R-4 Why Do Companies
Apply for ATP Funding?
The Advanced Technology
Program (ATP) fosters innovation in the United States by partnering with
industry to support high-risk Research and Development (R&D) with
great potential for broad-based economic benefit. ATP also encourages
R&D collaboration between companies and other organizations. The
Survey of ATP Applicants 2002 collected information
on factors that are important to companies in their decision to apply
to ATP.
Respondents
were asked to indicate the importance of a number of factors
in reaching their decision to apply for ATP funding. The
factors can be grouped as follows:
a)
ATP helps overcome unavailability or instability
of internal company funding, or dependence of internal
funding on external funding support
b) ATP funding provides external validation for the technological
or commercial
potential of the R&D project
c) ATP funding facilitates R&D collaboration among different
organizations
|
Most
ATP applicants indicate that unavailability or instability
of internal company funding, or dependence of internal
funding on receiving external support, are important
factors in their decision to apply to ATP
- Internal
company funding is not available. Almost 9 out of
10 applicants indicate that this was important in
their decision to apply to ATP.1 (See Figure 1.)
This is the same as was found for the year 2000 applicants.
- ATP
provides stability of funding for the project over
time. 82% of applicants indicate this was important
in their decision. This percentage is higher than
that found for the year 2000 competition, in which
75% of applicants stated this to be an important
factor in the decision to apply to ATP.
- Internal
company funding and commitment to the project depend
on receiving external funding. 72% of applicants
indicate this was important in their decision to
apply, very similar to what was found for the year
2000 applicants.
|
Figure 1 - Importance
of Factors for Why Companies Apply to ATP
ATP applicants
generally indicate that external validation of the technological
or commercial potential of the R&D project was an important
factor in their decision to apply to ATP
- ATP funding provides
external validation of the technological potential of the project.
61% of applicants indicate this was important in their decision to
apply to ATP. This is higher than what was found for the year 2000
applicants (55%).
- ATP funding provides
external validation of the commercial potential of the project. 50%
of applicants indicate this was important in their decision. This
is also higher than that found for the year 2000 applicants (43%).
Just under half
of ATP applicants indicate fostering R&D collaboration among
different organizations
was an important factor in their decision to apply to ATP
- ATP
funding facilitates collaborations among different organizations.
Just under half of all applicants indicate this was important in
their decision to apply to ATP, approximately the same as was found
for the year 2000 applicants.
Awardees are more likely
than Nonawardees to be seeking validation of the R&D project’s potential
when applying to ATP
- Four out
of five Awardees indicate that external validation of
the technological potential of the project was important
in their decision to apply to ATP. This compares to about
3 out of 5 Nonawardees (see Figure 2).
- Almost
two-thirds of Awardees indicate that external validation
of the commercial potential of the project was important
in their decision, versus almost half of Nonawardees.
Figure 2 - Importance
of Factors for Why Companies Apply to ATP: Awardees versus Nonawardees
Small companies,
relative to larger companies, are more likely to view the need for
external R&D funding as a critical factor in their decision to
apply to ATP
- Small companies view
a lack of available internal funding as an important reason for applying
to ATP to a greater extent than do large/medium companies (89% vs.
71%, respectively). Moreover, small companies are twice as likely
as larger companies to point to the lack of available internal funding
as being “extremely important” in their decision to apply
to ATP (see Figure 3).
- Small companies are
also much more likely than larger companies to indicate that an “extremely
important” factor in their decision was that external funding
was needed in order to obtain internal company funding and commitment
to the project
Figure 3 - Importance
of Factors for Why Companies Apply to ATP: Small versus Larger Companies
Note: Data
shown represent percentages of groups reporting each factor as being “extremely
important” in their decision to apply for ATP funding.
Single Company
applicants are more likely to emphasize the need for funding
as the factor for applying to ATP, while Joint Venture applicants
are more likely to emphasize the need to facilitate collaboration
among organizations
- About three out
of five Single Company applicants indicate that unavailability
of internal company funding was “extremely important” in
their decision to apply to ATP, compared to less than half of
Joint Venture applicants (see Figure 4).
- Almost half of
Joint Venture applicants indicate that facilitating collaboration
among different organizations was “extremely important” in
their decision to apply, compared to 13% of Single Company applicants.
Figure 4 -
Importance of Factors for Why Companies Apply to ATP: Single
Company versus Joint Venture Applicants
Note:
Data shown represent percentages of groups reporting each factor as being “extremely
important” in their decision to apply for ATP funding.
Companies seeking to
partner with the Advanced Technology Program (ATP) submit proposals
to the ATP. Proposals must be for the development of innovative technologies
that could not obtain private funding due to the high technical risk
and that have the potential to produce widespread benefits to the
economy and society. Proposals are evaluated for technical and economic
merit in a rigorous competitive review process.
Return to Table
of Contents or go to next factsheet in
Portfolio.
Date created: July
22, 2005
Last updated:
August 11, 2005
