Accelerator Fund Program and the Michigan Venture Devlopment Fund Program (individually)

Transcription

1 MEDC ENTREPRENEURIAL ECOSYSTEM ANALYSIS RFP-CASE Questions & Answers Q1) The RFP states that you are seeking an analysis to determine the effectiveness and economic impact of the Entrepreneurship and Innovation (EI) Programs, both its components and in aggregate. Please identify the specific EI programs (names of the programs) for which you want separate ROI analyses to be included in the report. A1) Early Stage Funding (as an aggregate) Business Accelerator Fund Main (individually) Business Accelerator Fund Discretionary (individually) Emerging Technologies Fund (individually) Pre-Seed Funds (as an aggregate) BRCC - Biosciences Research and Commercialization Center Fund (individually) Automation Alley Pre-Seed Fund (individually) MI Pre-Seed Fund 2.0 (individually) MI Pre-Seed Fund 1.0 (individually) University Commercialization Fund (individually) Michigan University Commercialization Initiative / MMichigan Initiative for Innovation and Entrepreneurship (individually) Venture Capital Recipients (as an aggregate) Accelerator Fund Program and the Michigan Venture Devlopment Fund Program (individually) MI 21st CJF Direct Investments 2006 / 2008 Business Plan Competition Retention Pfizer Assets/Company Formation Growth Fund Pure Michigan Venture Match Fund Entrepreneurial Support Services (as an aggregate) SBDC Tech Team (individually) Biotechnology Business Consultants (individually) AMIC (Accelerate Michigan Innovation Competition) (individually) GLEQ (Great Lakes Entrepreneurs Quest) (individually) DC3 (Detroit Creative Corridor Center) (individually) Green Light business competition (individually) MVCA (individually) Inforum (individually) MichBio (individually)

2 MI Light (individually) MATch Energy - Michigan Accelerating Technologies Energy Grant (individually) SmartZones/Incubators (as an aggregate) Ann Arbor SPARK (individually) Automation Alley (individually) Battle Creek (individually) Tech Town Detroit (individually) LEAP E. Lansing/Lansing (individually) GVSU/CEI Grand Rapids (individually) Houghton MTEC (individually) Holland (individually) Jackson (individually) SMIC Kalamazoo (individually) CMURC Mt. Pleasant (individually) MMIC Midland (individually) OUInc Rochester Hills (individually) SSMart Sault St. Marie (individually) Macomb OUInc (individually) SPARK East Ypsilanti (individually) Next Energy (individually) UM Desai (individually) Lawrence Tech University Universities Tech Transfer (as an aggregate) University of Michigan (individually) Michigan State University (individually) Wayne State University (individually) Michigan Tech University (individually) University Programs (as an aggregate) T3N - TechTransfer Talent Network (individually) First Customer Program - UM IRLEE (individually) MCRN Michigan Corporate Relations Network (individually) MTRAC Michigan Translational Research and Commercialization (aggregate) o MTRAC U of M Life Sciences o MTRAC U of M Transportation o MTRAC MSU AgBio o MTRAC Michigan Tech Advanced Materials o MTRAC WSU Life Sciences Angel Funding MAF - Michigan Angel Funds I and II (individually)

3 Q2) What type of information is available for each of these programs? Would detailed data, such as amount of funds awarded by MEDC per program per year and county where funds awarded, be available to the contractor? A2) The MEDC will supply all necessary data Q3) Do rules/guidelines/criteria for each of these programs exist and would this information be available to the contractor (for example, how and when funds are disbursed, what the funds could be used for, the time period within which the funds could be used, whether funds are limited to specific industries; whether funds for each specific program is limited to firms in a specific county or counties)? Specifically, could this be derived from records of the decisionmaking of the MSF Board over time about specific grants made, and what limitations were placed on the use of those particular grants approved by the Board? A3) All RFPs and grant performance records are held by the MEDC. This data could be made available if required to complete the analysis. Q4) Does MEDC require a DUNS number from each of the firms receiving grants? If so, is this information available to the contractor? A4) Not required but some may be recorded. MEDC may supply this information if avialable. Q5) How long do you envision the tenure of the project? What would you consider to be a reasonable amount of time for completing the project? A5) Time frame is dependent on the MEDC supplying the necessary data. After correct data is supplied, expectation is 3-6 months to complete the analysis. Q6) Would specific data collected from Battelle in its study be made available to the contractor? What specifically is included in the Battelle data? Does the Battelle data include (6.1.) amount received by each firm from each program; (6.2) the amount received by a firm from a particular program in a particular year?; (6.3) the county location of the assisted frim; (6.4) for programs that are services rather than financial awards, the hours of service in a particular year provided to a particular firm in a particular year? A6) It is expected that we will reach an agreement with Battelle to allow the use of the previously collected data. Battelle Data: Company, Status Code, Modeling sector, NAICS (if available), data associated with companies to various individual MEDC programs 6.1) Yes but data might need to be verified 6.2) No in aggregate 6.3) No 6.4) No but if service provider asked they could estimate the time or may have actual time documented. Q7) Would information on those who applied for funding but weren t awarded funding, per program, be made available to the contractor (for example, firms awarded funding, firms

4 considered but not awarded funding, and why those firms who applied were not awarded funds)? If there are data available for unsuccessful applicants, for which programs were awards made on a first-come, first-served basis as an award criteria, and could firms be identified who were otherwise qualified, but applied too late to receive assistance? In addition, if there are data available for unsuccessful applicants, for which programs were awards made on some sort of numerical scoring system with a cut-off, and would information be available for the numerical score of both successful and unsuccessful applicants? A7) Records of who and when applied for funding can be shared if available. Awards are made on a competitive basis with a numerical scoring system. If the numerical scoring for applicants is available that data can be shared. Q8) Within the bullet points in Appendix A, there appears to be a combination of subprograms and organizations involved in executing on programs. Are you looking for an individual analysis of the subprograms? And/or, are you looking for an analysis of those who operated the programs (for example, Ann Arbor Spark, Automation Alley, and so forth)? A8) Some are programs run by incubators (example Pre-seed 1.0 by Ann Arbor Spark). Others are actual incubators (Ann Arbor SPARK, Automation Alley, etc.). Both programs (individually analyzed) and incubators (individually analyzed) are part of the overall analysis. Q9) Has any analysis/analyses been done to date on the entrepreneurship and innovation program? If so, who completed the analysis or analyses? A9) Battelle / TEConomy Q10) Will a steering committee of MEDC staff be formed for the project? Who will serve as the point of contact? A10) This is still under consideration by the MEDC. Q11) How will the MEDC score financial stability of the firm? A11) Primarily length of time in business. Q12) What is the estimated start date for the project? When should all work be completed? A12) When the required data to start the study is available. Work completed 3-6 months later. Q13) How should the analysis organize the information by geography? Is a statewide analysis all that is needed? Will it need to be broken out by Michigan s 10 Collaborative Development Regions ( A13) Not by geography but by program. Some programs are statewide and others are regional. Q14) Are there any particular fiscal impacts that need to be evaluated?

5 A14) Total follow-on funding (private and public) jobs created, companies created, direct and indirect impact (secondary and tertiary impact). Fiscal impact to the state in terms of tax dollars generated from direct and indirect jobs created so that an ROI can be calculated Q15) Can you please provide a list of all Entrepreneurship and Innovation (EI) Programs that must be analyzed? Also, what is the total number of firms EI Programs assist each year and for the entire ten-year study period (separated by program)? A15) MEDC will provice more detailed information on each program and/or grantee to the successful bidder. Q16) Should the contractor estimate the sum of increases in Michigan per capita earnings, property values, and fiscal benefits for each program over the last ten years or for a different time period? A16) 10 years if the data allows it. Q17) Does the MEDC require the identification of non-direct economic impacts, or should the analysis focus solely on direct program outcomes? Relatedly, has the MEDC established effectiveness measures for the EI Programs beyond the economic and fiscal impact measures detailed in the RFP? A17) Both non-direct and direct program outcomes. Program outcomes could include other non-direct economic impacts, especially if they are consistent with how these programs are measured or evaluated nationally. Current analysis includes: $$ Leveraged = Match received because of MEDC grant New Companies created Companies Expanded Company s Served-Tech Companies Served - Traditional Jobs created Jobs retained MEDC Funds received SBIR/STTR, other Fed funds received Venture Capital Angel Funds received Bank / Loan received Owner investment received New Sales Other funding received Contractors Q18) Regarding the forward-looking analysis, should the contractor assume that there will be no change in how the programs are deployed over the next 5-10 years? A18) In the assumption yes. In reality the evaluation results most likely will result in changes in the programs in the future.

6 Q19) What types of recipient-provided data on outcomes by program will the MEDC (or other agencies) provide to the contractor? This could include data on firm location; industries within which firms operate; and reported growth in firm-level employment, payroll, sales, etc. Relatedly, is this information available for the entire ten-year study period? A19) The MEDC does not have this data. We will have to reach out to our service providers and companies that have received services to obtain this data if needed. Q20) Are staff members from the MEDC available to administer survey instruments or otherwise provide data collection support? A20) Yes. Entrepreneurial team can assist with reasonable requests. Q21) Is resolution at the state level sufficient or does the MEDC desire sub-state level results and reporting? A21) See answer #13. Q22) What will the duration of the contract be that is, within what timeframe must the contractor complete the analysis? A22) 6 month analysis time after the data is collected and reported out. Q23) What budget is available for this analysis? A23) The budget will be determined based on bids received.