MOSA and IP: Key Legal Considerations for Contractors

/in /by

The Modular Open Systems Approach (MOSA) framework represents a shift from traditional procurement processes, particularly in how intellectual property (IP) and data rights are handled. MOSA allows for greater flexibility in design and procurement, emphasizing modularity, open architecture, and adaptability while still considering the protection of proprietary technologies. 

 

Data Rights and Intellectual Property: 

  • Contractors must carefully consider how to protect their intellectual property (IP) when entering into MOSA-related contracts. For both hardware and software offerings, it’s crucial to balance the open architecture requirements of MOSA with the need to safeguard proprietary code and design. 
  • Contractors can negotiate data rights to retain control over certain parts of their IP, particularly when dealing with critical technologies. This may involve ensuring that government agencies have access to necessary data and software interfaces without giving up the core intellectual property. 

 

Negotiation Strategy: 

  • Focus on Key Interests: Organizations should identify which aspects of the contract—such as data rights, ownership, or specific technical innovations—are most critical to their business strategy and future competitiveness. 
  • Negotiate Early: It is important to engage in negotiations as early as possible in the procurement process to set the terms in favor of protecting valuable technologies. 
  • Push Back on Terms: Companies can push back on contract clauses that may negatively impact their competitive edge or critical technologies. This can involve negotiating more favorable data rights or IP clauses. 

 

Challenges of MOSA: 

  • One of the challenges in MOSA-related agreements is the impact of changes made to the contract later in the negotiation process. These changes may affect the underlying design and architecture of the product, resulting in a derivative effect and the need to change other parts of the structure. It’s essential that contractors address critical points early in the process to prevent delays and redesigns. 

 

MOSA Applies to Software, too: 

  • MOSA requires that contractors meet certain open architecture standards, especially when dealing with software. While this fosters flexibility and collaboration with the government and other contractors, it also means that companies need to define the boundaries of their IP and how it will be used within the open system. 
  • Contractors should ensure that any shared software modules or interfaces are properly protected, while also ensuring compliance with MOSA’s open architecture guidelines. 

 

MOSA Preparedness: 

  • Data Rights Management: As a prime contractor, ensuring the negotiation of proper data rights with subcontractors is critical. This includes clarifying the use of data and ensuring that no rights to key technologies are lost during the modularization process. 
  • Balance Openness with Protection: The key to successful MOSA implementation is balancing openness for system integration with the protection of proprietary technologies. Contractors should be vigilant in ensuring that the architecture remains flexible for future upgrades and integrations, while safeguarding their core technology. 

 

Collaboration Between Contractors and the Government: 

  • Effective communication and collaboration are key to creating a fair balance between openness and protecting proprietary technologies. Contractors and the government need to work together to develop clear and mutually beneficial terms that allow for flexibility without compromising on security or competitive advantage. 

 

In conclusion, navigating the legal complexities of MOSA requires a proactive approach to negotiation, an understanding of data rights and IP implications, and strategic management of design changes during development. By negotiating the right terms upfront, contractors can ensure they maintain control over critical technologies and are well-positioned to meet the demands of modular and open system architectures. 

 

govmates MOSA Institute Recap – November 12, 2024

/in /by

The govmates MOSA (Modular Open Systems Approach) Institute presented by ATI, convened on November 12, 2024, for a half-day educational session at the LMI venue, welcoming over 120 attendees. The event offered an in-depth exploration of MOSA, providing guidance to industry stakeholders on navigating this transformative procurement model. Participants represented a diverse mix of non-traditional companies, mid-tier organizations, primes, and integrators, reflecting strong industry interest in MOSA implementation. 

 

Key Highlights and Topics: 

  1. Fireside Chat: Christina Brantley (OSD (A&S)) and Paul Dudley (ATI) discussed the implementation of the Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft (FLRAA) program through the AMTC framework during Christina’s tenure as the CDRR. This conversation shed light on practical MOSA execution strategies and the collaboration required for success.
     
  1. MOSA Roadmap Presentation: Nadine Geier, Director of Systems Engineering at OUSD (R&E), provided an insightful presentation detailing the MOSA roadmap. Her talk emphasized the critical pathways for industry to align with government MOSA objectives.
     
  1. Panel on MOSA Requirements Definition: A panel discussion moderated by Rosemary Kramer of LMI featuring representatives from the office of Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army (Data, Engineering & Software), Defense Acquisition University, Parry Labs, and Booz Allen Hamilton offered invaluable insights into the MOSA requirements definition process. Attendees gained a clearer understanding of how this process differs from traditional procurement methods and how to participate effectively.
     
  1. Legal Considerations of MOSA: A legal panel emphasized the importance of intellectual property (IP) management in MOSA contracts. Panelists including representatives from Bell Textron, C3.AI and PilieroMazza advised industry participants to negotiate strategically and identify critical IP elements to retain throughout the project lifecycle.
     
  1. Real-Time Case Study: Moderated by John Stough, this session showcased industry leaders from companies including Avilution, Galois, Parry Labs, and Northrop Grumman, sharing their experiences with MOSA-related work. The panel highlighted best practices and strategies for successful MOSA implementation.
     

Key Takeaways: 

  • Enterprise-Level MOSA Implementation: Industry attendees expressed strong interest in seeing MOSA adopted as a business model at the enterprise level. They highlighted the importance of broader access to services to achieve return on investment. 
  • Clarity and Commitment from the Government: A consistent theme was the need for clear and committed government support for MOSA, enabling industry to forecast and plan investments more effectively.
     

This event marked a pivotal step forward in bridging the gap between government and industry in MOSA implementation. The insights and connections forged during this institute will undoubtedly shape the trajectory of modular, open systems in defense procurement. 

MOSA – What Does the Industry Really Want

/in /by

A commercial sector approach to acquisition of major defense systems and platforms qualitatively garners support across government and industry. The desire for increased innovation, competition and speed are (generally) criteria embraced by the Defense ecosystem. However, the introduction and inclusion of MOSA as a business model categorically brings to light its variance from the traditional defense prime model.  

To be clear, the traditional Defense Industrial Base and its corresponding business model has evolved as a derivative of its customer: the US Federal Government. Based upon acquisition and procurement structures put in place over the latter half of the twentieth century, the Department of Defense has purchased products and services from industry. They have done this purchasing in a manner that has created a customized ecosystem of businesses with attributes (some costly, cumbersome, and extremely nuanced) that are unique to a singular customer’s needs.  

In this monopsony, aspects like contractual limitations on profit margins and preference for cost-plus pricing have resulted in a business model in which there is increasing reliance on the sustainment phase to generate a substantial portion of its revenue. The security of revenue afforded by this tranche of the platform’s lifecycle provides visibility that is needed when justifying the initial investment in said platform.  

As the Department of Defense pivots its acquisition strategy to embrace MOSA, there are requisites for Industry to be a successful partner to the Mission. If the model is to be changed, then Industry – the collective ecosystem of companies in the Defense Industrial Base – needs to have a voice in how change transpires.  

Government commitment to MOSA 

As a fundamental shift in acquisition approach, industry needs a commitment from government to maintain MOSA standards and adhere to the model for the duration of a program or platform’s lifecycle. While this seems rudimentary, clearly defined variables are required as many in Industry must tweak their formula to calculate return on investment.   

Visibility is key  

Visibility is needed to prioritize resources and plan investments. The establishment of roadmaps for the development of future programs is critical, providing industry the needed inputs to plan resources and make informed bid/no-bid decisions.  Roadmaps also demonstrate the government’s long-term commitment to MOSA.  The existing industry-government working groups (such as MOSWG) are valuable to fostering regular communication and information sharing and represent a model for other DoD organizations looking to implement MOSA.  

MOSA should be implemented at enterprise-level  

For industry, one of the incentives for MOSA implementation is to expand market opportunities across systems and programs, opening the door to new prospective customers. For this to transpire, MOSA needs to be implemented at an enterprise level across the Department of Defense. While Army is most prominent in utilizing MOSA, the participation of other DoD entities at scale would offer industry more revenue-generating opportunities.  

Intellectual Property – enough said.  

A by-product of increased modularity and openness of data is enabling competitor and “frenemy” access to a company’s intellectual property. Discussions with government and industry have evolved – often in working groups – to define which portions of IP can be retained, and what is truly necessary to access.  Allowing industry to retain below-interface IP encourages continued investment and provides a more welcome environment for non-traditional vendors.  

Software licensing commercial best-practices  

It’s not just about hardware. MOSA also applies to software. Let’s apply what has been successful in the commercial sector via software licensing to allow the government to procure the most innovative solutions in a way that is compatible with industry business models.  

Integration rulebook is needed 

How modular is too modular?  When systems are broken down to the sub-component level, the need for increased levels of integrations is introduced to the platform.  Who (or what) bears fault when something goes wrong as a result of interoperability issues vs the failure of one single module?  

In a free market economy, industry will always follow financial opportunity. As a new method of procurement (rather, a new-to-DoD method) is embraced by the government, industry will augment existing business models to enable continue support of the mission while generating return on investment.  It’s the American way.  

What is Modular Open Systems Approach (MOSA)?

/in /by

What exactly is MOSA? Modular Open Systems Approach is defined as a technical and business strategy for designing modularized, adaptable systems.  For those of us in the DoD community, this was codified into law in 2019 via Title 10 U.S.C. 4401(b) – stating that all major defense acquisition programs are required to be designed and developed (to the extent practicable) utilizing MOSA.

In layman’s speak, it represents DoD taking a stance that it desires a standardized, transparent approach to building major systems – from aircraft to ground vehicles to training systems and beyond.  It can be applied to hardware (widgets, components, parts, etc.) or software (systems, platforms, applications, etc.).  This approach affords DoD more supply chain visibility, builds the Defense Industrial Base, fosters more competitive solutions at both the program and component level and opens the door to further collaboration between industry and government.

MOSA also serves as the response to the rapidly increasing pace at which technology evolves and changes. In complex environments, an agile, modular approach to implementing subsystems achieves speed when it is needed most. The cessation of an advanced weapons system or avionics platform that costs billions of dollars to design, build and maintain is a scenario to be avoided at all costs. Rapid solutioning becomes a reality with MOSA, enabling shorter lead times with life cycle replacements.

In addition, for the DoD, the ability to gain full transparency into suppliers and solutions has become a national security issue.  Modularity in design allows for more incremental additions, substitutions or replacements over the life cycle of the system/platform while benefiting from enhanced innovation and competition in these product offerings.  While vendors of various parts and components have long been a part of OEM supply chains, MOSA introduces a new level of interoperability and fungibility for any one piece that makes up these critical subsystem technologies. MOSA also combats obsolescence issues and supply chain shortages.

From a standardization and scalability perspective, one can draw logical rationale for MOSA.   But where does that leave us with technical data rights for both government and industry?  How do major OEMs protect the intellectual property related to the aircraft they built because of their investment of billions of R&D dollars? How do small businesses and non-traditional defense contractors build subsystems to MOSA requirements and maintain a competitive offering amid increased levels of transparency and data sharing?  While the case for government to embrace MOSA is evident, industry’s adaptation of this paradigm will be driven by a combination of market forces, mission requirements and shareholder priorities.

And then, there’s price.  At what price can MOSA be achieved across DoD?  If speed, transparency and national security are key deciding factors in this acquisition process, then how do long-term life cycle costs come into consideration?  If MOSA requires primes and OEMs to relinquish a certain level of data rights and control, do they simply pass through their IR&D and architecture-related investment to the government?  MOSA entails a different financial model, one that industry (both OEMs and their vendors) are still adapting to and learning.

The Office of Secretary of Defense (OSD) continues to promote the development of MOSA enabling standards as they “are essential to the ability to rapidly share information across domains, with quick and affordable updates or improvements to both hardware and software components.”  A framework and guidance for program management related to MOSA is provided by the Defense Standardization Program (DSP), with the primary emphasis – at present – focused on identification and distribution of MOSA enabling standards.

Over the coming months, we’ll dive more into MOSA and its impact within government and industry, including case studies, business model adaptations, intellectual property implications and more. The desired end goals of increased interoperability, speed, and incremental transparency are ones in which the Defense Industrial Base will need to embrace in order to successfully sustain their support of the mission.

AI | The Wild West – govmates Institute Recap

/in /by

The govmates Institute was back in full force with AI: The Wild West taking place on July 23 in Tyson’s Corner.  Hosted by LMI, the event featured AI experts and SMEs from industry including Oliver Sadorra of Dark Wolf Solutions, Sean Doherty of GovDash, Eric Blatt and Brian Detwiler of Scale LLP, and Doug Black of Deep Water Point & Associates.

AI: The Wild West was geared towards demystifying AI for federal contractors, taking a pragmatic approach to artificial intelligence, and determining how it can be applied to daily corporate life to streamline operations, lessen the burden of proposal-writing and – most importantly – support existing customers’ needs to grow additional sources of revenue.

Session 1: AI and Government Use Cases as told by Industry . “If you climb in the saddle, be ready for the ride.”  Our first session covered buying trends in AI as they pertain to the federal government, and how the customer has evolved to purchase products and capabilities vs expertise. As commercial solutions continue to prove value for the federal government, we’re seeing an increasing appetite for AI adoption, both in terms of scope and speed, across DoD and FedCiv customers. Inevitably, this affects a company’s go-to-market strategy depending on the existing customer base and ability to monetize existing relationships. Often education of the government customer is a critical component, with many facing challenges comprehending the benefits and limitations of AI in their office.

Contract vehicles – from OTAs to SBIRs to the Tradewinds marketplace – are all options that can be leveraged to engage the government customer. Most importantly, teaming with other government contractors who have existing vehicles, socio economic set-asides and customers is a great way to quickly get on contract.

Session 2: AI and Acquisition from Industry Perspective “Courage is being scared to death but saddling up anyway.”  During the second session we discussed incorporating AI into our proposal writing process.  Given the abundance of tools available in the marketplace, often government contractors struggle with determining which option is best for their business.   (Choose a tool that specializes in Federal government contract proposal-writing, to start).  We also discussed maximizing the use of AI in processes, and when to incorporate the human element.  The role of orals in future procurements will definitely prove to be a differentiating factor when selecting winning proposals.

Session 3: Legal Considerations: Protecting IP and more “You can take the boy out of the country…”  In the third session, we discussed all things legal. We discussed the most common legal issues that arise when selling AI to the government. For companies developing the AI tools, protecting the technology and licensing-based business models are top of mind – data rights management, assertions of commerciality, and the content of commercial software licenses to start. Also covered was the reseller/integrator relationship and general legal issues to be concerned with in these arrangements, commercial software license terms that the government is likely to reject, authorization to train machine learning models and AI clauses showing up in government contracts and solicitations.

Session 4: Utilizing AI to Streamline your operations. “Take the bull by the horns”  The final session focused on integrating AI into daily corporate operations, to include contract management, human resources and more. Also of discussion included legal considerations around AI-generated content and data security, transparency and ethics related to government consumption of AI and third-party liability in multiple use case scenarios.

Thank you to LMI and our sponsors for making the event happen. We look forward to the next govmates Institute on Modular Open Systems Approach (MOSA) in November.

Matchmaking at SOF Week 2024

/in /by

On May 8, 2024, govmates held a matchmaking event at SOF Week that brought together a dynamic mix of traditional defense contractors and innovative small and non-traditional businesses, creating a landscape ripe for innovation and partnership. Held in Tampa, Florida during the annual Special Operation Forces conference, the event saw participation from 19 Buyers and 150 Sellers, leading to over 150 meetings within just two hours. 

 

A Convergence of Cutting-Edge Capabilities 

The matchmaking event was a hive of activity as companies met to discuss an array of advanced capabilities. These capabilities are at the forefront of technology and critical to the future of the special operations community: 

Artificial Intelligence (AI): Companies showcased the latest in AI, including machine learning, predictive analytics, and autonomous systems designed to enhance decision-making and operational efficiency. 

Electrical Engineering: Discussions revolved around innovative electrical systems, from advanced circuitry to power management solutions, aiming to improve performance and reliability. 

Advanced Manufacturing: Participants highlighted state-of-the-art manufacturing techniques such as 3D printing, precision engineering, and new material applications, promising to revolutionize production processes. 

C5ISR: Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Combat Systems, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance capabilities were in demand, with integrated solutions for superior situational awareness and mission effectiveness. 

Enterprise IT: Robust IT infrastructures, cybersecurity measures, and cloud-based solutions were discussed to meet the growing demands of enterprise-level operations. 

Modeling and Simulation: Companies presented sophisticated simulation technologies, including virtual and augmented reality applications, essential for training, planning, and operational readiness. 

 

Focused Matchmaking 

The structured matchmaking format allowed for over 150 meetings in just two hours, providing a unique platform for Sellers to present their capabilities and for Buyers to find solutions tailored to their specific needs. Following the matchmaking sessions, participants were able to head outside for SOF Week’s beloved Capabilities Demonstration. 

The govmates matchmaking event at SOF Week exemplified the power of collaboration and the importance of bringing together diverse expertise to tackle complex challenges. The event not only facilitated meaningful connections but also underscored the critical role of technology in enhancing defense and intelligence operations. As attendees left the venue, there was a palpable sense of excitement and optimism about the future possibilities that these new partnerships and technologies could unlock. The success of this event is a testament to the collaborative spirit and innovative drive of all participants. We look forward to seeing the developments and breakthroughs that will undoubtedly arise from the connections made at this year’s govmates matchmaking event. 

Special Air Warfare Symposium Matchmaking

/in /by
-As shared by Katie Bilek

For those who work in the special operations community, Global SOF Foundation‘s annual Special Air Warfare Symposium (SAWS), co-sponsored by U.S. Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) in Fort Walton Beach, FL, is a can’t-miss event.

I recall my first SAWS event in February 2022. The Russian invasion of Ukraine had just commenced, and the tone of the event was markedly intentional and forward-leaning. Attendees included representatives from government and industry, both US and foreign allied partners. Unsurprisingly, the symposium topics revolved around the future of air warfare for the aviation-focused SOF.

With each passing year, the geopolitical landscape has evolved, and attendance has grown. Yet the emphasis on envisioning the future of air combat continues to permeate SAWS.  At govmates, we’re grateful for the opportunity to host matchmaking sessions at SAWS each year – facilitating 1:1 sessions between industry and government.

During SAWS Matchmaking 2024, govmates facilitated over 150 1:1 sessions for participants, including multiple divisions with AFSOC, SOCOM and for allied and partner nations. Large defense prime and systems integrators also participated, including Boeing, Aurora Flight Sciences, American Systems, Honeywell, Huntington Ingalls Industries, and more.

Requirements requested by the buyer organizations included intelligence analysis, intelligence operations, intelligence support, C5ISR, ISR integration, ISR operations; communications, Electronic Warfare, Navigation, Networks, UAV, UAS, Air Mobility, data links, CBM; Counter-UAS, C2/C4ISR, and tactical radios; Engineering, Fabrication, 3D Metal Printing, 5-axis CNC Machining; Training; modeling and simulation; loitering munitions, and more.

If you missed SAWS Matchmaking in Fort Walton Beach, then be sure to join us for SOF Week Matchmaking in Tampa on May 8.

For the Love of GovCon

/in /by

It’s the season of love, or so we’ve been programmed to believe by the corporate folks over at Hallmark.  But we embrace the season…because having Feb be only about Groundhog Day just isn’t doing it for us.

As we reflect on love, the question is what do we love about GovCon?

There are a million reasons to hate GovCon or despise it.  But rarely do we speak about how the industry is much like a finicky lover, with many contradictions, and many quirks, but dang, we just can’t quit them.

It’s a study of opposites. GovCon has many contradictions where two opposite things are true at the same time.  It’s a hard lover to put up with, but the rewards are great.

  1. Frenemies.Very few can go it alone here in the federal contracting world.  So, they partner with their competition for the greater good (i.e. winning).  Some companies go through teaming partners faster than they go through clean underwear.  Others have marriages of convenience with several select partners that they stay true to.  Whatever the strategy, it’s inevitable that you will eventually partner with a company on one bid and go against them as competition on another.  We are an incestuous industry, and we don’t care who judges us for it.
  1. Documentation.Rarely has an industry had all its dirty business published for the world to see…by law!  RFPs are available for the public to review, POCs are available, spend plans for the next 5 years for an agency, and priorities are briefed in overly reviewed, watered-down PowerPoint briefs.  GSA schedules yield competition rates (never to be trusted, but it’s a starting point).  Contractors report their 5-year revenue averages, their headcount, their past performance, and their capabilities (usually a nice 1-page summary…i.e. the infamous cap statement or dating profile).  There is data on top of data on top of data, all for the ready.But alas, the other side of the coin.  You must shift through all the data and read between the lines.  What isn’t published, what isn’t obvious.  The pros can shred a proposal in hours and determine if they should go after it.  The pricing folks can do rate buildups on the competition.  The capture managers can find money to pursue in 3 years.  It’s a science and an art and no one nails it 100% of the time.  But the good ones come close.  They read the dating website and find the cray-cray with anger issues.  They find the lovable folks and can decipher between the two.  Companies that excel know not to play with those customers who are high on the hot-crazy scale, no matter what the funding.
  1. NewbiesOne area the US Government does a decent job of is providing resources and help to the newly established companies.  The govt wants new blood in our industry. They offer excellent free resources and how-to’s with their Apex programs, the SBA website, etc.  There are accelerators to join, free webinars to attend, and conferences designed for newbies.  They publish their needs for all the world to see.  They invite you to respond.  They even tell you how to respond and what will make them happy, what makes them purr.Yet every company has the age-old problem of needing past performance to obtain new contracts.  And how does one get past performance when they are newly established?  Whelp, welcome newbie, as here is the harshest contradiction of them all.  We want to support you, but not until you’ve been in business a few years, had some success, and proven that you aren’t just a guy/gal in their basement making stuff up.  It’s the easiest industry to get into, yet one of the hardest to earn revenue from.  18+ month sales cycles, good old boy/gal network, lack of exposure to govies with money, much less money and contracting opportunities.  There are a million reasons why the defense industrial base is shrinking.  Much like Tinder, the government makes it easy to swipe, but so hard to find anything of substance.
  1. Sweet Marriage.The US government spends more money than any other consumer in the world.  The contracts can be long (5, 10, even 10+ years).  The government wants a long-term relationship.  It wants to be married. It wants stability.  It wants the industry to stay monogamous, play by the rules (FAR), and get to know it intimately.  In exchange for this commitment, the govt is willing to let large contracts, worth billions of dollars.But know your place in the relationship.  The minute you get crazy, the minute you start playing loose and fast with the rules, the performance, the timesheets, the profit margins, your marriage can come crashing down.  It starts with earlier-than-expected than expected recompetes, negative CPARs, and the cold shoulder from the govt PM.  Divorce papers are often issued in the form of a T for C.  You get too crazy, and the restraining order comes as a debarment.  This relationship is dead.  You are past marriage counseling, past the point of no return.

GovCon is the cruelest mistress of them all, but we all know, we can’t quit them.

BARDA OTA Programs to Lead Development of Future National Health Security Countermeasures

/in /by

As we emerge from a global pandemic, it is imperative to ensure we are well-equipped for the next one. With a renewed prioritization on preparedness and response, the last few years of medical advancement have demonstrated the need for existing, established partnerships to rapidly scale and execute when a public health emergency transpires.

As COVID-19 progressed, Operation Warp Speed (OWS) leveraged existing acquisition authorities – most notably Other Transaction Authority (OTA) – that enabled government and industry to collaborate and respond quickly to a global health crisis.   Through JPEO-CBRND’s Medical CBRN Defense Consortium (CWMD), the government was able to rapidly contract with industry for the development of vaccines, personal protective equipment, therapeutics and more.

Over the last few months, BARDA has launched two separate programs designed specifically to aid in the development of medical countermeasures with an emphasis on national health security, and the establishment of a manufacturing and industrial base for medical countermeasures. Both programs take the form of a government-sponsored OTA Consortium, a collaborative model where industry, academia and non-profit partners across the supply chain are able to join purpose-built ecosystems and bid on opportunities that are competed through these vehicles.

The Rapid Response Partnership Vehicle (RRPV) focuses on the “acceleration of products and technology development, regulatory approval, commercialization, and sustainment” and has already its first solicitation for the implementation of novel solutions to cGMP manufacturing hurdles and enablement of clinical trials for the next generation of COVID vaccines.

The Biopharmaceutical Manufacturing Preparedness Consortium (BioMaP) features a 10-year agreement to expand the drug and vaccine manufacturing base in support of public health crises.  This includes manufacturers and suppliers of materials, drug substance manufacturing suppliers and fill finish services, and innovative manufacturing firms.  The first of many requirements has been released for the production of biologically derived small molecule regulatory starting materials.

Both RRPV and BioMaP consortia are managed by Advanced Technology International (ATI), a non-profit organization with the most experience as a consortium management firm in supporting US government-sponsored OTA consortia.  For more information about these consortia and how to get involved, please visit rrpv.org and biomap-consortium.org.

*Information and solicitations referenced were current at the time this article was written (01/2024)

The R&D Capital Conversation – 2023

/in /by

Capital is the conduit by which small businesses survive.  The small business lending market in the US is estimated at $1.4 trillion with thousands of organizations relying upon outside capital for funding operations.  However, for many innovators in our ecosystem, their time is spent building and developing mission critical technologies, not financial models.

As the nation’s leader in R&D collaboration management, Advanced Technology International (ATI) has partnered with govmates to facilitate a series of discussions featuring financial institutions, investors, and advisors on the role of capital and financial tools for the emerging R&D community.

At the annual Defense TechConnect Conference, we hosted a series of educational sessions providing a foundational overview of capital structure and financial products that are most useful to small businesses in the R&D community.

The first presentation, delivered by Sharon Heaton of SBLiftOff, provided an overview of capital structure along with financial products across the debt and equity spectrum, including SBA products, conventional banking products (lines of credit), asset-based lending, receivables financing, mezzanine loans, and equity financing (venture, private and angel).

The second session featured a panel discussion with experts from the financial services industry covering capital solutions for every stage of a business’ lifecycle.  From the start-up phase to growth and mobilization, to eventual maturation, we spoke with Mustafa Nasseh of JP Morgan Chase, Matt Stavish of Republic Capital Access, and Glenn Noble of Prudent Capital on financial products that apply in every scenario.

The final session featured industry experts for a discussion on preparing a small business for the capital raising process.  Topics covered included key items for preparation, market timing, financial management, audits, success stories, and past examples of mistakes (no attribution, of course!).  Experts included Barry Rieger of Aprio, Ricky White of Cherry Bekaert, and Sharon Heaton of SBLiftOff.

Need more capital content? Reach out to Katie Bilek at katie@govmates.com for more information and 2024 programming.