Congressional Authorization

of the

National Network for Manufacturing Innovation

Requirements & Implications for NIST

Mike Molnar

Advanced Manufacturing National Program Office

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Visiting Committee on Advanced Technology

February 4, 2015
2

PCAST: The independent basis of NNMI

PCAST 2011

Recommends Advanced 

Manufacturing Initiative as national 

innovation policy

PCAST 2012

Recommends Manufacturing 

Innovation Institutes to address 

key market failure

PCAST 2014

Recommends strong, collaborative 

network of Manufacturing 

Innovation Institutes

President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology
“In my State of the Union Address, I asked 

Congress to build on a successful pilot 

program and create 15 manufacturing 

innovation institutes that connect 

businesses, universities, and federal agencies 

to turn communities left behind by global 

competition into global centers of high-tech 

jobs.

“Today, I’m asking Congress to build on the 

bipartisan support for this idea and triple 

that number to 45 – creating a network of 

these hubs and guaranteeing that the next 

revolution in manufacturing is ‘Made in 

America.’”

- July 30, 2013

AP Photo/Susan Walsh

3

The President’s Vision – 45 Institutes
NNMI Authorized: Revitalize American 

Manufacturing & Innovation Act

118 bipartisan RAMI Bill Sponsors

4

December 16, 2014 –

Signed By President Obama

September 15, 2014 –

Passed House

100 Cosponsors (51D, 49R)

December 11, 2014 –

Passed Senate with 2015 

Appropriations

18 Cosponsors (10D, 7R, 1I)

Bipartisan Momentum Supporting NNMI Passage

Sen. Sherrod Brown

D Ohio

Sen. Roy Blunt

R Missouri

Rep. Tom Reed

R NY-23

Rep. Joe Kennedy

D MA-4
RAMI and NIST

Call to Action: RAMI calls upon the U.S. Secretary of 

Commerce and NIST to establish:

1. The “Network for Manufacturing Innovation 

Program” (Network function) - to convene and 

support a network of Institutes

2. New “Centers for Manufacturing Innovation” 

(Institutes) - using an open topic, open competition 

process

3. The National Program Office at NIST - to oversee and 

carry out the program (coordination, network 

support, and reporting) 

5
1) Establish/Convene the Network:

Current Institute Status

6

Integrated 

Photonics

Smart 

Mfg.

Flex. Hybrid 

Electronics 

America Makes

Additive Mfg.

Youngstown, OH

Smart Power

Electronics

Raleigh, NC

LM3I

Light/Modern Metals

Canton, MI

IACMI

Adv. Composites

Knoxville, TN

DMDII

Digital Mfg.

Chicago, IL

FORTHCOMING FY15

New Institutes Planned for FY16:

Full Network Goal: 45 regional hubs

Open topic competition – addressing “white 

space” between mission agency topics

Selected topic competitions supporting Agency mission 

– using agency authorities and budgets
Develop a Network Support Structure & 

Operations

Interagency 

Advanced Manufacturing 

National Program Office

Congress

Department of 

Commerce

Network 

Council

Network of Institutes

Network Structure
U.S. Advanced Manufacturing

Institute

Communications Technology 

Development

Workforce and 

Education

Technology 

Transition

Executive Director

Executive Committee

Governance Board Technical Advisory Board

Agency Sponsor

Network Parallels/Complements the 

Typical Institute Structure
Management Committee

• Institute Leaders

• Federal Program Managers

• Federal Executive Leaders

Network Support

Industry Technology Workforce

Network Council

Draft: Network Council with 

Strong Advisory Board Presence
2) Initiate Open Competitions:

DRAFT Dual-Stage “Kick Start” Strategy

10

Stage I: Kick Start 

Applications

FY15

Stage II: Institute 

Applications

FY 16

Stage I

Awards 

(15 to 20)

President’s FY 16 

budget: $140 M for 

two DOC Institutes

• Open to any 

group, any 

topic

• Evaluations 

with external 

experts

• $150-$250k 

Awards (>1:1 

match)

Open 

Competition

Open

Competition

New 

Institute

• Open to all 

Stage I 

awardees

• Evaluations 

with external 

experts

• $70M-$120M 

per Award 

(>1:1 match)

New 

Institute

All Potential

Topics

(135 Identified 

By Public)

FFO 1 to stimulate 

and ready the 

marketplace

FFO 2 to reward & 

select the best 

performers

Use this process for 

FY17+

(29 institutes 

proposed)
— Catalyze robust industry-led consortia commitment 

and progress to establish an Institute, with greatest 

private-sector co-investment and industry owners.

— Maximize potential for successful, self-sustaining 

Institutes involving broad and diverse stakeholders.

— Establish Institute awards as early as possible.

— Learning from DoD and DoE, this process allows 

Institute Awardees to “hit the ground running”.

11

Dual-Stage “Kick Start” Objectives:

Industry Commitment/Ownership
Dual-Stage “Kick Start” Opportunities: 

Open-Topic, Quality, Timely Competitions

— A two stage competition that uses full 

recommendation of RAMI to “... assist the 

organization in planning, establishing, or supporting 

a center of manufacturing innovation.”

— Leverage “funneling effect” to allow proposals by 

industry consortia on any topic, with lowest 

stakeholder burden and highest quality.

— Quickly launch a FY 2015, “Stage I” competition that 

accelerates final Institute awards by 12 months.

12
Thank you

Questions?

Advanced Manufacturing National Program Office 

www.manufacturing.gov

amnpo@nist.gov

301-975-2830
Background / Supplemental

RAMI Competition Requirements

The Secretary Shall...

1. Financial: “...award financial assistance to a person or group of 

persons to assist the organization in planning, establishing, or 

supporting a center for manufacturing innovation.”

2. Open Process: “...ensure an open process that will allow for the 

consideration of all applications relevant to advanced 

manufacturing regardless of technology area.”

3. Outside Expertise: “...use a competitive, merit review process 

that includes peer review by a diverse group of individuals with 

relevant expertise from both the private and public sectors.”

4. Transparency & Accountability: “...implement a conflict of 

interest policy that ensures public transparency and 

accountability, and requires full disclosure of any real or 

potential conflicts of interest on the parts of individuals that 

participate in the merit selection process.” 14