Thanks for the note. One point to clarify, I do not think your mission statement should be written for the RFP that was my point. I think you stick with your mission statement and write the proposal around it.
I'd like to speak you soon because i had a conversation with a friend about this. He is extremely intelligent. has a phd in biology but has worked mainly as an investor and now is running his second successful startup. He is a great strategist and has always been able to raise money from investors. I asked him about this and he had a tactical suggestion that I thought was a super good idea. it's too much to type out so I need to explain it in a conversation. Let me know if you or the group has time before the 3pm info session .

Hi Danny, is there anything I can do to help for Wed?

C.B.

If you are able to articulate your perspective on how the RFP can be used to further the goals of BwoB then you can help by sharing that. Otherwise I appreciate you reading the RFP and providing a short comment.

I was thinking about workshoping questions over Loomio but there isn't much more time to do so before the meeting tomorrow. If I get around to drafting some tonight I will send them as a poll here.

Can we do a quick meeting? I am in the bay but could talk tomorrow if you have a few mins.

C.B.

I must have miscommunicated because I meant I wanted to have a quick chat today before the information session with the city or right afterwards. at this point afterwards would be more realistic . So let's say sometime before the end of the week

talk in 15-20 min.

how to connect for conference call?

in the meantime:

My initial thoughts:

After listening to the info session I feel confident that BWoB you can totally win an award with this program as a nonprofit BS2 facility provider.

Winning this can be straightforward if you focus on submitting a professional, practical, compliant proposal.

key ingredients:

- rational mission that fill an unmet need

- convincing explanation of the need

- how filling this need furthers the goals of the NYCEDC goals

- evidence that others are not providing this

- demonstration of how you will fill the need

                - products and services

                - qualification for service provision

                - implementation plan

                                - immediate, growth, long term phases

                - financial plan

                - risk mitigation plan

                - measurable success metrics
- management team

It will be hard enough to write a proposal for a focused mission. Adding to that would be impossible.

Problem:

This takes a lot of work and skills in writing, some financial accounting, market research, etc.  I don’t see that BWoB has sufficient people with the time/experience/interest/ needed to put this together by the deadline. This is a common problem faced by other applicants.

Possible solution:

For this reason there are companies out there that do this for a living. Yes, you can hire someone to write your proposal – not to formulate WHAT you want to say or make decisions about financing. They just do all the writing and formatting. They also thoroughly read the RFP and other materials to make sure the proposal in in alignment. But you would need to raise the funds to pay for that. And you would need to do this very quickly. You only have a month. That’s very little time.

i called the google meeting number and inpiut the pin but said no meeting is happening

The outcome said 18:00 sorry for any confusion

just got this

was in another meeting and now have to do other stuff. I will be available again at 9:30 PM.

• i think it would really help in anything we do to maybe be a little less reliant on only indirect communication through layers of tools. Sometimes calling someone directly is the most efficient thing to do which btw used to be the only form of communication other than in person. it works great. So for anyone in the future that needs to communicate with me immediately my number is 30578679625. just call me. for millennial that can't bring themselves to do that you can always text me.

regarding my last comment about how to win this, I should have added that I am very interested in contributing as much time as i have to writing the proposal but I would need to see that we have others involved enough to pull it off properly and make everyone's efforts worth while,

plenty to talk about. pleat let me know if we want to meet tonight and how to connect.

You were with us in spirit at our meeting. I revised the outcome to summarize.

I appreciate your thoughts about "direct" communication. You may have overlooked or missed the reasons I want to use Loomio as the default for organizational communication. The group description is the most concise way I have been able to express those thoughts at this point. They are primarily rooted in allowing for as many people to sit at the decision making table as possible and supporting a robust system of divergent thinking. However I also recognize the need to form working groups with a high level of alignment and purpose. We will be forming such a group to work on the RFP.

You phone number has a strange amount of digits. Can you check if it is correct? No need to share phone numbers so openly. You can always call the BwoB number and it goes to me (although I am not always available to pick up).

I communicate over text and phone using Signal with Vik and Ibrahim. We can set norms of communication at our next meeting.

From RFPs like this it's pretty clear what sorts of things NYEDC likes, big labs and infra projects. Bery much a "build it and they will come" mentality, which is not how anything works, but OK:

https://lifesci.nyc/news/new-york-city-seeks-proposals-100m-life-sci-hub

Compare their persective to paul graham's, who in this case I think has it right (though I'd argue he misses the forest for the trees when it comes to NYC):

http://paulgraham.com/pgh.html

http://paulgraham.com/hubs.html

Email I want to send to the EDC:

Hi NYEDC,

I have a few clarifying questions regarding the space that we propose for development as a part of the Life Sciences Innovation Infrastructure RFP.

Does the nonprofit respondent need to own the space they wish to develop into new lab space, or can the space be leased?

Does the space need to be controlled (owned/leased) by the nonprofit before submission of the proposal, or can the space be acquired (owned or leased) after an award is made?

Does cost to purchase/lease a space count as infrastructure costs?

If there is a general neighborhood that we want to focus on developing our space in, but no single location has been locked down for development yet, can we still submit a proposal focusing on the programming and services to be offered to the NY life sciences and startup community through our project while detailing requirements for the location in our search?

Thank you!

Regards,

Vikram

Looks good to me: thanks for drafting those.

Oh also in terms of potential blockers towards our application are the insurance requirements for funding eligibility. We can talk about it on Monday.

just notes for meetg

@Frank and @Yuriy Fazylov you should be able to comment on this thread now. Looks like we can't quite have guests from the main group in the subgroups. Sorry if there was any frustration with getting your thoughts up on this thread.

Thank you @Danny. Where is the RFP's live Q&A attendees list? Maybe some of the people on that list could be asked to join BwoB. Do nonprofits engulph one another for technicality of having an insurer?

It's on the RFP website which can be found here

I'm not sure of all the people on that list are necessarily aligned with the idea of being a member or the community. But there is something to that idea IMO, I just suspect it will not be a high return on effort if what we are looking for is engagement or membership.

And I'm not sure what you mean by your question. I think for non-profits to officially merge there are likely state level documents required to facilitate that merge as well as agreement required form the boards of each.

I looked the list over and CCNY.CUNY domains stand out the most. After its the generic Gmail. Makes one wonder what's going on on the CCNY end. A uni will have a lot more return on city's investment if only to pay off student debt over the years. Considering the competition, Downstate, Columbia, MSSM, etc. BwoB has to try that much harder.

Thank you to everybody who attended the meeting. I'm sorry I missed it, but I prefer written communication in any case.

I wish to state, as others have said, that for this type of proposal I would expect them largely to be awarded to known players. Most of us are not that, but Ellen is, and that could be useful.

I also agree with the comments above that you really need to stress that NYC has all kinds of people who have relevant expertise (e.g., physicians, those currently in the research universities that would prefer to work outside of academia, or programmers) but need access to lab space to develop their ideas with the goal of commercializing them without surrendering their intellectual property to a university or company. I also think that more about NYC's developing their biotech sector should be in the mission statement.

You might also check out the local politicians from various neighborhoods that you could partner with. I do think that a BwoB lab could help revitalize a neighborhood.

I think that maybe not for this grant, but in general, you really want to have a number of strong and appealing scientific projects in mind. While it is good to try to apply for this grant, I think it is much easier to convince individual backers (as opposed to large committees) with your ideas. There are even grants now where only ideas are reviewed, and the actual applicants are blinded. And Y-combinator was mentioned above, which I think that and similar ones would also be good places to apply.

From the BwoB materials I've seen, it all seems very vague and generic. I don't know what the vision is or how it will be run.

I will update the outcome of the meeting tomorrow to summarize some of what transpired but what to quickly share now that I am so happy you prefer written communication. That's one of the reasons I chose this platform to organize on. Have you read the main group's introduction yet? I hope it brings you some insight as to how I conceptualize the use of this tool.

Thanks, Danny. Now that I've clicked more through the BwoB website I know more, but I still would like to better understand BwoB's vision and plans. Not all of this would be suitable for a public website though.

For this grant, even if the awarding process is corrupt and they intend to give the grants to 'friends', in such set-ups they sometimes give some money to others as a fig leaf to cover the corruption. And BwoB has a virtuous name. ;)

I think most people would agree that to have a good chance
at obtaining this funding there are some necessary ingredients:

1. A team with enough people with enough participation 2.A clear mission that everyone agrees with
2. Sufficient expertise in the disciplines underlyingthe mission 4.The ability and time to write the rfp response 5.Enough financial competence to write a solid financial plan
3. The ability to communicate efficiently and work quickly, given the deadline for submission.

Unfortunately I just don’t see those ingredients materializing. Despite a list of names in Loomio, I have seen participation in BWoB by no more than 3 or 4 people.
An entire month has passed since the release of the RFP, whichis almost halfway through the time before the deadline and we are still not decided on a clear proposal statement/ask or mission statement. We still are not sure about the question of funding operations because we haven’t asked them yet.
From the sound of it, only me and I think Danny can or wants to write the document and we lost
the person who was going to be able to produce the financial plan.
Given the limited time, I don’t understand why we are discussing things that, as I understand it, would not be in the RFP, as well as unrealistic ideas like purchasing rather than leasing space and doing actual scientific research projects ourselves that would be of interest to the EDC. The
partnerships suggestions with Genspace and others doesn’t seem realistic either unless we are prepared to offer what they do not.

To Susan’s point about focusing and articulating a mission that provides some of what the RFP is seeking, I posted this opening shot to get the ball rolling:

In response to NYCEDC’s RFP…. We propose the creation of an important resource in New York City that will server multiple functions in support of the biotechnology sector and the life sciences
– Biotech Without Borders, a fully equipped BSL2 public laboratory with supporting education and expert staff where citizens, students, doctors, independent researchers and others can come to learn, develop laboratory skills, conduct initial investigations, test simplified protocols, perform proof of concept experiments, prepare personalized therapies, and much more .

It’s not a coincidence that most major cities in the US and Europe have one or more community “biospaces.” While they differ somewhat from one another, they all offer education and biological laboratory resources that can be utilized by non-professionals. They meet an important need that supports the larger local biotech ecosystem.

Amazingly NYC currently lacks a public, affordable, biosafety level 1 or 2 biolab that is open to the public. With NYCEDC funding, we can go beyond simply matching the resources available elsewhere and create an exemplary community bio space that sets a new standard both in serving the public and in tangibly supporting a robust and productive biotechnology ecosystem in New York.

Business model
Provide three core services in a synergistic manner such that each service benefits and supports: facilities (space, equipment), training/education, expertise
· Design and manage services in a manner that allows nimble response to user needs, market conditions, and new technology by customizing facility configuration and support for different experiments and training.
A second set of activities (track 2) focus on generating revenue to support the core services.

Services Overview
· Laboratory services
o Fully equipped level 2 safety laboratory
o Suitable for plant and animal cell biology, microbiology, molecular biology, biochemistry, and more
Expert staff
o guidance, supervision, and support
o consulting
Education
o Standard safety training
o scheduled classes
o custom workshops
o private sessions.
Track 2 Equipment services
o Off-premises rental
o Equipment evaluations for manufacturers

However, I’m not sure if we have agreed on any of this?

hopefully lots of progress was made after I left the meeting on Wed. but I have to be honest and say that at this rate unless more people materialize to produce this thing, especially the financial plan, and we fall into a much more productive cadence, I’m having a hard time picturing doing the work needed to submit this proposal in the time that remains.

Frank

Who did you think we lost, Frank?

If you are unsure about agreement with anything you should make a poll. This is a reason that I have chosen to use Loomio: folks can create a poll and ask who they think should weigh in.

Thanks for writing those snippets of the draft. At the meeting we talked about writing a draft even if we are ineligible or otherwise ill-equipped to submit a proposal because it can only help refine our thinking about the organization. I will placed this text in such a document and invited the community list to edit it.

I really appreciate your realistic and detailed comments on the RFP. I didn't mean to hijack the thread.

I too think a lot of energy, commitment, and realism will be needed to get BwoB up and running and to win grants of this type. I think some members are looking for signs of life and realism before they try to contribute. So far, in what I've seen, there has been a strange lack of direction, at least in communication style.

I fear that there is an idea that this can be run as self-organizing open source programming project or Wikipedia page. But those are very different undertakings from starting and running a BwoB-type organization, which is very hard to do well. It requires great will, leadership, and vision in my opinion. I am definitely not suitable, btw, and I'm not criticizing anyone.

As for your suggestions outlined above, I think they are good, but they would need to be expertly elaborated upon. On the other hand, all kinds of unexpected organizations are awarded government contracts, so you never know.

Isn't Genspace a BSL1 community lab?

Yes it is my understanding that Genspace is a BSL1 lab. However, @Frank mentioned something to the effect that when he asked to use the space they told him they are not accepting new members and/or the project he was proposing did not fall into that designation. Perhaps he can explain further.

I also agree with the sentiment that lots of energy, commitment and realism is required to get BwoB running. This is a space for anyone to bring that to the table and foster it in others. If an action is agreed upon by several folks I am happy to create a subgroup to allow them to work on that action. In some ways this thread is a microcosm of what one such action group would look like.

This sense that BwoB is being run like an open source programming project is not wrong. I am quite inspired by those projects when thinking about the future of BwoB. I disagree though that those projects or ours are fundamentally self-organizing. They have self-organizing elements which I am attracted to but I see them as requiring incentives and structure to allow the various actors to work towards a common goal. Could you elaborate on this fear?

I was and still am looking for a space where I could conduct a well designed and safe stem cell culture experiment lasting no more than two weeks. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GYuNYQ4EdmUAI5Ljq6TTxKzE2J5ea6kR07Bo7ul08kY/edit?usp=sharing
I also wanted to do a very simple oral microbiome transfer experiment.
Gene space told me that both experiments were beyond their capabilities.

Right, any human cell in culture is beyond what they will do, and maybe it's automatically BSL2. I don't remember the details. They will be very leery of direct DIY medical treatments though, and I can't blame them, though I do not have the background to comment on the safety of what you have in mind.

But that's biology . you can't possibly limit yourself to plant experiments only and consider yourself a real public bio lab that supports the biotech "ecosystem" . To be clear, I have not said I propose DIY medical treatments. The aim of the experiments I described is to redesign existing unnecessarily expensive and complicated protocols for extremely therapeutic treatments which do not utilize drugs to make them as inexpensive and simple without compromising safety or efficacy. the result is to make therapies with tremendous promise available to millions who would otherwise not have access. this is actually becoming a "thing" now. it's the type of project that would get a lot of media attention and recognition for lab that hosted it.

There are definite upsides with the downsides. I know a lot of people are very interested in having a BSL2 lab for the reasons you mentioned. I agree that making things cheaper is an important aspect of the DIY movement.

I am not an expert, but there is a common misperception about the number of people who effectively contribute to open source work. I heard an expert say that you could destroy the open source software movement worldwide if you assassinated the right 200 people. Furthermore, since it is a small world, the main reason people contribute is to show off their programming skills to their peers or possible employers. It is a great way to get recognition if you make really good additions to a well-known package, and the initial work is usually done by a few people. Finally, you do not pay a fee to contribute.

My experience is people are not good at acting collectively, and some kind of leader is necessary (as also exists in the open source world). And most members have no interest in setting up BwoB-type organizations or securing funding for them per se. For the right person, it would be a great achievement though.

Hi @Susan Harrington, we do have a core team of people dedicated to working on reopening and defining the new lab space. I think the open nature of the loomio and our willingness to entertain multiple different types of ideas (including this RFP) is a part of making sure that as we reopen, we are serving the needs of the bwob community effectively. During this stage, there is some back and forth on ideas (like talking about an RFP, realizing that there might be eligibility concerns, and having to potentially backtrack) which I think occurs naturally in any organization but is perhaps more transparently visible here? Either way I don't think those of us working on getting the lab reopened are truly treating the entire project like an open source initiative - like Danny mentioned above we are building a organization that has strong community elements but is still fundamentally structured. It's hard to open source a lease into existence!

If you have concerns about communication from us being unclear, please do reach out and let us know where we need to be doing better - it might be that we genuinely don't know yet, or it could be that we do have a specific plan that we aren't communicating clearly. Either way we owe the community strong communication and it would be invaluable if you could share with us where things might be falling short.

Thank you for sharing your thoughts and your active participation in this thread!

Head on this RFP as if there are no limitations for BWOB. If there is a half hearted approach to this RFP then its not worth doing. It has to work, and if BwoB is not what EDC is looking for, ask it to bend the rules. The organization obviously needs help. $20M won't wait for anyone.

BwoB was a BSL 2 lab. There is no other with a competitive pricing like the one offered by BwoB. It shouldn't have a lengthy and bureaucratic application process. The appeal is greater than its shortcomings.

Has anyone checked if the city can just stiff BwoB for spending if the city goes bankrupt or deem the funds are not going according to terms?

What is this core team?

Serving BwoB's community need is to open, not continue with the lip service, of something along the lines of [we are doing it, but we have jobs, so we need to reach a consensus on when to meet online to reach a consensus on what the policy should be.] 😂 Was there ever an old one? If yes, can't we keep an old one?

The only thing BwoB has to do is to inspire people, to come to it, not to serve the nebulous community. The more eyeballs one can direct to BwoB the more it can serve "the community" in the long run. Right now, above all else, BwoB has to help itself. Keep it in the blueprint but STEM/STEAM/community outreach - next summer. After opening, we'll still have dry runs, making sure all the equipment is still up to par.

All this being said, this RFP is not that difficult to write .we are just not doing it. If we agree we want to offer a public biolab with supporting education programs then why aren't we writing that proposal already? why aren't we compiling a list of equipment with costs? Why haven't we searched for and downloaded biolab floor plans from any number of biolab best practices sites? Why don't wee already have per sq ft pricing for the type of space we would lease so that we can be calculating estimated costs once we find a place. we can probably even submit a proposal outlining in detail an ideal lab space, demonstrating our understanding of this, without even having selected a location, simply saying we would use the award to find a suitable place . so we are posting pools to 3 or 4 people about everything instead of just getting to work on this beginning with taking a close look at the other community labs around the country to cherry pick ideas for details about our proposed offering.

This should be the bread and butter of those in charge. An intelligent person could have a decent draft proposal done in a couple of days. Or you could pay someone to do it. But even if you did this and won, you would need someone to follow up on the million other things that need to be done. I've been paying a monthly fee since 10/2019, and I've been assuming that they were planning the basic steps. If you want to see why leadership is necessary, I think this inefficient back and forth is exhibit A in neon.

If we won and had a space to design and build out it would likely be much less difficult to attract qualified volunteers to help out with those million details. If we won we would certainly need to have submitted an implementation plan. When you have a good plan, things get done.

I do want to reassure you that we've begun reopening and work on that is well underway. I shared some thoughts on that here: https://www.loomio.org/d/R7ab0NgY/request-for-proposals-nyc-life-sciences-innovation-infrastructure-rfp/78

The RFP is separate from just plain reopening - the RFP is a nice to have and we are getting the lab up and running with or without it. We are currently actively scouting spaces in LIC, finalizing governance documents, putting together a budget for restarting operations, and looking at options for raising the initial funds we would need for reopening (security deposit etc). I think in the next week or so we'll be having a community meeting regarding fundraising to get a sense of the viability of crowdfunding vs donors etc. Thanks to members contributing now, we are able to keep our equipment in storage and essentially keep the organization alive through this process, and we're grateful to everyone who is contributing. This is a challenging period since 33 flatbush was such a unique location and without its advantages, we have a new set of hurdles to overcome, but we are definitely making progress, and I'm excited to get Bwob up and running again!

I appreciate the reassurances. And I don't mean to give anyone a hard time. If BwoB is not eligible for a particular grant, that's not a big deal. But not applying because of lack of focus or disorganization is a different story.

Did we get an answer yet form EDC on the question of whether funding can cover operational costs including staff salaries? If not, does anyone else think the next step should be to call them directly on Monday morning? I would be happy to do that. Don't they provide a phone number for that purpose?

I just read all the messages from the last two days and don’t know where we stand. So I’d like to ask some questions that will indicate to me if this has a chance. Please try to answer. Thanks

1. do we want to pursue submitting a viable proposal?

2. if so who is willing to take responsibility for making sure this happens?

3. Can we have the questions we sent EDC answered and an agreed upon detailed outline of the proposal content by Tuesday?

4. Is there anyone currently associated with this capable of writing the financial part of the proposal?

5. Is there anyone who can put in the time to collect necessary information for the proposal such as a more detailed list of public biolabs than the one I posted, equipment costs, etc.?

6. Who is willing to own obtaining a list of available spaces for lease with cost and terms for each?

7. Who is proficient using Sketchup or similar 3d software that can create 3d renderings of the lab interior from floor plans?

8. Who is capable and willing to write parts of the proposal and to start on Tuesday?

9. If EDC says the funding does cover operations and staff, who is interested in formally working in a defined role a minimum 20 or 40 hours?

Thanks.
Would you please post the answer to the question we sent them about operations vs capital expenditures?

I think they will post it to the website. The questions I submitted are:

• Does the Project site need to be controlled (owned/leased) by the nonprofit before submission of the proposal, or can the Project site be acquired (owned/leased) after an award is made?

• Is the cost to purchase/lease a Project site considered an infrastructure cost?

• Are any operational costs of the Project site covered by the NYCEDC contribution?

• Does the Respondent nonprofit have to purchase and maintain the insurance (as per Appendix 6) or can a for-profit partner make this purchase on their behalf and list them as insureds? If the latter case is acceptable, would ownership stake be demonstrated if the Respondent leases the Project site from their for-profit partner with the intent to occupy and develop the Project site?

I stopped seeing posts after july 11th. did something end , the rfp ieffort, this thread, something else? would someone update me please?

I think that they are thinking things over.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1c22rf8ooR-7CqSY18ga2x9VV4oHYzPIiGaCClnAKczM/edit?usp=sharing

I hope you can see and use that link. It's an example of a proposal for a biospace in Elm City, NC. It's interesting to see how simple and straightforward it is and also to see the space and equipment available in a town in NC that is not available in NYC.

Yes, thank you for the example. It really doesn't look that difficult, does it? I imagine the RFP is more involved, but still. This little town isn't that far from the NC research triangle though, which they might want to make a quadrilateral :). NYC's biotech sector is sadly underdeveloped given the strength of its research institutions, and BwoB and similar labs should help to grow it.

Thanks Danny for the post. My thoughts in a nutshell are that we all have to come to terms with what we are actually, in reality, willing and able to do. You talk about ideas and discussions that can lead to more ideas and discussions, but BWoB is supposed to be opening a biospace, a public biolab. For that purpose I think you have all the ideas and discussion you need. So why has no one including yourself written any text for the proposal or even for a business plan. I don't mean conceptual ideas about inclusion but practical, organizing, planning content that tangibly moves the project ahead. If i had the time it would take to write this I would but i am currently underwater with stuff to deal with.

If no one is capable of writing, or curating an equipment list, or taking a first shot at a financial plan spread sheet in all the time that has passed since the RFP was announced, then would you bet your money on this group opening a usable public biolab any time soon, let alone submitting a proposal to the EDC? There is nothing wrong with that. Plenty of brilliant people with great ideas are not so good at making things happen. I think it only serves BWoB well to be realistic by basing its perception of what it can do on observable history rather than future vision.
Finally, now that the EDC has stated that operational expenses are off the table, in addition to the capital expansion project proposal you'd also have to show a business plan for funding the operations because you currently have no operations . That's too much to accomplish unless you happen to be a partner in a venture capital firm.
I do think you can open a lab if you modify your approach and start taking action even if you still have questions, and recruit other people along the way. I hope that wasn't too much of a downer and that you see it constructively.

Frank

I agree.

Whether or not BwoB applies for the RFP, the leadership do need to know how they plan to run the organization (including funding it and renting lab space), and they should have some kind of time frame.

Also, as a general point, eligibility is a very flexible concept, and people are awarded grants all the time that they might not strictly be eligible for. You have to choose the best of the available possibilities to apply for, and the funders usually have to pick the best of those that apply even if their eligibility isn't perfect.

Not a downer at all. It's important be able to articulate a perspective for others to see even if it isn't some sort of pep rally type speech.

I think your perspective has a realism to it which is valuable. My thought is there is the capability in our group but the challenge is aligning it towards a common goal that satisfies the vision of a community lab as we articulated in the Mission Vision and Values that is both shared among those who would write the application (but also more generally doing the work of operating such a space) and those who want to use the facilities. I believe Susan said in a previous comment this task is sometimes referred to as "herding cats".

I have a slight disagreement that we should base our perception of what we can do on observable history because those conditions are quite different than they are now. My interest in thinking about a future vision is to see what folks may articulate if given the space to because then we will better know the commonalities between our visions and how they intersect to form this organization. I think you have articulated such a vision in a previous comment. And there are elements I resonate with in that plan and elements I do not. This encourages me that we will find a way to reopen the lab.

I know you are still seeking the articulation of a more concrete plan to reopen, Susan. There was a point earlier in the pandemic where I thought the only way we would open is if we had folks willing to split the rent together. I still think this is our best path to start. When this RFP opportunity was brought to us it seemed like it might represent an alternate path to reopening. But as I expressed in the proposal above, I'm less convinced of that possibility now. Soon after RFP meeting #3 Vik and I did align that the plan for reopening shouldn't be tied to winning a grant and there were already things we were working on that needed to be done regardless of the RFP. Along with the folks that have expressed interest in using the lab since our close (including some in this group) I think a crowdfunding campaign represents a promising avenue to pursue funding our space.

Thanks, Danny. This is concrete and helpful. That is a stripped-down and inward-facing vision, but probably one of the easier ones to implement. (It doesn't require much approval or grant-writing, at least initially.) But in an even split of minimal running costs (rent + waste disposal and utilities in a properly zoned building), do you have a rough guess about the fee per member?

It can be done: There are even cat circuses! :) I also agree that the past might not indicate much since BwoB has been dormant.

OK so let's go this way for a moment because I've heard you talk about this before but it would seem more real to me if you provided some numbers because I sort of don't see it being affordable. So, can anyone here post:

1. approx sq ft needed (I figure 1000??)
2. actual monthly rent that you've seen for suitable space in the past year. (amount and sq ft)

Exactly. If this is the default model in the minds of the leadership, we should have some sense if it's actually feasible. Otherwise, we need a new plan and to be serious about applying for grants, etc. :)

Did anyone find the questions I posted on 7/11 useful.? https://www.loomio.org/d/R7ab0NgY/request-for-proposals-nyc-life-sciences-innovation-infrastructure-rfp/84 I took no answer to that to mean that we couldn't pull it off.

A well executed public biolab in NYC is a major operation with significant costs (rent, insurance, equipment, utilities, staffing., etc.) . I assume this requires either a long list of reliable contributors, relationships with sponsoring organizations, or other substantial sources of income along with an adequate number of people (like a dozen) very actively managing just that aspect of the operation. Am I wrong?

Hi Frank,

I definitely appreciated your questions, and I think others have mentioned that they did too. You seem to be the most serious about actually getting things done, although I can't see what is going on behind the scenes.

Chirag does seem to want to apply for the RFP and has set up a session to do so.

You are not wrong, and I agree with you completely about this. I think the leadership need to consult with the board, other community biolabs, and knowledgable advisors about their plans ASAP. If you are taking membership fees, you need to have plans for funding and everything else. It's fundamental, but not easy.

Average cost per sq ft in 2019 in queens was $40/sqft/yr. I wish we had specific quotes for current pricing, but we don't right now. We'd obv try to come in less than that number, by a significant margin if possible, but we might have missed the pandemic price lows. Probably max around 1000 sq ft. It's all very wishy washy, but including that, lab waste fees, other expenses like insurance etc, I think we can shoot for around $3500-$4000 max monthly spend, as maybe low as $2000. That's a pretty significant range and the modeling becomes a lot more precise once we have some quotes. There are a lot of other unknowns in terms of cost as well, like fixed costs (security deposit, any work we need to do). If we get a rent concession (first few months no rent), that gives us time to hit breakeven on a cash flow basis.

Also uncertainty in revenue sources. How many people are willing to be members, and how much are people willing to pay ($100/month vs $200/month cuts in half the number of people we need, if people are willing to pay different amounts then how do those dynamics work, etc). Also, a significant source of revenue is courses. If we can make a few hundred bucks margin per course taught, that significantly lowers the number of members needed to keep the space open, but there are questions on how many people will attend in a post pandemic world, how good the new location would be, etc. And final major unknown source of revenue is crowdfunding/donations. Those might be required for overcoming fixed costs to reopen.

Major advantage is that we own all our equipment and aren't constrained by things like high traffic areas/retail space/needing fancy offices etc. We are also traditionally entirely volunteer run. I think it's doable financially to go ahead and reopen, but as you can see, there are a lot of sources of uncertainty that we need to begin derisking.

I didn't see a place to dive into drafting this RFP but maybe if we try to block off a time to try to draft together for a few hours we can have a viable draft. We have many writers who are capable of doing this and with multiple minds on the document at the same time I think some of the inertia (at least my own) could be overcome to pursue the goal. I am available Monday to do this later AM or all afternoon.