Report raps NASA tech transfer programs

NASA's technology transfer programs are "not nearly as successful" as previous efforts, the National Academy of Public Administration has found.

In a report released Tuesday, the academy highlighted budget difficulties, a lack of focus, and widespread dissatisfaction with the programs.

"If NASA wants to strive for excellence in technology transfer, major changes are needed," said academy fellow Costis Toregas, chairman of an expert panel that examined the space agency's efforts for a year. "We think technology transfer should be given a major boost in visibility."

A change is required, according to Toregas, because most research and development work critical to NASA's mission no longer is performed inside the space agency.

The Apollo moon program is responsible for countless technologies that spun out of NASA, making their way into civilian and military use in the 1960s and 1970s. Rechargeable batteries, cellular communications, small computers and telemedicine are some examples.

Privately funded research and development has surged since the lunar landing era, but the academy found that NASA has not done a good job infusing private technology. "I don't think they've had much success from spin-in," said project director Joseph Thompson.

NASA also has not done a good job tooting its own horn, according to Thompson, who urged the agency to report to the public and Congress on the economic impact of its technology spinoffs. "For long-term support of the program, that is an essential ingredient," he said.

The independent report, "Technology Transfer: Bringing Innovation to NASA and the Nation," was requested by the space agency and the Office of Management and Budget.

For it, the academy specifically analyzed NASA's Innovative Partnerships Program. But panelists told a news conference that their advice should apply across the agency because they believe all of its technology transfer programs are dysfunctional.

NASA's technology program has two major goals: to increase the agency's technical capabilities by infusing technologies from external sources and to increase the nation's economic strength by transferring NASA-developed technologies into U.S. industry and markets.

The academy contends that the system is not structured to meet the agency's needs or the expectations of its stakeholders and public. Panelists want NASA leaders to renew their commitment to technology transfer activities, reconstruct the agency's national network of technology transfer agents and set performance standards. They listed seven recommendations:

• Establish technology transfer as a core element of NASA's mission.
• Move the Technology Transfer Office to the NASA administrator's office.
• Let associate administrators identify outside technology that NASA needs to bring in.
• Let field center directors oversee outward technology transfer.
• Develop a comprehensive evaluation scheme that includes output measures, economic impact assessments, and performance standards for the responsible individuals.
• Streamline NASA's national technology transfer network.
• Increase use of information technology in daily operations and public outreach.

But Toregas cautioned that NASA's "fiercely inward-looking" culture--which he said the panel observed and spent many hours discussing--could get in the way of meaningful reform. "Sometimes," Thompson added, "it does blind them to opportunities to do things differently."

Editor's Note: The original headline to this article and parts of the first two paragraphs were modified after it was initially published because they contained misleading information about the NAPA report. NAPA's response to the story is in our Mailbag section.