David Rockcliffe: And welcome to the Webinar on the solicitation, accelerating innovations and biomanufacturing approaches through collaboration between Nsf. And the Oe B to Fund. The agile biofunctory. My name is David Rockcliffe,
David Rockcliffe: and it, and along with James Dartner from the Agile by a foundry, we will be giving you a presentation this afternoon on the solicitation that is a joint collaboration between and Nsf. And doe.
David Rockcliffe: Ah, this is a Webinar format. So please place any questions. Any questions that you have in the Q. And A. Section
David Rockcliffe: of the Webinar.
David Rockcliffe: Okay. So next slide, please, just a little background about this solicitation. This program is a collaboration between the National Science Foundation,
David Rockcliffe: the Department of Energy. Ah, Bioenergy, Technology's office and the Agile by a phone tree, the program was actually conceived in recognition of the critical roles that synthetic and engineering biology played in advancing of our bio economy. So we taught that in order to translate advanced advances in synthetic and engineering biology into products and processes that will impact
David Rockcliffe: the bio-economy as well as stimulating new approaches to biological and bioengineering research. There is a need to accelerate innovation and adopt new biomanufacturing approaches. This need to be far, partly fulfilled
David Rockcliffe: through broadening access to biofunctry infrastructure, not only for biom manufacturing but also for basic research. Therefore we thought that the program should,
David Rockcliffe: in the first instance advanced basic research, and secondly, transform biology, biotechnology, and bioengineering workforce to one that is killed in both hypothesis, driven experimental design
David Rockcliffe: as well as modular workflows. Ah, therefore, to this end the Nsf. And the Do E Beto
David Rockcliffe: office, and the agile biofunctry are collaborating on this solicitation to support proposals from the scientific community that would one
David Rockcliffe: ah utilize the integrated design, build, test, learn capabilities of abf and to translate basic research in synthetic and engineering biology into products and processes that will impact the economy.
David Rockcliffe: So in short, we're looking for proposals that both leverage the design build a test-learn capabilities of the Abf to translate basic science into by economy relevant innovation and also we the development of general rights or generalizable rules or theories of biological systems that can enhance our understanding of science.
David Rockcliffe: Next slide, please. Yeah,
David Rockcliffe: this is now just a synopsis of this solicitation. The proposals must effectively leverage the unique design, build, test, learn capabilities available at the Abf. To translate the latest advances in synthetic biology and engineering biology
David Rockcliffe: mit ctl and basic research into testable prototype processes and products that are potentially scalable and manufacturing, and can be appropriately validated In this solicitation Nsf would would support what provides support rather one hundred and fifty
David Rockcliffe: for all activity of the institution of higher education. Aren't nonprofit wherever the proposal is coming from, and it it will provide Nsf. Will provide support for all the work that occurs in parallel
David Rockcliffe: with or prior to, the work that is being done at the Abs
David Rockcliffe: Ah, and the work. Any work that is being done in the preparation process to go to ebs, and along with the work that is being done simultaneously in the Evs, and a steph will provide support for that.
David Rockcliffe: Nsf. Will support all the allowable personnel for a regular nsf
David Rockcliffe: award such as post-doctoral fellows, short-term faculty fellows graduate students undergraduate students interns that may be hosted at the National at the national lab or ebs.
David Rockcliffe: The Doe Biddle will cover the cost for implementation of approved projects at the
David Rockcliffe: partnering with industries encouraged for technologies
David Rockcliffe: both to facilitate eventual scale-up and for regulatory approval next line.
David Rockcliffe: Okay, Okay,
David Rockcliffe: the all the proposals will be submitted to Nsf. And will be reviewed at Msf. And these proposals must address the standard. Nsf. Review. Criteria of intellectual merit and broader impact.
David Rockcliffe: The intellectual merit encompasses the project's potential to advance knowledge in the immediate scientific area or across scientific areas, and a broader impact is the potential to benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes.
David Rockcliffe: The two. These two sections of the proposal should be clearly delineated in the application, and just a reminder that for those who are not used to submitting proposals to Nsf.
David Rockcliffe: The broader impact should be presented as a plan of activities that are attended to address a specific goal or specific goals that speak to a societal benefit or a specific societal outcome.
David Rockcliffe: There should also be an assessment plan, so that the investigator could have a sense of to what extent the goals have been achieved.
David Rockcliffe: There are additional solicitation-specific review criteria and we ask that you consult the solicitation to see the list of the additional refuel criteria.
David Rockcliffe: These additional review criteria must be addressed, and they are pertaining to what we want to see in order for us to achieve the goals of the solicitation
David Rockcliffe: in
David Rockcliffe: the Nsf. Will coordinate and manage the review of the proposals with input from Doe Beeto there will be representatives from the Deoi Beeto, who will be permitted to view all the proposals to recommend reviews to attend the review
David Rockcliffe: panels as observers, and receive unattributed proposal, refused
David Rockcliffe: all the pertinent information about proposals and reviews of proposals will be shared between the two entities. Nsf. And Doe, through secure
David Rockcliffe: file transfer processes, and I will hand the button now over to James.
James Gardner: Okay, Thank you, David.
James Gardner: All right. So the rest of the Webinar presentation is really intended for attendees to have an opportunity to learn a little bit more about the agile foundry, its capabilities, the kinds of ah collaborations that we are already engaged in the Feasibility Review activity. That will be a preliminary assessment of the project that you
James Gardner: have in mind what that feasibility review looks like on the timetable part, and then we will be able to open up to questions. So um, you can see my email address there. There is also the email address that is available through the solicitation. So I recommend that you take note of that, so that if you do have uh questions, we can address those questions and uh compile them for the community uh pretty large.
James Gardner: So if you could go to the next slide, please.
James Gardner: All right. So the ads of biofoundry is a consortium of seven national laboratories dedicated to accelerating biomanufacturing. This is a program out of the bio-energy technology's office at the Us. Department of Energy.
James Gardner: You can see that it is made up of the laboratories that are listed, and it spans across the country, including the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Argon, Berkeley, Lab,
James Gardner: Ah, Enrol, Oakridge, Sandia, and Los Alamos, and each of these labs bring unique capabilities and expertise to bear on the tough kinds of problems that that are
James Gardner: needed to be solved for advancing biomanufacturing in the United States. The
James Gardner: the infographic to the right really represents the why, how, and who of the agile foundry with the top hexagons representing Why of of the agile foundry's kind of mission space in developing sustainable aviation fuels and really sort of decarbonizing industry at large. So both of those are very important
James Gardner: and really central to the the mission of the adrobial foundry, and I'll. I'll just note here that it's It's important to think about your application through that lens, because that will be an important consideration for understanding the feasibility of your of your project, as well as
James Gardner: the overall success that your your application may may ultimately enjoy
James Gardner: when it comes to the how, reducing time to scale up and using the design. Build Tesla and approach is is the bread and butter of the agile foundry, and i'll get into that a little bit more deeply. And with regard to who we collaborate with industry and academia as we are setting to do so today,
James Gardner: and we are all about promoting workforce, development and stem. And so but there again i'll i'll reiterate what David had referenced with regard to the importance of considering how your project and your proposal has has those sorts of impacts, and how the age of biochemistry can contribute to that.
James Gardner: Okay, uh, on to the next slide, please.
James Gardner: So, in terms of capabilities there are many that the agile foundry can bring to bear across the design, build, test, and learn cycle, ancillary to that to that cycle it. It also includes process, integration and scale up
James Gardner: integrated analysis as well as a host onboarding for non-canonical hosts that can serve very important industrial applications based on feedstock viability as well as Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah! Ah! In industrial environmental conditions that microbes may be able to endure
James Gardner: while they are not necessarily considered sort of the the canonical Ah! Types of hosts. So there we are, talking a variety of different microbes, Archaea, as well as fungal hosts, and we can talk a little bit more about that in terms of the design. Build, test, and learn cycles. You can see that it It includes many different kinds of technologies, and I would very much encourage each of the prospective applicants to
James Gardner: to peruse the agile-foundry dot org slash capabilities website that will provide you with an extensive list of of activities and capabilities that the agile biofoundry is capable of, and and and provide you with a a dense level of detail behind each and every one of those
James Gardner: Okay, And I would say, Why, Don't, we go on to the next slide?
James Gardner: The Agile foundry has ah approximately twenty six collaborations that are either completed in or active research, or R and D. As well as in the contracting phase. And you can see that that includes a variety of different universities and academic institutions, as well as industrial partners that run the gamut from our relatively large companies, such as agile
James Gardner: to small startups that are listed here. Each of them has promising technologies, and we're able to make their case in a compelling way, based on our competitive funding opportunities that that they applied to.
James Gardner: Uh and okay and uh, next slide.
James Gardner: The feasibility process is one where we are eager to understand exactly what at a high level. What the project is that that you have in mind, and in order to best kind of provide the the necessary time that would go into helping you craft that that project. It makes the most sense for us to collect a feasibility document ahead of time,
James Gardner: so that we can know whether to encourage your application, or discourage your application for encouraged applications. We would have evaluated your feasibility document, and i'll get a little bit more into the specifics of that but once that feasibility document is is evaluated and encouraged, we would set about to have a coordination call with the applicant,
James Gardner: so so that we can better understand what the ah, the needs of that project would be. Ah, what the what the budgeting would look like, and ah! To ah provide support in crafting the aims that that would be abf specific.
James Gardner: So the feasibility document is really intended to be specific to the agile foundry portion of your and Nsf. Application. Here we are looking to understand at a high level the scope, and you can see that it's a maximum of two pages. So we're not asking for a detailed
James Gardner: uh body of information at this time,
James Gardner: and that would include overview aims and outcomes, as well as a a compelling and convincing indication of alignment with the and Nsf. As well as and perhaps just as importantly or more important, and for the purposes of the feasibility document, how this aligns with the bio-energy technology's office mission, which I said I mentioned earlier in the slide. So with regard to the agile phoning resources
James Gardner: again, this is a two-page maximum so a total of four pages for your feasibility document. And here you would list the types of Abf capabilities that you would wish to bring to bear for your project, and at a high level, the timetable that you would see these being carried out
James Gardner: over the say, the course of your total project. So this gives us an understanding that you have thought it through, and that you have a good understanding of what the capabilities are that you wish to utilize.
James Gardner: Um.
James Gardner: You can see that on the to get back up for one second you can see that on the right. This is a screenshot of the ah of the directions that are provided, and it also serves as a template for you to utilize, to fill out your feasibility document. So, once you are in the solicitation, you will find a link that will take you to a further description of the feasibility document, and all of the the
James Gardner: stages require, as well as a link to this template, and so you will see that once you are gain an access to the solicitation, the a level of detail with regard to the description of of the directions within the feasibility document have have been pretty carefully laid out, and so we think that you will find that to be quite informative again,
James Gardner: for things that are not clear. Please do let us know, and we will respond as quickly as possible. All right, if you'd like to go to the next slide.
James Gardner: So the Feasibility review process is as follows: So the P. I. That would be the applicants here would be to submit a feasibility document no later than February fifteenth, and i'll just say up front that I recommend and and really encourage you to submit that feasibility document as soon as you possibly can.
James Gardner: Um. The Adf will review the feasibility documents as they arrive and provide out outcomes via email as quickly as possible Again, no later than march first.
James Gardner: Um, and if the Aggabya foundry encourages the application, the pi will receive a link to a so-called speed dating call. This is sort of a coordination call with all of the investigators from the agile foundry
James Gardner: who can speak to the the needs and the objectives of the proposed project.
James Gardner: So once that takes place on or before April seventeenth, the pi will follow up with specific, agile foundry investigators who are relevant for the prospective application for budget and and refining by those aims. So the sooner that you have that feasibility document in
James Gardner: that will translate into more time being able to be spent crafting particularly the agile foundry portion of your Nsf proposal,
James Gardner: and you can see the timeline there. This screenshot, again, is a figure that comes from the ah ah directions that are associated with the Feasibility Review, which you can find a link to. Ah in the solicitation itself.
James Gardner: Okay,
James Gardner: next slide.
James Gardner: So ah! As David referenced ah for successful applications. The and Nsf. Oversees the application of renewal selection process, and that will be in consultation with doe Veto and the edge of biofoundry for Abf Based project scope,
James Gardner: Relevant national labs enter into the necessary agreements with the outside organizations that may include a cooperative research and development agreement. We are continually exploring ways to streamline our processes and to ascertain the best types of of
James Gardner: work agreements. And so so we will evaluate those on a case by case basis to ascertain which work agreements are are appropriate for the work being executed on behalf of the project.
James Gardner: Okay, And with that I will leave it open to questions.
Olaf Corning: If you have any questions, please leave them in the Q. And a chat.
Olaf Corning: A few questions have been answered already, so Pedro Costa Nunez as does this mean that only academic or nonprofit organizations are eligible for this program?
Olaf Corning: And Karen wrote out an answer. Karen, would you want to
Olaf Corning: to say what the answer was, while we wait for some questions to roll in.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Oh, thanks,
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: thanks a lot. Um. I just copied in the information that came directly from the solicitation which says that the eligible eligible institutions are in general institutions of higher education and nonprofit institutions.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: The complete information on that is located in the solicitation.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: There's also some other questions showing up David. Maybe you can answer this one. What is the funding amount?
David Rockcliffe: Okay, yes, I could take that.
David Rockcliffe: There. There is no specific funding amount. What we usually ask is that the scope of the work be
David Rockcliffe: aligned with the budget request, and the budget request should not be excessive, but it should reflect on the scope of the work that is being described in the proposal, and that's what we usually look at. There is one
David Rockcliffe: there. There's one limitation on the budget, and this is on the doe side. I don't know if you want to say something about that, James. But the Dewey budget should not be uh more than four to nine percent to the total um cost of the project.
Yeah,
David Rockcliffe: there's another question on How often is the solicitation? Call all David the solicitation right now it's first. The first call was last year.
David Rockcliffe: We have another call this year in two thousand and twenty, and to two thousand and twenty, three.
David Rockcliffe: And uh
David Rockcliffe: that that is it. For as as far as it goes for the moment.
Yeah,
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: thank you and ah, James, this question could come to you, I think, didn't the speed dating call of her before the feasibility document last year, and my understanding is, you need to know who or what skills you're asking for at the feasibility document stage
James Gardner: that that's right. So the feasibility document did take place after the coordination call last year. And yeah, in in exploring different ways in which we can streamline our process and make sure that we are offering the best sort of value to applicants. It made more sense to evaluate how we constructed that feasibility document and ask for it up front, so that we can make sure
James Gardner: that there is some clarity with regard to what the applicant would see as ah, that that kind of body work, and make sure that it at least is reasonably feasible. Ah! Relative to what the agile foundry is capable of of offering
James Gardner: So so. Yes, we are turning it around this year, and having the feasibility document
James Gardner: up front. You'll note that we are not asking for any budget figures, and and there's really little reason to expect that that Pis, who would be applying would would even know how to construct those those budgetary figures. So that would be the kind of information that would come about in the sort of subsequent conversations after the coordination call, which, of course, will have happened after
James Gardner: a A, an encouraged indication will have been received by that P. I so I hope that makes some sense.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Yes, thank you. Um, can I? Just? I'm gonna follow up on that. And just because I know that, James, you said you were offering up your email address, and of course there's a contact. There's contact information in the solicitation. So i'm certain that you would be willing to entertain some questions
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: ahead of time. If people needed some more guidance on that feasibility document
James Gardner: absolutely, absolutely. And as a matter of fact, both the info at, and obviously my own email come to me. So either way I would see that.
James Gardner: Ah, for those that are not ah fielded by myself, it would either be. Ah, my colleague, Angie Tarber, who is also ah present in the panel Ah, or or even Ah, Ah Gail, Ah, Bentley, from Ah, the bioenergy technology's office can can help support and and clarifying any questions that come our way.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Thank you.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: I I see two questions about asking about whether about particular kinds of institutions that would they be eligible? One is, can national labs get funding from this proposal, and the other is is an S. P. Of also allowed to do this work,
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: James or
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: David, do you have
David Rockcliffe: the the national labs that are collaborated that are collaborating? I beg your pardon in this solicitation.
David Rockcliffe: The work that is being done there will be funded separately under the doe, and Nsf. Will be funding the work that is done in preparation.
David Rockcliffe: Ah! For going to the national Lab. Ah! To perform the experiments that that would be done there. So they it! They are separate. Ah funding tracks, so to speak.
David Rockcliffe: I don't know if you'd like to add to that, James. Yeah.
James Gardner: So maybe i'll. I'll answer answer the questions, and in the reverse or so so there was a question about Spps, which is one of the work agreement contracting mechanisms that the national labs use it's. Ah! Formally referred to as work for others type agreements, and and these are generally more narrowly Ah! Scoped types of word agreements that have
James Gardner: uh kind of different. If If not, I would say more.
James Gardner: Ah! What would be the best way of of putting it, that when it comes to intellectual property there is a a an assumption that new intellectual property that would would not
James Gardner: arise from that from that body of work. It's generally meant to be a kind of almost service agreement, if you will,
James Gardner: and and So that stands in stark contrast to a cooperative research and development agreement which generally assumes that new intellectual property would arise from the work.
James Gardner: In fact, we are exploring a variety of different kinds of contracting mechanisms, some of which are lesser known, and we'll provide more guidance and more clarity on on that, as in the coming days and weeks. But we are evaluating those opportunities and those options
James Gardner: with both Daily Council as well as the national labs. So with regard to whether national labs themselves can apply. I would say that
James Gardner: um
James Gardner: that would not be aligned with the general mission of of what it is we are Ah! Aiming to to achieve with with this funding opportunity, it's really intended to be reaching out to Academia and other nonprofit institutions. Not necessarily the national labs.
James Gardner: Um. And so, Gail, i'm not altogether sure if you have specific, more kind of black and white. Ah, guidance on that. But but I believe the answer it would be no that national labs are not eligible To apply to this funding.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: I would say that that's true. James Nsf. Does not usually fund. A national does not usually fund a Federal law.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: There's a question on. Is there a funding minimum or maximum? And I think, David, you answered that question previously. But maybe you'll just
David Rockcliffe: mission it again here.
David Rockcliffe: Yes, I I could reiterate for emphasis that there is no stipulated maximum in the budget requests. But we look to see how well
David Rockcliffe: the scope for the work is aligned with the budget requests there should be some alignment between the two, and the Budget Request should be reasonable, and it should be in the amount where
David Rockcliffe: it is very evident that you will be able to accomplish the work that you propose.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: I would I would also mention that the
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: the There is a
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: um a website on the or there's information on the Abf website of the awards that were funded last year, and so you could get a sense of what the what the funding rates were, or what the funding amounts for those awards were. And
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: and I would say that.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Ah! In ah! In an address in Felix's question in last year's solicitation, there was a weapon, four to one intercept to abf ratio for budgeting and project scoping. Is that the same as this year?
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Change to you? Haven't.
James Gardner: Um. So the the answer would be, yes, that the the four to one ratio Ah! Is is likely to be. Ah the same. There may be some ah options to ah slightly adjust that upward. Ah, it really depends on how other funding opportunities that we may be engaging in. Ah, ah! You know, take shape, and so it'll be. It'll be kind of a a bit of a moving target, but four to one
James Gardner: would be the the reasonable expectation.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Thank you.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Is there a timeframe for the completion of the proposed projects?
David Rockcliffe: There is no stipulated timeframe on the Nsf side.
David Rockcliffe: We, the the solicitation is aligned with the general Nsf
David Rockcliffe: regulations as far as the projects are concerned, meaning that you can request.
David Rockcliffe: You can make requests for projects that are two to five years. But I but maybe they are limits. That might be on the the Abf: side. James.
Yeah.
James Gardner: Ah, not at this time. We are not looking at at the limits per se. It is worthwhile to to just
James Gardner: make sure that that one has in mind the the the fact that there is that four to one basic guidance in terms of in terms of funding, and it may be worthwhile to to consider that as a
James Gardner: rough guideline in terms of the way the project is is ah generally scoped. Any Any one project is generally scoped, That, said the The only hard requirement is the one, David, that you are referenced earlier, which is that
James Gardner: Ah, no one budget can be any more than forty-nine percent of of total dedicated to the agile foundry portion of the project.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Thank you.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Laura Writes: What if i'm the inventor of a synthetic biology product research of twelve years and goal was to change the toxic
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: lipstick industry. Not a scientist
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: retired welder because of toxic metals in my blood, and I would like the universities here to help me with this, can they? How do I go about this,
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Laura? I would suggest that you,
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: if you want to share your contact information. We've already had one advertisement as a question. So if you want to write back, we'll put your contact information in. People would be willing, I'm sure if they're interested to answer.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Thank you.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Can an applicant make a preference regarding doe reviewers
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: is a question for
David Rockcliffe: okay, I think.
Oh,
David Rockcliffe: when you're making an application to Nsf. You are allowed to recommend
David Rockcliffe: your fears. Are you are allowed to recommend those who you think might be appropriate reviews for for your proposal.
David Rockcliffe: The review process is administered by Nsf. In collaboration with the doe. Therefore
David Rockcliffe: there will be consultation about who will be the panelists or the ad hoc reviewers who might be associated with with the program. And as I just said,
David Rockcliffe: the doe will have an ah an input in in all of this. So I don't know if you can look at it from the point of view that they are doe-specific reviewers or
David Rockcliffe: are Nsf. Specific reviews. But what we are aiming to have is the reviewers who are appropriate, and who will be able to give a competent review to the proposals that have been submitted to the solicitation.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Thank you, David. The next question is,
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: at what level is someone qualified to be a fi, and can a postdoc perform this role? And if it's okay with y'all. I'll take this question because I know what the Nsf. Policy is on this
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: um intercepts policy is that if the academic institution at which you're um employed will allow you to become to submit a proposal as a Fi, Then we will reveal.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: So that's definitely not something that we make a decision on, but it it's your institutions. It's your institution's decision. So some institutions do allow postdocs to be the eyes, and if that's the case for you, then we would be welcome to to um. Submit a proposal to this particular.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: There's a question about. Is there a cost match requirement?
David Rockcliffe: There's no costs no costs, much requirements,
David Rockcliffe: at least an Nsf. Does not. As for cost much requirements
James Gardner: in this instance, nor does the agro biofounder
James Gardner: from a sort of technical standpoint for us. The and Nsf. Ah. Contribution to this funding opportunity essentially stands as a kind of cost match, so there is no there is no cost share across match in this instance.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Thank you,
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: does. And is the industrial decarbonization need focused on the most difficult to electrify or wide open to multiple industrial sectors.
James Gardner: It's it. It is wide open. Ah, but it is also important that ah, that one sort of builds a compelling case for the ways in which a particular technology could be harnessed to Ah, to ah serve in in that decarbonizing type of role for industry.
James Gardner: And i'll just make another plug for sustainable aviation fuel, which is also a key pillar for the work that we are doing.
James Gardner: Yeah, so really Ah, in terms of decarbonization, make the strong case. Ah, but but it's Ah, it's a relatively open um opportunity. And in with regard to a variety of different industries
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: like he drives.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Oh, I'm
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Timothy Timothy asked again, Could we repeat the four to one point is that four dollars from company to one dollars from Abf, and I have an answer to that for you. Um. The overall funds available for the solicitation are at a four to one ratio. So
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: this is our expecting rate of funding for the whole program because we expect to have four billion dollars available for this one and one million dollars available from the Adf. So that's the four to one ratio. So each individual project
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: should really target the majority of the work to be formed at the home institution, taking advantage of the Nsf. Funds, and then the Abf funds would be used to support the Abf activities. That would complement your project.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: If that's clear, Tim, if that doesn't make sense for me, please
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: just uh, where, I guess another.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: And then there's a question of Does the program target fundamental research or applied research.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: David, do you want to take that?
David Rockcliffe: Yes, I I could take this. The The program is more about taking fundamental research or the findings of fundamental research and accelerating the innovation process in an effort to translate that
David Rockcliffe: a fundamental finding that that that came from the fundamental research into a process or a product that is related to
David Rockcliffe: the development through
David Rockcliffe: biomanufacturing, or or it should have some kind of impact on our by economy. So I I wouldn't say that it targets both. But there is a requirement, because at Nsf. Our project should address fundamental science,
David Rockcliffe: and therefore there is a requirement for the project to have
David Rockcliffe: some measure of discovery that is associated with it, and then the the section that the doe supports It's about the potential for taking that fundamental discovery and translating it into a useful process of our products.
David Rockcliffe: But in the process of accomplishing all of this,
David Rockcliffe: what we would like you to do is to try to understand. What are you learning about basic biology in the work that you are doing.
David Rockcliffe: They they're thought to be something about basic biology that you want to learn. Ah, in carrying out this project in the way that you do it both in the preparative work that you would do in your lab as well as the work to be done.
David Rockcliffe: Uh at the bio phone tree.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Thank you, David.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: And then there's another question of ah to asking about clarification of what James mentioned as the forty nine percent number a few minutes ago, and if I can try to clarify that, but forty, nine percent is the maximum ratio of funds
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: to be spent at the Abf at the agile Bio foundry
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: with the funding scope. The projects are probably not going to reach that particular maximum.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: That's that. But that is a Mac that that is an accident.
Thank you for that question.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: So would a platform for a new crop and growing system, delocalized and environmentally sustainable. We appropriate for this award funding use for manufacturing that the automated system to use to find this crop for animal feed and
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: um, i'm going to ask that we if you have specific questions about specific kinds of projects. I think that those are probably best posts to the program directors. So when you're writing to David, we're writing to James for specific input on what nerds the project?
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Um Timothy is asking again, is this a mechanism for a company to work with abf or ins? This only for non-profit academic institutions. And the answer is, is, This is for nonprofit at nonprofit and or academic institutions to work with the idea
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: ed asks does the proposed effort at a Bf. Need to elevate the trl or crl levels, and to what degree? James.
James Gardner: Ah, the work that we are ah seeking by way of this funding opportunity does not specifically address. Ah, technology, readiness, manufacturing readiness type
James Gardner: ah regimes. And so, while those are important in other contexts and and certainly we are
James Gardner: quite committed to raising these readiness levels it. It is not as such a criterion for ah, the assessment that that we are looking for ah! With regard to feasibility as well as with regard to the ah quality of the application itself. So so, no. Ah! Various sorts of readiness. Level regimes are not, are not ah in play for this particular application.
It's.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: There's a question about how many proposals we received last year. I'm not sure of the number of proposals we received, but I think, but as we mentioned earlier, there's a link in the answered questions and the link on the Avia on the agile biofoundry website where you can see the the
James Gardner: yeah, I can say that we received a couple dozen applications, and perhaps a couple more than that. So so sort of a
James Gardner: a baker's two dozen, if you will. Ah, so so that gives you a sense of Ah! The oversubscription kind of rates that that we observed last year.
Thank you, Jobs.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: There's a question of if an outcome is confirmation of a new discovery.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: With whom do the Ip rights reside?
James Gardner: I'm sorry, Karen, could you repeat that?
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: It says if an outcome is confirmation of a new discovery.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: With whom do the Ip rights divide the
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: I? I'm wondering if they're asking, Does agile biofounderry will agile bioboundry hold any Ip rights. I'm not sure. Do you want to clarify your question for us?
James Gardner: You know with with regard to that, certainly the the starting place for intellectual property ownership is with inventorship, and that's that's always the case. And so
James Gardner: I would. I would say that that's that's an important consideration. If there is new intellectual property that arises as a function of the work that ads are biofoundry
James Gardner: Investigators perform on behalf of the project. It may indeed lead to a an ownership of that intellectual property on behalf of
James Gardner: the national lab where that particular investigator resides. So. Um: So so yeah, it it gets into a a lot of you know, kind of Ah, if then ah decision, tree type considerations,
James Gardner: And as I had mentioned before. We are working to identify all the streamlined ways in which the contracting mechanisms and intellectual property management are appropriately handled. But at the end of the day. Ah! Ownership follows inventorship. That's that's really the
James Gardner: the letter of the law,
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: and I think I think that um i'm also, seeing that this is part of what gets ironed out with the the cooperative agreement kind of arrangements. So I think that that that would be coverage in that particular, as as you've come to agreement on how these things are going to be executed.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: The next question is, Um,
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: does Does the agile bio foundry? You
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: have expertise in biomass carbonization
James Gardner: we work with various types of biomass. The real focus of the algebraic foundry is in the genetic engineering of of Ah, various microbes and hosts that go on to become the platforms for various bio-products and including fuels.
James Gardner: So so you know, when it comes to understanding how best to strategize and to execute against the necessary alterations to a a given hosts and genetics.
James Gardner: Uh, the the tools of gadget biofuels are are some of the best in the world uh, and that includes um other uh supportive type uh tools, including the techno economics and life, psychoanalysis and scale up and so on. So there are a variety of tools, I would say that biomass itself is, and then i'm hearing that term, i'm thinking,
James Gardner: ah agricultural residues, and so on, that are being studied, and and have been studied and and utilized commercially for a long time, for the production of things like ethanol, and so on.
James Gardner: So I would say that that that engineering, that genetic engineering can take place in the context of a specific target. Ah, feedstock. And and we have performed experimentation along those lines.
James Gardner: So. So I I hope that that answers the question. But I would say that that feed stuck in and of itself is is um is is kind of ancillary to the core and capabilities of the azure biofounder.
James Gardner: How that
it's!
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Thank you, James. Um, and I. I know that Olaf put into the chat the link to last year's awards, and I just put into the chat and link to this year's solicitation for those of you who
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: other questions,
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: David and James, it looks like the questions are come to an end. I thank you very much for for helping put this on today. And, Ola, we really appreciate your um your technical inputs. With that I think that we will sign off,
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: and we look forward to seeing um your applications coming.
Karen Cone / NSF-MCB: Thank you. Everyone.
David Rockcliffe: Thank you. Thank you.
David Rockcliffe: Bye, bye, bye,