bandwidth, software-reconfigurable radio. Through a 50/50 

cost-share cooperative agreement, Glenn Research Center developed one with Harris 

Corporation, and the final product flew in the International Space Station’s Space 

Communications and Navigation (SCaN) testbed and was honored with an R&D 100 Award. 

The Palm Bay, Florida-based company used what it built to create its AppSTAR radio, which 

soon will be tracking airplanes worldwide.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

New Software Usage Agreements Executed 1,316 1,368 1,685 2,107 2,646

Public Domain Release 29 56 218 303 550

US Release Only 787 665 699 930 1,111

Project Release 247 289 286 399 326

Interagency Release 99 110 146 167 122

NASA Release 104 166 181 174 389
143

Rocket Technology Stops Shaking in Its Tracks

In testing, the Ares I launch vehicle displayed a serious vibration problem—shaking that 

resonated dangerously, causing potentially hazardous conditions in the crew capsule right above 

the booster. Engineers at Marshall Space Flight Center found a solution, creating a brand new, 

low-cost, lightweight damper that could become the industry standard for buildings, bridges, and 

many other structures that vibrate or shake. New York City-based Thornton Tomasetti markets 

the technology to make buildings safer against the wind and from earthquakes.

Orion Video Requirement Advances High-Speed, Compact Cameras

To film parachute deployment on the Orion spacecraft, Johnson Space Center required a highspeed, compact, rugged video camera. Integrated Design Tools (IDT) of Pasadena, California, 

which specializes in cameras for industrial and scientific markets, such as crash testing, was 

subcontracted. IDT developed a camera capable of filming up to 1,000 frames per second and 

backing that data up nearly as fast. All of IDT’s “Os” series of cameras now include the highspeed, solid-state memory developed for Orion.

Rechargeable Hearing Aid Batteries Draw from NASA Research

In its early days, NASA spent much effort developing rechargeable silver-zinc batteries, as the 

pairing offers a higher power-to-weight ratio than any other battery couple. Significant advances 

in the batteries’ durability were made at Glenn Research Center, which ZPower, LLC of 

Camarillo, California, used as part of its starting point, undertaking years of additional 

development before releasing its rechargeable hearing aid batteries, the first that can last all day 

on a single charge.

Laser Imaging Helps Archaeologists Dig Up History

Archaeologists are using tools developed for space missions, like remote scanning with lasers, or 

lidar, to help search for clues to long-ago history. One company making the scanners is 

Teledyne Optech, a Canadian company with offices in Henrietta, New York, which most 

recently designed a lidar instrument for the OSIRIS-REx asteroid return mission managed at 

Goddard Space Flight Center, and which has incorporated space mission innovations into their 

commercial offerings.
144

Chapter 3 Conclusion

Technology transfer is an active and essential mission of federal R&D laboratories. By 

leveraging our Nation’s innovative nature and investing in science and technology, we 

strengthen our economy and U.S. competitiveness in world markets. In recent years, agencies 

have engaged in efforts to increase the rate and efficacy of technology transfer activities and 

thereby improve the economic and societal impact from federal research and development 

(R&D) investments.

This report provides a summary of the technology transfer activities of all 11 federal agencies 

that are actively involved in R&D. This summary is derived from each agency’s annual 

technology transfer reports that are located online at https://www.nist.gov/tpo/agencytechnology-transfer-reports.

Statistical data provided in this report indicate that for all agencies covered by this report,

between FY 2012 and FY 2016 there has been a 5% decrease in invention disclosures, a 1% 

increase in patent applications, and a 1% increase in patents issued. In FY 2016, the largest 

number of federal patents issued involved the technical areas of measurements (11%),

biotechnology (8%), electrical machinery, apparatus, energy (7%), pharmaceuticals (7%), other 

special machines (6%), and computer technology (6%).

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, total active licenses increased by 7%, new licenses increased by 

7%, invention licenses increased by 7%, and new invention licenses increased by 14%. Incomebearing licenses increased by 13%, and exclusive income-bearing licenses increased by 21%.

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, income from all licensing increased by 7%, income from 

invention licenses increased by 8%, and total earned royalty income decreased by 9%.

Between FY 2012 and FY 2016, the number of cooperative research and development 

agreements (CRADAs) increased by 40% while new CRADAs per fiscal year increased by 10%. 

Traditional CRADAs increased by 56% while other collaborative R&D relationships decreased 

by 5%. 

In FY 2016, federal researchers published 58,609 papers. More than half of these papers were in 

the fields of biological sciences (26%), medical sciences (23%), and physics (11%). In FY 2016, 

15,644 papers cited in U.S. patents were authored or coauthored by federal researchers. Of these 

papers, 79% involved research in the fields of biological sciences (43%), medical sciences 

(25%), and chemistry (11%).

Initial effort to determine the number of small businesses involved in federal CRADA 

agreements reveals that out of the 6,671 traditional, federal CRADA agreements from agencies 

that tracked small business participation, 19% involve small businesses as participants. Federal 

agencies also support small businesses through the licensing of technologies. Initial data reveal

that of the 8,156 active, federal licenses from agencies that could identify company size, 10% 

were issued to small businesses. 
145

Federally developed technologies are also transferred through the actions of young startup 

companies. Companies that have been in existence for five years or less and have spun off 

federally developed technologies or have received critical technical support for their core 

development areas from federal laboratories evidence the effective transfer of federal 

technologies. Review of preliminary data from six agencies identifies 100 companies that started 

between the years of 2012 and 2016 and have received critical technical support from federal 

laboratories.

In summary, this report shows that agencies have made steady progress in their efforts to 

improve the transfer of technologies from federal laboratories. By projecting trend lines for 

patents, invention licenses, CRADAs, and Space Act Agreements, there is clear evidence that 

efforts to streamline and improve processes have been successful. Agencies are now engaged in 

efforts to assess the impact of these efforts to show how federal technology transfer promotes 

economic growth, the creation of new products, and increased employment opportunities.
146

Appendix A

Federal Invention Disclosures and Patenting

Agency Metric FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

USDA New Inventions Disclosed 160 191 117 222 244

Patent Applications Filed 122 157 119 125 109

Patents Issued 69 65 83 94 60

DOC New Inventions Disclosed 60 41 47 61 64

Patent Applications Filed 27 26 25 32 25

Patents Issued 13 21 19 20 16

DOD New Inventions Disclosed 1,078 1,032 963 781 874

Patent Applications Filed 1,013 942 916 884 941

Patents Issued 1,048 648 670 623 665

DOE New Inventions Disclosed 1,661 1,796 1,588 1,645 1,760

Patent Applications Filed 933 944 1,144 949 999

Patents Issued 676 713 822 755 856

HHS New Inventions Disclosed 352 320 351 321 320

Patent Applications Filed 233 230 216 222 269

Patents Issued 335 428 453 501 579

DHS New Inventions Disclosed 40 20 36 15 17

Patent Applications Filed 10 4 5 7 15

Patents Issued 0 4 3 4 3

DOI New Inventions Disclosed 10 9 6 7 8

Patent Applications Filed 3 8 4 8 4

Patents Issued 3 4 2 3 1

DOT New Inventions Disclosed 2 13 3 0 0

Patent Applications Filed 1 5 0 5 0

Patents Issued 4 1 1 1 1

VA New Inventions Disclosed 310 282 289 217 239

Patent Applications Filed 94 106 116 116 104

Patents Issued 29 31 37 54 54

EPA New Inventions Disclosed 18 8 5 7 6

Patent Applications Filed 10 7 9 4 1

Patents Issued 17 16 5 7 3

NASA New Inventions Disclosed 1,656 1,627 1,701 1,550 1,554

Patent Applications Filed 130 150 140 129 129

Patents Issued 131 118 120 123 103

New Inventions Disclosed 5,347 5,339 5,106 4,826 5,086

Patent Applications Filed 2,576 2,579 2,694 2,481 2,596

Patents Issued 2,325 2,049 2,215 2,185 2,341

All 

Federal 

Agencies
147

Federal Licenses

Agency Metric FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

USDA Licenses, Total Active 384 400 414 424 441

New Licenses 34 25 30 35 33

Invention Licenses, Total Active 341 351 363 359 370

New Invention Licenses 28 19 28 20 27

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 379 397 412 421 439

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 277 291 299 292 307

DOC Licenses, Total Active 41 38 38 46 57

New Licenses 6 7 7 13 15

Invention Licenses, Total Active 41 38 38 46 57

New Invention Licenses 6 7 7 13 15

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 23 26 26 31 33

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 10 13 14 16 20

DOD Licenses, Total Active 520 527 430 560 515

New Licenses 44 59 24 11 127

Invention Licenses, Total Active 432 425 297 446 358

New Invention Licenses 44 59 6 69 57

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 356 264 223 213 194

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 120 na na na 218

DOE Licenses, Total Active 5,328 5,217 5,861 6,310 5,410

New Licenses 757 568 573 648 621

Invention Licenses, Total Active 1,428 1,353 1,560 1,336 943

New Invention Licenses 192 153 171 155 145

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 3,340 3,709 4,215 4,577 3,963

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 344 199 141 98 231

HHS Licenses, Total Active 1,465 1,426 1,555 1,767 1,750

New Licenses 231 184 212 279 278

Invention Licenses, Total Active 1,090 1,069 1,186 1,354 1,721

New Invention Licenses 192 152 117 232 221

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 809 809 845 843 837

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 24 25 24 11 23

DHS Licenses, Total Active 0 0 2 4 5

New Licenses 0 0 0 3 1

Invention Licenses, Total Active 0 0 2 4 5

New Invention Licenses 0 0 0 3 1

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 0 0 1 4 1

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 0 0 0 0 0

DOI Licenses, Total Active 26 20 18 20 22

New Licenses 1 3 0 3 0

Invention Licenses, Total Active 24 20 16 18 20

New Invention Licenses 1 3 0 3 0

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 22 16 14 18 17

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 12 4 5 7 8

DOT Licenses, Total Active 2 3 1 2 2

New Licenses 0 1 0 1 2

Invention Licenses, Total Active 2 3 1 2 0

New Invention Licenses 0 1 0 0 0

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 2 3 1 2 2

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 0 0 1 0 0
148

Federal Licenses (continued)

Agency Metric FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016

VA Licenses, Total Active 197 194 197 200 261

New Licenses 8 9 3 3 1

Invention Licenses, Total Active 197 194 197 200 260

New Invention Licenses 8 9 3 3 1

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 9 13 14 16 42

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 9 10 9 11 35

EPA Licenses, Total Active 42 40 40 37 35

New Licenses 2 2 6 0 8

Invention Licenses, Total Active 42 40 40 37 35

New Invention Licenses 2 2 6 0 8

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 39 35 33 31 31

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 10 9 8 7 7

NASA Licenses, Total Active 346 332 349 375 452

New Licenses 33 38 51 74 107

Invention Licenses, Total Active 296 281 297 321 387

New Invention Licenses 28 31 45 69 97

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 152 160 176 193 245

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 10 11 9 12 14

All Licenses, Total Active 8,351 8,197 8,905 9,745 8,950

Federal New Licenses 1,116 896 906 1,070 1,193

Agencies Invention Licenses, Total Active 3,893 3,774 3,997 4,123 4,156

New Invention Licenses 501 436 383 567 572

Income Bearing Licenses, Total Active 5,131 5,432 5,960 6,349 5,804

Income Bearing Exclusive Licenses 816 562 510 454 863
149

Federal Income from Licensing ($000s)

Agency Metric FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

USDA Total Income, All Active Licenses $3,806 $4,386 $4,928 $5,067 $4,784

Invention Licenses $3,671 $4,054 $4,733 $4,842 $4,456

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $3,060 $3,354 $3,611 $3,510 $3,633

DOC Total Income, All Active Licenses $248 $151 $220 $164 $149 

Invention Licenses $248 $151 $220 $164 $149 

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $248 $151 $220 $164 $149 

DOD Total Income, All Active Licenses $7,055 $21,575 $11,703 $9,448 $6,205 

Invention Licenses $6,552 $20,859 $10,890 $8,482 $5,199 

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $6,335 $20,438 $7,845 $6,099 $6,205 

DOE Total Income, All Active Licenses $40,849 $39,573 $37,885 $33,137 $31,149 

Invention Licenses $36,103 $36,068 $32,869 $28,966 $27,364 

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $28,735 $27,669 $23,384 $21,245 $16,273 

HHS Total Income, All Active Licenses $110,576 $116,448 $137,249 $151,727 $132,833 

Invention Licenses $108,308 $103,664 $133,814 $147,512 $130,701 

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $110,930 $116,601 $116,765 $114,102 $110,193 

DHS Total Income, All Active Licenses $0 $0 $3 $5 $12 

Invention Licenses $0 $0 $0 $0 $12 

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $0 $0 $3 $5 $12 

DOI Total Income, All Active Licenses $76 $96 $58 $106 $83 

Invention Licenses $76 $96 $58 $106 $83 

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $65 $96 $58 $106 $82 

DOT Total Income, All Active Licenses $7 $9 $23 $12 $15 

Invention Licenses $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $7 $9 $23 $12 $15 

VA Total Income, All Active Licenses $391 $389 $336 $494 $316

Invention Licenses $391 $389 $336 $494 $316

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $391 $389 $336 $494 $316

EPA Total Income, All Active Licenses $727 $193 $439 $232 $466 

Invention Licenses $727 $193 $439 $232 $466 

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $201 $193 $439 $232 $466 

NASA Total Income, All Active Licenses $3,375 $2,183 $2,095 $3,395 $3,149

Invention Licenses $2,967 $1,644 $1,729 $2,828 $2,750

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $3,333 $2,132 $2,063 $3,250 $2,746

Total Income, All Active Licenses $167,110 $185,003 $194,939 $203,787 $179,161

Invention Licenses $159,043 $167,118 $185,088 $193,626 $171,496

Total Earned Royalty Income, (ERI) $153,305 $171,032 $154,747 $149,219 $140,090

All 

Federal 

Agencies
150

Federal Collaborative R&D Relationships

Agency Metric FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016

USDA CRADAs, Total Active 274 259 267 301 238

New CRADAs 65 86 60 80 79

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 211 211 193 188 161

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 14,691 16,199 16,144 14,206 11,854

DOC CRADAs, Total Active 2,410 2,428 2,359 2,751 2,940

New CRADAs 2,323 2,289 2,111 2,548 2,607

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 154 206 233 365 335

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 2,782 2,963 2,981 3,125 3,273

DOD CRADAs, Total Active 2,400 2,682 2,762 2,148 3,125

New CRADAs 757 769 671 793 1,061

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 1,328 2,682 2,281 1,601 2,297

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 0 606 581 1,389 452

DOE CRADAs, Total Active 742 742 698 732 739

New CRADAs 184 142 162 188 246

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 742 742 698 732 739

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 0 0 0 0 0

HHS CRADAs, Total Active 377 427 532 400 590

New CRADAs 93 104 98 112 134

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 245 313 378 202 391

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 0 114 154 150 147

DHS CRADAs, Total Active 94 114 158 230 343

New CRADAs 53 76 88 98 114

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 89 91 121 200 272

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 11 6 31 30 71

DOI CRADAs, Total Active 379 476 601 825 873

New CRADAs 284 376 423 586 511

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 28 21 35 38 37

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 283 322 292 318 319

DOT CRADAs, Total Active 29 40 51 48 68

New CRADAs 12 8 10 9 22

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 3 3 7 48 62

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 14 26 30 35 152

VA CRADAs, Total Active 1,510 2,181 2,317 2,305 2,613

New CRADAs 542 453 517 509 502

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 1,430 1,982 2,126 2,113 2,359

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 0 0 0 0 0

EPA CRADAs, Total Active 92 112 129 97 103

New CRADAs 22 51 35 23 44

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 63 55 52 50 55

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 0 0 0 0 0

NASA CRADAs, Total Active 0 0 1 8 12

New CRADAs 0 0 1 7 5

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 0 0 1 8 12

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 1,756 1,990 2,091 2,113 2,204

CRADAs, Total Active 8,307 9,461 9,875 9,845 11,644

New CRADAs 4,335 4,354 4,176 4,953 5,325

Traditional CRADAs, Total Active 4,293 6,306 6,125 5,545 6,720

Other Collaborative R&D Relationships 19,537 22,226 22,304 21,366 18,472

All 

Federal 

Agencies
151

Appendix B

Technology Area Classifications

Mapping of International Patent Classifications to Technology Area36

Analysis of Biological Materials – Includes the investigation or analysis of specific methods not 

covered by other groups. Materials analyzed include: food, water, metals, explosives, oils, paints, 

paper, textiles, concrete, resins, wood, and biological material.

Audio-Visual Technology – Includes but is not limited to: advertising, signs, labels or nameplates, seals, arrangements or circuits for control of indicating devices using static means to 

present variable information, scanning details of television systems, color television systems, still 

video cameras, loudspeakers, microphones, stereophonic systems, and printed circuits. 

Basic Communication Processes – Includes but is not limited to: generation of oscillations, 

modulation, amplifiers, control of amplification, impedance networks, tuning resonant circuits, 

pulse technique, and general coding, decoding, or code conversion.

Basic Materials Chemistry – Includes but is not limited to: preservation of bodies of humans 

or animals or plants, nitrogenous fertilizers, explosive or thermic compositions, detonating or 

priming devices, means for generating smoke or mist, manufacture of matches, organic dyes, 

coating compositions, natural resins, preparation of glue, adhesives, drying or working-up or 

peat, cracking hydrocarbon oils, production of acetylene by wet methods, lubrication 

compositions, and detergent compositions. 

Biotechnology – Includes but is not limited to: compounds of unknown constitution, peptides, 

apparatus for enzymology or microbiology, micro-organisms or enzymes, fermentation or 

enzyme-using processes to synthesize a desired chemical compound or composition or to 

separate optical isomers from a racemic mixture and measuring or testing processes involving 

enzymes or micro-organisms. 

Chemical Engineering – Includes but is not limited to: boiling, evaporating, sublimation, cold 

traps, crystallization, solvent extraction, displacing liquid, degasification of liquids, filters 

comprising of loose filtering material, cartridge filters of the throw-away type, processes of 

filtration, regeneration of the filtering material or filter elements outside the filter for liquid or 

gaseous fluids, separation of different isotopes of the same chemical element, chemical or 

physical laboratory apparatus for general use, separating solid materials using liquids or using 

pneumatic tables or jigs, centrifuges, flotation, spraying apparatus, treating textile materials by 

liquids, bleaching, drying solid materials or objects by removing liquid therefrom, and plasma 

technique. 

 36 Derived from The World Intellectual Property Organization’s International Patent Classification (IPC) 

Correspondence Table (http://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/ipstats/en/statistics/patents/xls/ipc_technology.xls) 

and IPC Searchable Classification Database, Version 2016.01 

(http://web2.wipo.int/classifications/ipc/ipcpub/#refresh=page).
152

Civil Engineering – Includes but is not limited to: construction of roads, sports ground, 

platforms and refuge islands, landing stages for helicopters, machines for making railways, 

bridges, devices providing protection against weather, street cleaning, ship-lifting devices, 

foundations, excavations, embankments, dredging, water installation, sewers, water-closets or 

urinals with flushing devices, general building constructions, building materials, skylights, 

gutters, stairs, floors, locks, handcuffs, swimming pools, hinges for doors, windows, or wings, 

safes or strong-rooms for valuables, bank protection devices, ladders, earth or rock drilling, 

mining or quarrying, large underground chambers, and safety devices. 

Computer Technology – Includes but is not limited to: digital computers in which all the 

computation is affected mechanically, digital fluid-pressure computing devices, optical 

computing devices, electric digital data processing, analog computers, recognition of data, 

counting mechanisms, image data processing or generation, speech analysis or synthesis, speech 

recognition, and static stores. 

Control – Includes but is not limited to: systems for controlling or regulating non-electric 

variables, ticket-issuing apparatus, time or attendance registers, handling or coins or of paper 

currency or similar valuable papers, con-freed or like apparatus, signaling or calling systems, 

traffic control systems, educational or demonstration appliances, ciphering or deciphering 

apparatus for cryptographic or other purposes involving the need for secrecy, and railway or like 

time or fare tables.

Digital Communication – Includes but is not limited to: transmission of digital information, 

selective content distribution, and wireless communication networks.

Electrical Machinery, Apparatus, Energy – Includes but is not limited to: incandescent 

mantles, lighting devices or systems, nonportable lighting devices or systems, cables, conductors, 

insulators, magnets, inductances, transformers, capacitors, electric switches, electric discharge 

tubes or discharge lamps, electric incandescent lamps, spark gaps, emergency protective circuit 

arrangements, dynamo-electric machines, electric heating, static electricity, and generation of 

electric power by conversion of Ingra-red radiation, visible light, or ultraviolet light.

Engines, Pumps, Turbines – Includes but is not limited to: steam engines, rotary-piston or 

oscillating-piston machines or engines, steam engine plants, cyclically operating valves for 

machines or engines, lubricating of machines or engines in general, cooling of machines or 

engines in general, internal-combustion piston engines, gas-turbine plants, jet-propulsion plants, 

starting of combustion engines, machines or engines for liquids, wind motors, positive- and nonpositive displacement pumps, generating combustion products of high pressure or high velocity, 

fusion reactors, nuclear reactors, nuclear power plant, conversion of chemical elements, 

obtaining energy from radioactive sources, and nuclear explosives. 

Environmental Technology – Includes but is not limited to: fire-fighting, separating dispersed 

particles from gases, combinations of devices for separating particles from gases or vapors, 

disposal of solid waste, reclamation of contaminated soil, gathering or removal of domestic or 

like refuse, water treatment, cremation furnaces, and measurement of nuclear or x-radiation.
153

Food Chemistry – Includes but is not limited to: new plants or processes for obtaining them, 

treatment of flour or dough for baking, preserving by canning, dairy products, edible oils or pats, 

coffee, tea, cocoa, coca products, protein compositions for foodstuffs, feeding-stuffs specially 

adapted for animals, brewing of beer, recovery of by-products of fermented solutions, wine, 

preparation of vinegar, production of sugar juices, extraction of sucrose from molasses, and 

drying sugar.

Furniture, Games – Includes but is not limited to: tables, desks, office furniture, chairs, child 

furniture, special furniture, household or table equipment, furnishings for windows or doors, 

kitchen equipment, sanitary equipment, toilet accessories, domestic washing or cleaning, 

apparatus for physical training, design or layout of courts, bowling games, card games, indoor 

games, merry-go-rounds, swings, toys, devices for theaters and circuses, racing and riding sports 

equipment and accessories.

Handling – Includes but is not limited to: labeling or tagging machines, containers for storage 

or transport of articles of materials, transport or storage devices, handling thick or filamentary 

material, elevators, escalators, moving walkways, cranes, capstans, winches, tackles, pulley 

blocks, hoists, applying closure members to bottles, and filling or emptying of bottles, jars, cans, 

casks, barrels, or similar containers. 

IT Methods for Management – Includes data processing systems or methods, specially adapted 

for administrative, commercial, financial, managerial, supervisory, or forecasting purposes.

Machine Tools – Includes but is not limited to: chemical means for extinguishing fires, rolling 

of metal, working or processing of metal wire, making forged or pressed metal products, making 

metal chains, making gears or toothed racks, thread cutting, soldering, welding, abrasive or 

related blasting with particulate material, tools for grinding, hand-held nailing or stapling tools, 

handles for hand implements, workshop equipment, saws for wood or similar material, working 

veneer or plywood, dovetailed work, removing bark or vestiges of branches, and accessory 

machines or apparatus for working wood or similar materials.

Macromolecular Chemistry, Polymers – Includes but is not limited to: polysaccharides, 

treatment or chemical modification of rubbers, derivatives of natural macromolecular 

compounds, use of inorganic or non-macromolecular organic substances as compounding 

ingredients, and compositions of macromolecular compounds.

Materials, Metallurgy – Includes but is not limited to: foundry molding, casting of metals, 

working metallic powder, non-metallic elements, ammonia compounds, cyanogen compounds, 

compounds of alkali metals, chemical composition of glasses, manufacture of iron or steel, 

processing of pig-iron, production or refining of metals, alloys, and changing the physical 

structure of non-ferrous metals or non-ferrous alloys.

Measurement – Includes but is not limited to: measuring linear dimensions, measuring 

distances, surveying, navigation, gyroscopic instruments, measuring volume, weighing, 

measurement of mechanical vibrations, measurement of intensity or velocity, measuring 

temperature or quantity of heat, measuring force, testing static or dynamic balance of machines 
154

or structures, sampling, investigating strength properties of solid materials by application of 

mechanical stress, investigating density or specific gravity of materials; investigating flow 

properties of materials, investigating or analyzing materials by use of optical or thermal means, 

and investigating or analyzing materials by the use of nuclear magnetic resonance, electron 

paramagnetic resonance or other spin effects.

Mechanical Elements – Includes but is not limited to: fluid-pressure actuators, fluid dynamics, 

devices for fastening or securing constructional elements or machine parts, shafts, couplings for 

transmitting rotation, springs, means for damping vibration, belts, cables, ropes, chains, fittings, 

gearing, pistons, cylinders, pressure vessels, valves, devices for venting or aerating, pipes, 

frames, casing, lubricating, safety devices in general, steam traps, gas-holders of variable 

capacity, vessels for containing or storing compressed gases, pipe-line systems, and control 

devices or systems insofar as characterized by mechanical features.

Medical Technology – Includes but is not limited to: diagnosis, surgery, identification, 

dentistry, veterinary instruments, filters implantable into blood vessels, physical therapy 

apparatus, containers specially adapted for medical or pharmaceutical purposes, methods or 

apparatus for sterilizing materials, devices for introducing media into or onto the body, 

electrotherapy, radiation therapy, ultrasound therapy, and x-ray technique.

Micro-Structural and Nano-Technology –Includes but is not limited to: micro-structural 

devices or systems, processes or apparatus specially adapted for the manufacture or treatment of 

micro-structural devices or systems, specific uses or applications of nano-structures, and nanostructures formed by manipulation of individual atoms, molecules, or limited collections of 

atoms or molecules as discrete units. 

Optics – Includes but is not limited to: optical elements, spectacles, apparatus or arrangements 

for taking photographs, photosensitive materials for photographic purposes, apparatus for 

processing exposed photographic materials, photomechanical production of textured or patterned 

surfaces, electrography, devices used to stimulate emission, and holographic processes or 

apparatus.

Organic Fine Chemistry – Includes but is not limited to: cosmetics or similar toilet 

preparations, general methods of organic chemistry, acyclic or carbocyclic compounds, 

heterocyclic compounds, steroids, derivatives or sugars, nucleosides, nucleic acids, and 

combinatorial chemistry.

Other Consumer Goods – Includes but is not limited to: machines for making cigars, smoke 

filters, match boxes, shirts, corsets, outerwear, suspenders, artificial flowers, wigs, masks, 

feathers, hats and head coverings, characteristic features of footwear, buttons, pins, buckles, 

jewelry, coins, walking sticks, umbrellas, purses, luggage, hairdressing or shaving equipment, 

apparatus or methods for life-saving, bookbinding, filing appliances, implements for writing or 

drawing, apparatus or tools for artistic work, saddles, stirrups, upholstering methods, ropes or 

cables in general, musical instruments with associated blowing apparatus, and methods or 

devices for protecting against, or for damping, noise or other acoustic waves in general.
155

Other Special Machines – Includes but is not limited to: soil working in agriculture or forestry, 

planting, sowing, fertilizing, harvesting, mowing, threshing, cultivation of vegetables, 

manufacture of dairy products, animal husbandry, shoeing of animals, machines or equipment 

for making, slaughtering, processing meat, machines or apparatus for treating harvested fruit, 

preparing grain for milling, shaping clay or other ceramic compositions, working stone or stonelike materials, shaping or joining of plastics, additive manufacturing, manufacturing or shaping 

of glass, sugar extraction, weapons for projecting missiles without the use of explosive or 

combustible propellant charge, small arms, apparatus for launching projectiles or missiles from 

barrels, weapon sights, targets, explosive charges, blasting, and ammunition fuses.

Pharmaceuticals – Includes but is not limited to: preparations for dentistry, medicinal 

preparations characterized by special physical form, medicinal preparations containing organic 

and inorganic active ingredients, medicinal preparations containing peptides, preparations for 

testing in vivo, electrically conductive preparations for use in therapy or testing in vivo, 

radioactive non-metals and metals, specific therapeutic activity of chemical compounds or 

medicinal preparations, and containing or obtained from roots, bulbs, leaves, bark, seeds, grains, 

flowers, stems, branches, or twigs.

Semiconductors – Includes semiconductor devices and electric solid-state devices not otherwise 

provided.

Surface Technology, Coating – Includes but is not limited to: apparatus and processes for 

applying liquids or other fluent materials to surfaces, layered products, coating metallic material, 

enameling of metals, nonmechanical removal of metallic material from surfaces, cleaning or degreasing of metallic material by chemical methods other than electrolysis, and single-crystal 

growth.

Telecommunications – Includes but is not limited to: transmission systems for measured 

values, waveguides, resonators, aerials, transmission, broadcast communication, multiplex 

communication, secret communication, jamming of communication, telephonic communication, 

and scanning, transmitting, or reproducing documents.

Textile and Paper Machines – Includes but is not limited to: appliances or methods for making 

clothes, manufacture of brushes, making articles of paper or cardboard, processes for the 

manufacture or reproduction of printing surfaces, typewriters, stamps, printing plates or foils, 

mechanical treatment of processing of leather in general, preliminary treatment of fibers, 

spinning or twisting, crimping or curling fibers, shedding mechanisms, auxiliary weaving 

apparatus, knitting, braiding or manufacturing of lace, sewing, embroidering, mechanical or 

pressure cleaning of carpets, decorating textiles, and paper-making machines.

Thermal Processes and Apparatus – Includes but is not limited to: methods of steam 

generation, superheating of steam, methods or apparatus for combustion using fluid or solid fuel, 

burners, grates, feeding fuel to combustion apparatus, regulating or controlling combustion, 

ignition, domestic stoves or ranges, air-conditioning, fluid heaters, ice production, steam or 

vapor condensers, other heat exchange apparatus, and cleaning of internal or external surfaces of 

heat-exchange or heat-transfer conduits.
156

Transport – Includes but is not limited to: vehicle wheels, vehicle tires, vehicle suspension 

arrangements, windows, windscreens, arrangement or mounting of propulsion units or of 

transmissions in vehicles, propulsion of electrically-propelled vehicles, power supply lines or 

devices along rails for electrically-propelled vehicles, vehicles adapted for load transportation, 

arrangement of signaling or lighting devices, vehicle brake control systems, air-cushion vehicles, 

locomotives, body details or kinds of railway vehicles, rail vehicle suspensions, shifting or 

shunting of rail vehicles, guiding railway traffic, hand-propelled vehicles, vehicles drawn by 

animals, trailers, cycle stands, cycle saddles or seats, brakes specially adapted for cycles, rider 

propulsion of wheeled vehicles or sledges, ships or other waterborne vessels, offensive or 

defensive arrangements on vessels, marine propulsion or steering, auxiliaries on vessels, lighterthan-air aircraft, airplanes, helicopters, equipment for fitting in or to aircraft, flying suites, 

parachutes, and cosmonautics. 
157

Appendix C

Fields and Subfields of S&E Publications Data37

Agricultural Sciences: dairy animal sciences, agricultural and food sciences

Astronomy

Biological Sciences: general biomedical research, miscellaneous biomedical research, 

biophysics, botany, anatomy and morphology, cell biology, cytology, and histology, ecology, 

entomology, immunology, microbiology, nutrition and dietetics, parasitology, genetics and 

heredity, pathology, pharmacology, physiology, general zoology, miscellaneous zoology, general 

biology, miscellaneous biology, biochemistry and molecular biology, virology

Chemistry: analytical chemistry, organic chemistry, physical chemistry, polymers, general 

chemistry, applied chemistry, inorganic and nuclear chemistry

Computer Sciences

Engineering: aerospace engineering, chemical engineering, civil engineering, electrical 

engineering, mechanical engineering, metals and metallurgy, materials engineering, industrial 

engineering, operations research and management, biomedical engineering, nuclear technology, 

general engineering, miscellaneous engineering and technology

Geosciences: meteorology and atmospheric sciences, geology, earth and planetary sciences, 

oceanography and limnology, marine biology and hydrobiology, environmental sciences

Mathematics: applied mathematics, probability and statistics, general mathematics, 

miscellaneous mathematics

Medical Sciences: endocrinology, neurology and neurosurgery, dentistry, environmental and 

occupational health, public health, surgery, general and internal medicine, ophthalmology, 

pharmacy, veterinary medicine, miscellaneous clinical medicine, anesthesiology, cardiovascular 

system, cancer, gastroenterology, hematology, obstetrics and gynecology, otorhinolaryngology, 

pediatrics, psychiatry, radiology and nuclear medicine, dermatology and venereal disease, 

orthopedics, arthritis and rheumatism, respiratory system, urology, nephrology, allergy, fertility, 

geriatrics, embryology, tropical medicine, addictive diseases, microscopy

Other Life Sciences: speech/language pathology and audiology, nursing, rehabilitation, health 

policy and services

 37 Sources: SRI International; Science-Metrix; National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and 

Engineering Statistics, Integrated Science and Engineering Resources Data System (WebCASPAR) database 

system, http://webcaspar.nsf.gov. Science and Engineering Indicators 2016, Appendix Table 5-24. Used with 

permission.
158

Psychology: clinical psychology, behavioral and comparative psychology, developmental and 

child psychology, experimental psychology, human factors, social psychology, general 

psychology, miscellaneous psychology, psychoanalysis

Physics: acoustics, chemical physics, nuclear and particle physics, optics, solid state physics, 

applied physics, fluids and plasmas, general physics, miscellaneous physics

Social Sciences: economics, international relations, political science and public administration, 

demography, sociology, anthropology and archaeology, area studies, criminology, geography 

and regional sciences, planning and urban studies, general social sciences, miscellaneous social 

sciences, science studies, gerontology and aging, social studies of medicine