|
Project Completed: 1998
NOTE:
This project has been renewed for an additional
5 years as the RERC on Technology
Transfer.
The Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on Technology Evaluation and
Transfer(RERC-TET) was one of sixteen RERCs funded by the USDE's National
Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research. The RERC-TET was a consumer-directed
partnership, advancing to market new or improved assistive devices through its business
partner AZtech Inc. The RERC-TET evaluated
prototype assistive devices and helped inventors commercialize promising devices. The
RERC-TET also contracted to provide market evaluations to companies, laboratories and
agencies on a Fee basis.
The RERC-TET partnership included the Center for Assistive
Technology, the Independent Living Center of
Western New York (WNYILC), AZtech Inc., a not-for-profit, community based partnership
directed by and for persons with disabilities.
Background
In 1982, the Office of Technology Assessment identified a need for a single
organization capable of finding, evaluating and commercializing products for people with
disabilities. In 1992, the National
Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, U.S. Department of Education
announced a priority for a Rehabilitation Engineering Research Center on assistive
technology evaluation and transfer. This RERC was tasked with integrating technical
information from the research community, with consumer opinions from the end-user
community. This RERC was also tasked with organizing its program's in a manner capable of
working toward self-sufficiency over time.
In 1993, the Center for Assistive Technology, University
at Buffalo proposed a program for evaluation and transfer. The program would involve
an iterative process of evaluation and development, where an invention/product would
receive increasing investment as it progressed toward the commercial marketplace. The RERC
would also integrate not only technical and consumer input, but marketing input from the
private sector as well. Finally, the program would establish a consumer-directed
corporation which would accrue resources for future operations.
[ Top of Page ]
Overview
The resulting organization's activity was summarized in its mission statement:
"The RERC on Technology Evaluation and Transfer is a consumer-directed partnership,
advancing to market, new or improved assistive devices, through its business partner
AZtech Inc." Understanding the RERC-TET is as simple as one, two, three... and four.
One Process. The RERC-TET identifies opportunities, evaluates those
opportunities and then transfers those with potential through appropriate channels.
- Opportunities are identified through two sources. Technology supply push opportunities
are new technologies or new applications of technologies that are searching for
application in the field of assistive technology. Consumer demand pull opportunities are
unmet needs identified by end-users in search of a technology to meet the need.
- Evaluating opportunities involves screening out those that reinvent existing solutions,
those that compete with existing products, and those not appropriate for the field of
assistive technology. Remaining opportunities are assessed to determine their potential
value to end-users, their potential value as new products, and the presence of
intellectual property worthy of protection. The evaluation also includes conducting
additional research and development, through the original developer, through the RERC or
through another participating research center or company.
- Transferring opportunities may involve licensing or selling a product to a company,
providing program services to support additional development, or disseminating information
on the opportunity through papers or presentations.
Two Missions. The RERC-TET's mandates required that it fulfill
obligations that satisfy two complimentary missions: a social mission and a business
mission.
- The social mission fulfills the traditional mandate of a federally funded research
center. The RERC established the program's credibility so the public was comfortable
sharing proprietary information about inventions and new technology. As a public service
the RERC reviewed all submissions regardless of the source, provided useful referrals for
products that didn't pass our screens and provided evaluations for those that did. The
RERC integrated end-users and other consumers in the evaluation and development of
products, disseminated information to the research community, and partnered with agencies
from the private, public and not-for-profit sectors.
- The business mission related to the program's mandate of self-sufficiency. The RERC
established a corporate identity through AZtech Inc.. AZtech Inc., in turn, represented
inventors and companies in the licensing of products for commercialization, in the
protection of intellectual property where appropriate, and in the sale of market
evaluation services to companies and government agencies. In all cases, AZtech Inc. is
positioned to share in the royalties generated by licenses and in revenues generated by
sales, services and investments made on the RERC-TET's behalf.
Three Partners. The RERC-TET operated through three partner agencies,
representing interests and expertise in research, business and end use.
- The research partner was the Center for Assistive Technology,
University at Buffalo. The CAT employed the RERC's technical team with a core staff of
engineers, technicians, designers and fabricators. Additional CAT personnel with expertise
in various disciplines and technology applications participated as needed.
- The business partner, AZtech Inc. , employed
the marketing team which was responsible for product commercialization, marketing
evaluation services and business development assistance. AZtech Inc. was the liaison to
business and industry, participating in trade associations and product shows for the
industry.
- The consumer partner was the Independent
Living Center of Western New York Inc., which employed the team of people with
disabilities. The consumer team was responsible for recruiting and accommodating people
with disabilities for product review panels, focus groups, survey research and product
field testing. The consumer team administered this work locally and nationally through a
network of fourteen testing sites.
Four Programs. The RERC-TET's three partners applied its one
process to operate four programs: 1) Invention solicitation and evaluation;
2) Device development and transfer; 3) Consumer
ideal products; 4) Market evaluations. Collectively the four programs supported
the two missions.
- The invention solicitation and evaluation program was a unique national resource
supporting the social mission. It was the only program in the national ready and able to
evaluate any invention in terms of its potential application to the needs of people with
disabilities. Every year the program received about one thousand inquiries, screened about
three hundred contacts, and evaluated one hundred devices. The invention program responded to over four thousand telephone, mail
and e-mail inquiries from the U.S. and thirteen other countries. Many
of those inquiries were information requests or people with ideas for
devices. over four hundred inventors submitted devices for evaluation,
of which the majority were eliminated due to RERC-TET's ability to screen
products that already had a competing product in the market, or by identifying
products that were either unsafe or technically not feasible. AZtech,
Inc. has assumed responsibility for the on-going invention evaluation
program. It is now called the Innovations Program.
- The device development and transfer program supported the technology supply push model,
because it worked to commercialize new inventions or technologies. We annually offered
about twenty inventions for commercialization based on the potential assessed through the
invention evaluation program. Some of these inventions needed further development, while
others required investment of capital or expertise to support the corporate partners.
About five devices were licensed or otherwise commercialized per year.At present, we have twenty-one devices licensed to manufacturers or distributors, four
devices in final negotiation with manufacturers, and one patent pending. The original grant
expected to generate five promising devices per year, but to meet this goal the program
eventually had to intake and screen twice as many devices as originally expected (100 versus
50 per year). Twelve other devices are still under review by manufacturers under AZtech Inc.'s
responsibility.
- The consumer ideal product program supported the user demand
pull model, because it identified unmet end-user needs and works to satisfy them. This program
accessed consumer input to define the ideal product, benchmarked existing products against the
ideal and developed product evaluation checklists for consumers making purchase decisions. A
similar program was useful for identifying functional deficiencies in current products, and
translating those deficiencies into technical specifications.The Consumer Ideal Product program started with a small number of
products in need of improvement, as identified by a national survey of State Tech Act
programs. We developed and implemented the methods and instruments needed for a national
sample of experienced device users to define the ideal product. Those results led to
descriptions of ideal products, comparisons of existing products, and checklists for
consumers to use when shopping for assistive devices, for battery chargers, wheelchair
tie-downs, and van lifts.
- The market evaluation program addressed the business mission of AZtech's
self-sufficiency. Our process and resources were available for evaluation, transfer and
commercialization assistance on a contract basis. This program doubled revenues each year
and concurrently secured contracts with progressively larger organizations. These trends
indicate that we were both providing a useful service and making progress toward the goal
of self-sufficiency.AZtech Inc. is now an established company within the private
sector, contributing regular columns to trade magazines, presenting seminars at industry
trade shows, and negotiating contract-based work with companies, government agencies and
entrepreneurs. The market evaluation program is generating the majority of revenues in the
near term. The demand for these services continues to grow. The market evaluation revenue
is supplemented by the licensing royalties, which are now starting to flow from products
in the marketplace. In addition to generating income for AZtech Inc., the program is
promoting the concept of consumer involvement in product definition, development, testing
and marketing-a core mission of the RERC-TET.
In summary, the RERC-TET partnership was a broker for marketplace transactions through
its multiple capabilities:
- Consumer evaluation of concepts, prototypes and products;
- Technical research and development on the functional utility of product design;
- Market analysis of innovations, spin-off and spin-on opportunities;
- Integrating consumer, technical and marketing attributes for new or improved assistive
technology products.
[ Top of Page ]
Links:
[ Top of Page ]
RERC-TET Publications
Books
Mann, W.C. & Lane, J.P. Editors (1995). Assistive technology for persons with
disabilities. (2nd edition). American Occupational Therapy Association:
Rockville, MD.
[ Top of Page ]
Journal Articles
Bauer, S.M., Lane, J.P., Stone, V.I., & Unnikrishnan, N. (1998). The Voice of the
Customer-Part 2: Benchmarking Battery Chargers Against the Consumer's Ideal Product. Assistive
Technology, 10(1) 51-60.
Cushman, L.A. & Scherer, M.J. (1996). Measuring the relationship of assistive
technology use, functional status over time, and consumer-therapist perceptions of ATs. Assistive
Technology, 8(2), 103-109.
Keefe, B., Scherer, M.J., & McKee, B.G. (1996). Mainepoint: Outcomes of teaching
American Sign Language via distance learning. Technology & Disability, 5(3-4)
319-326.
Lane, J.P., Usiak, D.J., Stone, V.I., & Scherer, M.J. (1997). The voice of the
customer: Consumers define the ideal battery charger. Assistive Technology, 9(2)
130-139.
Lane, J.P. (1997). Technology evaluation and transfer in the assistive technology
marketplace: Terms, process and roles. Technology and Disability, 6(3), 5-24.
Lane, J.P. (1996). Development, evaluation and marketing of assistive devices. Technology
and Disability, 6(1-2),105-125.
Lane, J.P. (1995). Rehabilitation engineering research center on technology evaluation
and transfer. Technology and Disability, 4(2), 137-148.
Lane, J.P. (1997). Introduction for T&D Technology Transfer Issue. Technology
and Disability, 7(1-3)
Scherer, M.J. & Moffat, J. (1997). Function, but at what cost? Preventing secondary
injury with assistive technology. Advance for Directors in Rehabilitation, 5 (10),
45-46.
Scherer, M.J. (1996). Outcomes of assistive technology use on quality of life. Disability
and Rehabilitation, 18(9), 439-448.
Scherer, M.J. & Lane, J.P. (1997). Assessing consumer profiles of 'ideal' assistive
technologies in ten categories: an integration of quantitative and qualitative methods. Disability
and Rehabilitation, 19(12), 528-535.
[ Top of Page ]
Trade Journals/Magazines
Kon, B. & Scherer, M. (1997). More then middlemen. Home Health Care
Dealer/Supplier, May/June, 149-149.
Kon, B. & Scherer, M. (1997). The consumer is right. Home Helath Care
Dealer/Supplier, March/April, 133-134.
Kon, B. & Scherer, M. (1996). Talk to your customers." Home Health Care
Dealer/Supplier, November/December, 207-209.
Lane, J.P. (1996). Products for people with disabilities: What exists and how to market
your invention (Parts I-III). Inventor's Digest, XII (3, 4 & 5).
Mencer, R. (1997). Consumers develop "wish list" for better choices in
walkers and canes. Home Health Care Dealer/Supplier, March/April, 54-55.
Mencer, R. & Scherer, M. (1997). Walking advertisements: Ambulatory aids enable
mall goers to spread the word on HME. Home Health Care Dealer/Supplier,
March/April, 53-57.
Scherer, M.J. & Kon, B.D. (1997). Product Appeal. Home Health Care
Dealer/Supplier, November/December, 146-147.
Scherer, M.J. & Galvin, J.C. (1997). Outcomes and assistive technology. Rehab
Management, 10(2), 103-105.
Scherer, M. & Kon, B. (1997, September/October). Get Focused. Home Health Care
Dealer/Supplier, 199-201.
Scherer, M.J. (1996). Consumer choice. Home Health Care Dealer/Supplier,
160-161, 164-165.
Scherer, M.J. (1996). User Desires for Wheelchairs. Rehab Management, 9(4),
121-123.
[ Top of Page ]
Conference Proceedings
Bauer, S.M. & Lane, J.P. (1997). The Product Team in Technology Transfer.
20th Annual RESNA Conference: Pittsburgh, PA, 133-135.
Bauer, S.M., Shankar, V., & Lane, J.P. (1996). Technology Transfer: The Virtual
Product Model. 19th Annual RESNA Conference: Salt Lake City, UT, 154-156.
Grubbs, R.L. & Usiak, D.J. (1998). Customer Orientation: The Emerging Role of
Independent Living Centers in Participatory Research in Assistive Technology. RESNA:
Minneapolis, Minnesota 95-97.
Jain, A.K. & Usiak, D.J. (1997). Consumer Orientation: A Blueprint for Action.
20th Annual RESNA Conference: Pittsburgh, PA. 136-138.
Jain, A.K., Usiak, D.J., & Lane, J.P. (1996). Customer orientation: Key to
Delivering Useful Assistive Devices. 19th Annual RESNA Conference: Salt Lake City, UT,
143-145.
Kohler, L. & Kon, B.D. (1998). A Survey on the Presentation of New Assistive
Technologies to Manufacturers. RESNA: Minneapolis, Minnesota 92-94.
Kohler, J. & Mencer, R. (1996). Valuing Assistive Technologies. RESNA: Salt
Lake City, UT. 140-142.
Lane, J.P. (1997). Roles for the Technology Transfer Intermediary. Association
for the Advancement of Assistive Technology in Europe (AAATE) Conference: Thessaloniki,
Greece. 357-362.
Lane, J.P. (1997). The Technology Transfer Intermediary -- Roles in the Assistive
Technology Marketplace. Technology Transfer Society: Denver, CO, 165-169.
Lane, J.P. (1997). The Technology Transfer Process: Towards a Consensus on Terms and
Elements. 20th Annual RESNA Conference: Pittsburgh, PA, 130-132.
Lane, J.P., Usiak, D.J., & Moffat, J.A. (1996). Consumer Criteria for Assistive
Devices: Operationalizing Generic Criteria for Specific ABLEDATA Categories. 19th
Annual RESNA Conference: Salt Lake City, UT, 146-148.
Lane, J.P. (1996). Incorporating the Customer in Technology Transfer: Directions in
the Field of Assistive Technology. Proceedings of the Technology Transfer Society,
21st Annual Meeting: Cleveland, OH, 19-21.
Lane, J.P. (1996). International Technology Transfer in Assistive Technology: United
States and European Union Links. Proceedings of the Technology Transfer Society, 21st
Annual Meeting: Cleveland, OH, 429-432.
Lane, J.P. & Evanco, M.S. (1995). Evaluation and Commercialization Support to
Assistive Devices for Persons with Disabilities: The RERC-TET and AZtech, Inc.
Proceedings of the Technology Transfer Society, 20th Annual Meeting: Washington, DC.
Lane, J.P. (1995). Improving Technology Transfer: Three Priority Areas. 18th
Annual RESNA Conference: Vancouver, CAN. 228-230.
Lane, J.P. (1995). Toward a Single Global Market for Assistive Technology: U.S.
Electronic Links. Proceedings of the 2nd TIDE Conference: Paris, France.
Lane, J.P. (1994). Assistive Technology Evaluation and Transfer. Combined Annual
Conference of the American Occupational Therapy Association and the Canadian Association
of Occupational Therapists: Boston, MA.
Lane, J.P. (1994). RERC on Technology Evaluation and Transfer: A Cross-sector
Partnership. Proceedings of the Technology Transfer Society, 19th Annual Meeting:
Indianapolis, IN. 17-21.
Lane, J.P. (1994). RERC-TET: Program Access and Value Added. Proceedings of the
17th Annual RESNA Conference: Nashville, TN. 225-227.
Lane, J.P. (1994). Toward a Single Global Marketplace for Assistive Technology.
4th Annual International Conference on Computers for Handicapped Persons: Vienna, Austria,
195-197.
Lane, J.P. (1993). A Collaborative Model for Technology Evaluation and Transfer.
16th Annual RESNA Conference: Las Vegas, NV. 225-227.
Leahy, J.A. (1997). Technology Transfer via Invention Review: Year 3 Progress
Report. 20th Annual RESNA Conference: Pittsburgh, PA. 145-147.
Leahy, J.A. & Lane, J.P. (1996). Technology Transfer via Invention Review: A
Progress Report. 19th Annual RESNA Conference: Salt Lake City, UT, 128-130.
Scherer, M.J., Usiak, D.J., & Kon, B.D. (1997). Consumer Ratings of Key
Characteristics of Five "Ideal" Mobility-related Assistive Devices.
Proceedings from the 20th Annual RESNA Conference: Pittsburgh, PA. 172-174.
[ Top of Page ]
|  |
