SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY & DEVELOPMENT FUND BENCHMARK ASSESSMENT REPORT

May 2009

This report was produced for review by the HRH/ET Office of the United States Agency for International Development’s Mission in Egypt. It was prepared under the Global Evaluation and Monitoring II BPA EDH-E-10-08-00003-00 by the Aguirre Division of JBS International, Inc. Its authors are Dr. Terrence S. Millar and Dr. Mohsen Elmahdy Said.

SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY & DEVELOPMENT FUND BENCHMARK ASSESSMENT REPORT

Benchmark Assessment of the Egypt STDF

Aguirre Division of JBS International, Inc. p. i

Table of Contents Acronyms ........................................................................................................................ ii

Executive Summary ........................................................................................................iv

Introduction and Background .......................................................................................... 1

Genesis of the STDF ............................................................................................... 1

Benchmarks and Terms of Disbursement ............................................................... 7

Terms of Disbursement Verification ................................................................................ 9

Autonomy – Demand Driven (4.1.1, 4.1.4, 4.1.5, 4.1.6, 4.2.1., 4.2.3) ...................... 9

Autonomy – Staff Management (4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.1.7, 4.2.2) ..................................... 21

Peer Review (Implicit in 4.1.5)................................................................................ 33

STDF Board of Advisors (4.1.8, 4.2.4) ................................................................... 35

Sustainability and Public/Private Funding (4.1.9, 4.2.5, 4.2.6) ............................... 38

Terms of Disbursement Summary ................................................................................. 42

Benchmark 4.1 ....................................................................................................... 43

Benchmark 4.2 ....................................................................................................... 47

Annexes

Annex I Report Methodology

Annex II Document List

Annex III Interview List

Annex IV STDF Staff Advertisement

Annex V Presidential Decree 217 (SCST)

Annex VI Presidential Decree 218 (STDF)

Annex VII Bylaws


Aguirre Division of JBS International, Inc. p. ii

Acronyms

CV Curriculum Vita ENSF Egyptian National Science Foundation FWG Finance Working Group GERF German Egyptian Research Fund GESP German Egyptian Scholarship Project GOE Government of Egypt IC2 Innovation, Creativity and Capital - Institute, University of Texas, Austin IPR Intellectual Property Rights IWG Innovative Working Group JRS Joint Research Scheme LE Egyptian Pounds MOU Memorandum of Understanding NRS National Research Scheme NSF National Science Foundation NSTC President’s National Science & Technology Council OMB Office of Management and Budget OWG Operations Working Group P&M Planning and Monitoring Working Group PCAST President’s Council of Advisors on S&T PWG Projects Working Group SBIR Small Business Innovation Research


Aguirre Division of JBS International, Inc. p. iii

SCST Supreme Council for Science & Technology STDF Science & Technology Development Fund OSTP Office of Science and Technology Policy TEC Technical Evaluation Committee USAID United States Agency for International Development VC Venture Capitalists


Aguirre Division of JBS International, Inc. p. iv

Executive Summary

Background This report is an assessment of the technical and managerial operations of the Egyptian Science & Technology Development Fund (STDF) after its first year of operation in order to determine whether Benchmarks 4.1 and 4.2 (and the related Terms of Disbursement) of Objective Four of the Monitoring Plan for Cash Transfer program have been met. The Monitoring Plan is based on a 2007 Memorandum of Understanding between the Governments of Egypt and the United States. Monitoring Plan – Objective Four and Benchmarks 4.1 and 4.2 Objective Four of the Monitoring Plan reads: “Establish an Egyptian National Science Foundation to improve the market responsiveness of Egyptian science and technology (S&T) ($20 million).” Benchmark 4.1 of Objective Four reads: “Issuance of presidential decree and executive order establishing Egyptian National Science Foundation (ENSF) with the necessary budget allocations for the first year of operations made. The ENSF will be an autonomous, demand-driven organization for funding and managing scientific research that will be free from all constraints limiting the efficiency of governmental research organizations linked to private section competitiveness.” Benchmark 4.2 reads: “Full operation of ENSF (STDF) with above characteristics with necessary GOE budget allocations for second year of operations made.” The purpose of the Assessment was to determine if the achievement of the two Benchmarks could be verified. Methodology To review STDF’s performance, a two-person evaluation team (one American and one Egyptian) spent more than four weeks collecting and reviewing information. Over 25 relevant documents and websites were analyzed and 35 interviews were conducted with more than 70 key informants of institutions and organizations that are significant stakeholders in Egyptian Science and Technology. While problems and mishaps were reported by both STDF staff and other stakeholders, these difficulties were typical of the ‘implementation dip’1 often experienced during the early stages of major change and were being monitored and corrected by STDF staff via changes in policy, practice, and stakeholder communications strategies. The design strategy for the interviews was informed by research on methodological practices in evaluating complex organizational structures and associated reforms. A particular challenge found in many such evaluation studies is that researchers tend to focus on discrete elements, such as documents, funding and assessment practices associated with the reform. Interviews were based on a qualitative case study approach. The qualitative case study methodology is an approach for conducting an empirical inquiry into a “contemporary phenomenon within its real life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly 1 Fullan, M. (2002). Principals as Leaders in a Culture of Change. http://www.michaelfullan.ca/Articles_02/03_02.pdf


Aguirre Division of JBS International, Inc. p. v

evident.”2 The underlying research paradigm guiding this study’s interview approach was that of ethnographic research, where the Evaluation Team attempted to study the STDF’s first year implementation effort within the relevant Egyptian science, technology, institutional, and industrial contexts. The Evaluation Team did this in a grounded and multi-dimensional fashion, based largely on factual evidence and the perspectives and experiences of “local participants,”3 as well as the experience and expertise of the Evaluation Team itself. Findings and Conclusions: Benchmarks and Disbursement Criteria While the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) primarily focuses on research in the Pure Basic and Inspired Basic categories of research, Pure Applied research is typically left to the mission agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Department of Energy (DOE). In contrast, STDF is intended to support research in all of these areas. With this formidable goal challenge before it, STDF came into existence in 2008. The key components of STDF to be considered under the Benchmark Review were its governance, structure and management, staffing, autonomy, role in achieving national priorities and sustainability, and the role of peer review. The report systematically reviewed these elements in detail in the process of verifying each Term of Disbursement to determine if the first year’s activities have laid sufficient groundwork to accomplish the goals set by the Government of Egypt. Those Terms of Disbursement were analyzed in the following terms:

• Autonomy – Demand Driven: 4.1.1 (“a demand driven, autonomous STDF for funding and managing scientific research and development in support of business and industry”), 4.1.4 (“determine research priorities”), 4.15 (“compete funded research between private and public”), 4.1.6 (“manage research projects for results”), 4.2.1 (“autonomous research funding and management foundation”), and 4.2.3 (“being demand driven and serving the needs of a competitive private sector”);

• Autonomy – Staff Management: 4.1.2 (“employing staff under a special

payment system…competitive salaries…flexible funding”), 4.1.3 (“employing a majority of professional staff”), 4.1.7 (“a highly motivated staff...based on performance…contracting”), and 4.2.2 (“modern management practices”);

• STDF Board of Advisors: 4.1.8 (“governed by a board of scientists, private

sector investors, other non-governmental stakeholders, and some government representatives “) and 4.2.4 (“governed by a Board…free from government control on its research agenda and plan”); and

• Sustainability and Public/Private Funding: 4.1.9 (“seeking significant private

sector contributions”), 4.2.5 (“given the necessary budget allocations ...”) and 4.2.6 (“planning for sustainability through joint private and public funding…”).

2 Stake, R. (1994). Case Studies. N.L. Denzin, Y. (Ed.), Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, p. 13. 3 Agar, Michael. (1996). The Professional Stranger: An Informal Introduction to Ethnography, San Diego: Academic Press.


Aguirre Division of JBS International, Inc. p. vi

• The capacity to make informed, non-coerced decisions; • The capacity of a system to make a decision about its actions without the

involvement of another system or operator; • Having immunity from arbitrary exercise of authority; and • Free from external control and constraint in action and judgment, for example.

Autonomy – Demand Driven Establishing that the specified contexts in the Terms of Disbursement are sufficiently autonomous as required by the Benchmarks presents challenges to the assessment, since it basically amounts to proving a negative. This implies that confirmation would be more difficult than refutation, since autonomy/independence is obtained if and only if there is an absence of significant external affect on the agent: To address this challenge, the Evaluation team took into account three perspectives to ascertain autonomy: empirical evidence provided by the interviews, the inferred intent of the GOE deduced from the sequence of events leading up to the creation of the STDF and now during its first year of operations, and the nature of the structures put in place An extensive review of these, especially an analysis of structural and institutional relationships, established the weight of evidence of autonomy. Autonomy – Staff Management Twelve of 20 STDF employees are professional staff. The Evaluation Team also performed a careful analysis of the staffing levels and ratios, through position descriptions, workflow diagrams, CV analyses, interviews, and outcomes of the first year of STDF work. The outcomes were satisfactory. Of the current 20 staff, most key unit heads have been hired. The other staff who have been hired to date were essential to the first year of operations and comprise the Operations and Financial and Working groups. The balance of professional to support staff seemed appropriate to the Evaluation Team, as evidenced by the volume of work successfully completed during the beginning of the first year of operations During the assessment, the Evaluation Team examined staff salaries and hiring policies, management practices, national science and technology policy, assessment and quality improvement, communications and marketing, process management, and peer review, to reach the conclusion that the STDF had proceeded in a satisfactory manner in each of the benchmark issues. STDF Board of Advisors: The STDF Board of Directors was appointed and had its first meeting in March, 2008. Ten meetings had been held at the time of the evaluation. The Evaluation Team attended part of the March, 2009 meeting. At these meetings the members of the board oversee, discuss, and approve different activities of STDF. Reviewing all documentation and conducting relevant interviews, the Evaluation Team determined that the Terms of Disbursement relating to the creation of the Board of Advisors was satisfactorily met.


Aguirre Division of JBS International, Inc. p. vii

Sustainability and Public/Private Funding The Evaluation Team examined support by the government, the potential for industrial funding, and technology transfer and private funding. Under a 1991 law, the STDF is empowered to create a holding company to foster private, market-based investment, and a Board of Directors subcommittee has recommended the establishment of such a company in cooperation with the private sector and owned by STDF for managing new technological projects. The STDF is also examining in detail the issue of intellectual property rights, which is an internationally recognized key for moving ideas to commercialization. Point by Point Review In a subsequent section, the Evaluation Team examines each Term of Disbursement separately under Benchmarks 4.1 and 4.2 and assesses the degree to which STDF has achieved it or is moving to reach it in the coming months. In summary, Benchmark 4.1 stipulates that STDF “…will be an autonomous, demand-driven organization for funding and managing scientific research that will be free from all constraints limiting the efficiency of governmental research organizations and linked to private sector competitiveness.” This stipulation was broken up into the parts that constitute the Terms of Disbursement and were covered in the Terms of Disbursement section. The Evaluators found that the Terms had been met. Benchmark 4.2 has three parts: an introductory sentence, the Terms of Disbursement, and Means of Verification. The introductory sentence requires 1) full operation of the STDF with the characteristics spelled out in Benchmark 4.1 – this has been done; and 2) necessary GOE budget allocations for second year operations – this has been done (as discussed in 4.2.5 in the report, where there is a summary of each Terms of Disbursement. For the Means of Verification the GOE has:


Aguirre Division of JBS International, Inc. p. 1

Introduction and Background

This report is a performance assessment of the Terms of Disbursement of two benchmarks related to activities in science and technology established by mutual agreement between the Governments of Egypt and the United States. The methodology for the report is described in Annex I. The performance assessment was conducted over a period of more than a month in February and March of 2009. These benchmarks are found in Objective Four of USAID Grant 263-K-650, the cash transfer program to provide support for Human Development and Economic Sector Development. The two benchmarks relate to the establishment of the Science & Technology Development Fund (STDF). Benchmark 4.1 concerns the successful establishment of the agency in terms of its: formal creation through decree and executive order; funding through necessary budget allocations; functioning as an independent, autonomous, market driven funding agency and manager of scientific research; and supporting private sector competitiveness. Benchmark 4.2 concerns the full operation of the STDF with the characteristics just described, as well as necessary budget allocations for its second year of operation. The Science Technology Development Fund is a modernization story in one of the cradles of civilization. This section includes an attempt to provide a synthesis of that story that will make the analysis of the Terms of Disbursement of Benchmarks 4.1 and 4.2 more intelligible.

Genesis of the STDF UNESCO’s The Arab States report4 looked at the broad history of the Arab world and scientific development and makes clear that, although the region of the Arab nations was home to cutting edge scientific inquiry and advancement for many centuries, the current social reality of Arab nations does not play a correspondingly important role. This can be documented even at the level of basic relevant quantitative data, such as number of patents generated, papers published, percent of GDP devoted to research and development, and the number and level of research support. Although Egypt generally leads the Arab nations in most of these indicators, even Egypt significantly underperforms compared with the major industrial nations of the world. Presumably in an attempt to address this problem, the Government of Egypt commissioned a study of how to reform relevant national priorities and assume responsibility for program design, implementation, and management of a new organizational entity to be the agent of change in Egypt within the cultures relevant to research and development. This previous work on studying these issues culminated in a July 2006 report authored by Professor Dr. Aly El-Shafei, then Assistant Minister for Technological Development, titled, Proposed Restructuring Plan for Science and Technology in Egypt.

4 UNESCO Science Report (2005) ISBN 92-3-103967-9.



The restructuring section of the July 2006 document authored by Professor El-Shafei states: The restructuring of (the) Science & Technology system in Egypt depends on the following two criteria:

1. Egypt has decided to embark on an ambitious plan to develop a knowledge-based economy.

2. Political support for the vision of a knowledge-based economy and political support for the restructuring efforts.

The restructuring is designed to overcome the problems outlined in the Assessment Report by the Ministry of Administrative Development, and to use the best practices outlined in the report by the Team studying the Science & Technology Management Models in the world.

The proposed restructuring plan then goes on to describe the establishment of a ‘Technology Development Agency’ that presumably later directly informed Benchmarks 4.1 and 4.2 of the USAID Grant 263-K-650. The document outlines roles for this new entity in the restructuring plan:

1. Provide funding for scientific research and technology development in Egypt; 2. Provide oversight on the complete cycle of scientific research and product development,

including introduction of knowledge-based products to the market; 3. Develop an information system to disseminate information on Science & Technology in

Egypt, including providing ready data on the status of Science &Technology; 4. Work with the National priorities established by the Supreme Council for Science &

Technology, and provide detailed plans of action; 5. Develop Innovative Capacity through innovation development schemes, including

supporting university-led instructors, science parks, and Centers of Excellence; 6. Provide continuous and detailed assessment of Science & Technology indicators,

including scientific papers, patents, and effect on economy; and 7. Report to Ministry of Science & Technology on its activities, and work through the

guidance of the Ministry. In 2007 a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on the Support for Human Development & Economic Sector Development between the Arab Republic of Egypt and the United States was signed. The purpose of the MOU was “to set forth policy objectives of the Government of Egypt (GOE) in the areas of human development and economic sector development for U.S. Government economic assistance.” As stipulated in the MOU, if the Government of Egypt achieved those policy objectives, the U.S. Government agreed to “carry out a cash transfer program by distributing funds in accordance with a separate agreement…” This led to USAID Grant 263-K-650, the cash transfer program to provide support for Human Development and Economic Sector Development. Benchmarks 4.1 and 4.2 of that grant, to be discussed in detail



later, called for the creation of a new agency that has come to be called the Science Technology Development Fund (STDF). The long term goals set for STDF, first framed by the 2006 Proposed Restructuring Plan for Science and Technology in Egypt, are ambitious. Although the agency is intended to resemble the U.S. National Science Foundation in role and function, STDF’s intended scope goes well beyond the NSF mission scope. The following diagrams suggest some of those differences. Figure 1 provides a comparison of the “chain of commands” within which the two organizations reside and their relationship to the research to product cycle.

Figure 1. NSF and STDF roles in policy, research, and development Thus the two organizations are quite different in their intended function on the path from research to commercialization, with NSF playing a much more limited role than the role intended for STDF. Figure 2 offers one representation of the research to commercialization path.

Office of Science and Technology Policy

National Science Foundation

National Science Board

Supreme Council for Science & Technology

Science & Technological Development Fund

STDF Board of Directors

Policy

Research Support

U.S.A. NSF Hierarchy Egypt STDF Hierarchy

IP Management

Financial management of development

Commercialization



Figure 2. Linear Model of Research to Commercialization5 In addition, even the scope of research to be supported is broader for STDF than for NSF. Consider the alternative taxonomy introduced by Stokes6: Phenomena exploration – pursued due to research curiosity regarding particular phenomena, inspired by neither understanding nor use; Pure basic research – pursued with the goal of fundamental understanding, without any consideration of the use; Pure applied research – pursued with the goal of use, without any consideration of fundamental understanding;

5 Adapted from Mark Y.D. Wang, Shari Lawrence Pfleeger, et.al. (2003). Technology Transfer of Federally Funded R&D: Perspectives from a Forum. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Science and Technology Policy Institute. http://rand.org/pubs/conf_proceedings/2006/CF187.pdf. 6 Donald E. Stokes. (1997). Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Government Investment

Basic Research

Applied Research

Development

Intellectual Property

Prototype

Product

Marketing and Commercialization



Use-inspired basic research – pursued with the dual goals of basic understanding and use, as demonstrated in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3. Stokes Pasteur’s Quadrant STDF is intended to support research in all of these quadrants. NSF primarily focuses on research in the Pure Basic and Inspired Basic categories, typically leaving Pure Applied research to the mission agencies such as NIH and DOE. With this formidable goal challenge, STDF came into existence in 2008. The key components of STDF are its governance, structure and management, staffing, autonomy, role in achieving national priorities and sustainability, and the role of peer review. This report will deal with these elements in detail in the Terms of Disbursement verification. Experience suggests that an agency intended to promote the advancement of knowledge and an application to commerce of those advancements must have a certain amount of independence and autonomy. On the other hand, every nation has security issues and other pressing national priorities that must be factored into the actual autonomy of such organizations. This is certainly true in the United States. The challenge for Egypt has been to create a new, still workable set of circumstances that promise to be more productive than the circumstances surrounding research in the past, but that still abide by necessary national constraints. For this to occur, there must be



sufficient political will augmented by new forms of structure and management that are staffed by talented and visionary individuals; this is the approach that the Government of Egypt has taken. This was presaged in the restructuring section of the July 2006 document authored by Professor Dr. Aly El-Shafei mentioned above. For an organization that was still within its first year of creation at the time of the review, the successes have been impressive. Given this successful beginning, obtaining the scope of the role envisioned for STDF in a sustainable way is the real challenge. For example, the “black box” in Figure 2 above is the notorious “valley of death.” The valley of death is so named because it is the transition point at which many promising research ideas are stalled or cancelled. This happens for many reasons, among which are the changing cultures, attitudes, resources, and strategies of the stakeholders above and below this point. Often an enthusiastic researcher, sure of the value of his/her discovery, finds that industry and commercial concerns are indifferent to the possible opportunity that the discovery represents. This may be because the idea in fact does not have a real application that can be commercialized. However, it may also be that although the idea is sound, it has to be developed first, for example with the help of venture capitalists and perhaps a start-up company. There is the expression, ‘the fog of war,” used to describe the level of ambiguity in situational awareness experienced by military personnel. Yet there is also a ‘fog of discovery,’ which describes a level of ambiguity in situational awareness experienced by stakeholders in the transition from discovery to prototypes, products and commercialization. In fact, the valley of death has at least two aspects: first, there are many promising ideas developed by research that were not properly translated into the Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) domain, and thus the opportunity for the inventor(s) and their institutions to possibly profit from those ideas was lost at the outset. In addition, very few research developments actually end up leading to viable commercial ventures – the problem is that the potential successes and failures are often difficult to discern, especially at the time of discovery. Thus, the IPR machinery has to be set up to work in volume, which implies a considerable investment in financial and human resources despite the fact that very few discoveries lead to commercial success, even among those properly protected. Also, on the Egyptian side, the inducements to researchers and their institutions must be commensurate with the potential pay-off, otherwise possible inventors might not pursue STDF funding because of the IPR policies being seen as too onerous. A second aspect of the valley of death occurs in moving from boutique prototypes of research-based ideas to retail scaled commercialization. Again, there are many examples across the world of ideas that “should have worked.” At universities in countries such as the United States, one mechanism for tackling this challenge is the emergence of entities typically called “university research parks.” Here is where entrepreneurial, financing and marketing concerns play a prominent, often challenging role. Thus, not only is STDF attempting to become a independent, peer-reviewed based funding agency for all forms of scientific research, it also is attempting to become, or create parallel organizations to become, IPR agents and research park-like commercialization entities. Any one of these three tasks would be daunting; together they are formidable.



Fortunately the first year has been auspicious. Not only has the new agency appointed top notch individuals in a well-planned structure for handling the first year’s competition for research funding, it also has started planning for and implementing the structures necessary to tackle its formidable challenges on the path from discovery to commerce. One year is insufficient time to accomplish all of this, but early efforts promise to realize the ambitious goals that have been set for the agency.

Benchmarks and Terms of Disbursement The remainder of this report will deal with the specifics of the Terms of Disbursement found in Benchmarks 4.1 and 4.2, in order to verify that the first year’s activities have laid sufficient groundwork to accomplish the goals set by the Government of Egypt. The last condition to be specified in Benchmark 4.2 of the Monitoring Plan for Cash Transfer program is:

3. A positive review of first year technical and managerial operations by an impartial qualified team of research management experts and scientists, jointly assigned by the Ministry of State for Scientific Research and USAID.

This document reports on that required review, using as a lens the Terms of Disbursement found in the Benchmarks. The preparation work for this report included an extensive review of relevant documents, interviews with a sampling of key stakeholders, and a synthesis of all of these information sources that provides the analysis and assessment on the progress of the STDF in addressing the required benchmarks. The Terms of Disbursement for the Benchmarks as found in Grant 263-K650 are now presented, except that the interim phrase “ENSF” is replaced with the name later adopted, “STDF.” An indexing system is introduced for easier reference in the discussion to follow.

Terms of Disbursement for Benchmark 4.1: 4.1.1. The GOE will establish a demand driven, autonomous STDF for funding and managing scientific research and development in support of business and industry. The STDF will operate more efficiently by:

• 4.1.2 Being established as an independent authority and employing staff under a special payment system, allowing payment of competitive salaries. The salary system will allow flexible funding from public, private, and international sources;

• 4.1.3 Employing a majority of professional staff;

• Being autonomous and independent to:

o 4.1.4 determine research priorities in response to research demands of

private business and industry, taking into consideration national priorities;



o 4.1.5 compete funded research between private and public affiliated researchers;

o 4.1.6 manage research projects for results;

• 4.1.7 Being autonomous to manage a highly motivated staff, including recruiting

and dismissal based on performance and work needs, and using contracting and other modes of flexible forms of employment;

• 4.1.8 Being governed by a board of scientists, private sector investors, other non-

governmental stakeholders, and some government representatives, to provide sound business practices in managing the institute and its research endeavors; and

• 4.1.9 Seeking significant private sector contributions to the funding of projects.

Terms of Disbursement for Benchmark 4.2:

• 4.2.1 The GOE will have implemented the first year of operation of the STDF as an autonomous research funding and management foundation, including:

o 4.2.2 employing modern management practices;

o 4.2.3 being demand driven and serving the needs of a competitive private

sector, and other national priorities;

o 4.2.4 governed by a Board of scientists, private sector investors, other non-governmental stakeholders, and some government representatives, which is free from government control on its research agenda and plan and other operations;

o 4.2.5 being given the necessary budget allocations to ensure its

empowerment to achieve its goal and vision; and

o 4.2.6 planning for sustainability through joint private and public funding sources for research.



Terms of Disbursement Verification

Since some groups of the Terms of Disbursement are either similar or one follows from the others in that group, we will address the criteria in each such group in the same subsection below:

• Autonomy – Demand Driven: 4.1.1 (“a demand driven, autonomous STDF for funding and managing scientific research and development in support of business and industry”), 4.1.4 (“determine research priorities”), 4.15 (“compete funded research between private and public”), 4.1.6 (“manage research projects for results”), 4.2.1 (“autonomous research funding and management foundation”), and 4.2.3 (“being demand driven and serving the needs of a competitive private sector”);

• Autonomy – Staff Management: 4.1.2 (“employing staff under a special

payment system…competitive salaries…flexible funding”), 4.1.3 (“employing a majority of professional staff”), 4.1.7 (“a highly motivated staff...based on performance…contracting”), and 4.2.2 (“modern management practices”);

• STDF Board of Advisors: 4.1.8 (“governed by a board of scientists, private

sector investors, other non-governmental stakeholders, and some government representatives “) and 4.2.4 (“governed by a Board…free from government control on its research agenda and plan”); and

• Sustainability and Public/Private Funding: 4.1.9 (“seeking significant private

sector contributions”), 4.2.5 (“given the necessary budget allocations ...”) and 4.2.6 (“planning for sustainability through joint private and public funding…”).

The review also added an explicit condition that may be implicit in 4.1.5 (“…compete funded research between private and public affiliated researchers”), which is the condition of peer review. Since this is a central feature to autonomy for NSF and other U.S. funding agencies, the evaluation carefully examined the peer review structure in terms of both process and substance. Here autonomy also is important, since peer review would be relatively meaningless if there were outside influences that countermanded the peer reviewers’ decisions.

Autonomy – Demand Driven (4.1.1, 4.1.4, 4.1.5, 4.1.6, 4.2.1., 4.2.3) 4.1.1 Is the STDF autonomous for funding and managing scientific research and development in support of business and industry? 4.1.4 Can the STDF determine research priorities in response to research demands of private business and industry, taking into consideration national priorities? 4.1.5 Is the STDF competing funded research between private and public affiliated researchers? 4.1.6 Is the STDF able to manage research projects for results?



4.2.1 Has the STDF been set up in the first year as an autonomous research funding and management foundation? 4.2.3 Is the STDF demand driven and serving the needs of a competitive private sector, and other national priorities? For a working definition of “demand driven” the evaluators looked to see that funding included research support in the Edison quadrant (Fig. 3) and that it supported national science and technology policy, as determined by the Supreme Council for Science and Technology (SCST). In this context we take ‘autonomy’ and ‘independence’ to be synonymous, and having the general meaning of:

• The capacity to make informed, non-coerced decisions; • The capacity of a system to make a decision about its actions without the involvement of

another system or operator; • Having immunity from arbitrary exercise of authority; and • Free from external control and constraint in action and judgment, for example.

The problem with determining whether or not an agent has autonomy or independence lies in deciding what would constitute evidence for confirmation or refutation of the condition. It is clear from the above definitions that confirmation would be more difficult than refutation, since autonomy/independence is obtained if and only if there is an absence of significant external affect on the agent: “non-coerced decisions,” “without the involvement of another system or operator,” “having immunity from,” and “free from external control.” The problem in determining this status is exacerbated in this case because at the time of the evaluation, STDF had existed for less than a year. Thus, establishing that the specified contexts in the Terms of Disbursement are autonomous as required by the Benchmarks basically amounts to proving a negative. To address this challenge, the Evaluation team took into account three perspectives to ascertain autonomy: empirical evidence provided by the interviews, the inferred intent of the GOE deduced from the sequence of events leading up to the creation of the STDF and now during its first year of operations, and the nature of the structures put in place.

Interview Evidence Every respondent who played a significant leadership role in his or her institution expressed the opinion that STDF was definitely an autonomous organization. No one interviewed expressed an opinion that could be reasonably interpreted to imply that they felt that the STDF was not autonomous. In addition, almost all of those interviewed were pleased by the performance of the STDF in its first year of existence and hopeful, given the first year, that the STDF would indeed be a catalytic change agency in helping both to improve science and technology research in Egypt, and also to improve the complete cycle of innovation.



GOE Intent The creation of the Development Fund was motivated by a desire to create a catalytic change agency that could help to reform the existing institutional and government cultures, which at that time had the net effect of muting the full innovation cycle and thus slowing Egypt’s transition to a knowledge-based economy. This vision was clearly articulated in the 2006 Proposed Restructuring Plan for Science and Technology in Egypt document, authored by the current STDF Executive Director, Dr. El-Shafei. The actions then taken by the GOE, as outlined in the Introduction and Background section above are consistent with and support that vision. Thus, well before the MOU between the GOE and the USG was discussed, arguably the Egyptian Government had been made aware of and accepted the need for a new kind of science and technology organization that a priori would have to be autonomous in order to be successful as a catalytic change agency.

Structure There are some parallels between the structure and function of the Office of Science and Technology Policy – National Science Board – National Science Foundation on the U.S. side and the Supreme Council for Science and Technology – Science & Technology Development Fund Board – Science & Technology Development Fund on the Egyptian side. Although form and function cannot guarantee autonomy – only political will and vigilance can do that – it is encouraging that Egypt has adopted a model that is significantly parallel to a successfully established model that is assumed to include the requisite autonomy. Autonomy is a subjective concept, but that does not reduce its importance. Formal structure certainly is important in establishing agency autonomy, but no formal structure would protect or ensure autonomy in a system where there was not the political will to respect and protect that autonomy. Before considering the structures within which STDF is embedded, consider the U.S. National Science Foundation in the context of U.S. policy and practice. There is an NSF oversight entity called the National Science Board (see www.nsf.gov/nsb ) whose members are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate:

The NSB is made up of 24 Members appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate. The NSF director is an ex officio Member. Members serve six-year terms; one-third of the board is appointed every two years. NSB Members are drawn from industry and universities, and represent a variety of science and engineering disciplines and geographic areas. They are selected for their preeminence in research, education or public service.7

The mission and roles of the National Science Board also are explained at the website:

The National Science Board was established by Congress in 1950, and has two important roles. It provides oversight for, and establishes the policies of, the National Science Foundation, within the framework of applicable national policies set forth by the

7 http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/about/index.jsp



President and the Congress. It also serves as an independent body of advisors to both the President and Congress on broad national policy issues related to science and engineering research and education.8 In addition, The National Science Board has two important roles. It provides oversight for, and establishes the policies of, NSF within the framework of applicable national policies set forth by the President and the Congress. In this capacity, the Board identifies issues that are critical to NSF’s future, approves NSF’s strategic budget directions, approves annual budget submissions to the Office of Management and Budget, approves new programs and major awards, analyzes NSF’s budget to ensure progress and consistency along the strategic direction set for NSF, and ensures balance between initiatives and core programs. The second role of the Board is to serve as an independent body of advisors to both the President and Congress on broad national policy issues related to science and engineering research and education.9

In addition, an annual budget request for NSF is submitted by the President to the Congress and is considered, possibly amended, and voted on by House and Senate Committees on Appropriations’ Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies. Finally, the director of the NSF is appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. There are also other relevant science policy entities, including the House Committee on Science and Technology, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. Therefore note that both the congressional and executive branches of U.S. government establish national priorities for NSF and can exert considerable influence on NSF programs and funding patterns. However, most informed observers would support the proposition that NSF is an autonomous organization with respect to its mission of advancing knowledge. The Egyptian Supreme Council for Science & Technology was established by Presidential Decree 217 in 2007. The document (see Annex V) states:

(Second Article) The Council aims to promote and enhance science and technology to achieve the purposes of development in Egypt, through the identification of strategic directions for the country in areas related to scientific research and technology in the context of decentralization, and participation with the universities, scientific and research centers, scientific institutions, the public sector, and the civil society.

(Third Article)

To achieve the objectives, the Council is competent in the following:

1. The strategic planning to use scientific research in development, setting future visions and tasks entrusted to them, and the priorities at the national level.

8 http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/index.jsp 9 http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/about/index.jsp



2. The adoption of the national plan for scientific research in the country, achieve the

objectives of the strategic planning, and proposing appropriate policies to ensure their implementation to achieve their objectives in coordination with the competent ministries.

3. Adoption of the values and ethics of the science and technology system and its staff.

4. Work to promote the governance of science and technology system and its

development to keep pace with the global development and to maximize the capacities available for its development.

5. The Adoption of standards of progress of the executive plans and follow-up to

achieve the goals of the national plan.

6. Assessment of studies on the national position of science and technology compared to what is happening globally.

7. Taking a direction to prepare studies that would lead all sectors of society to assume

their roles in the field of science and technology.

(Seventh Article)

Ministries, agencies, and local government units and the business sector are to provide the Council with data, reports and researches related to its work and requested from them. They are also to provide the Council with periodic reports regarding the procedures taken to implement the Council's policy, its plans and programs.

STDF was established by Presidential Decree 218 in 2007. That document states (see Annex VI): The Fund will:

Ensure funding of the scientific research and technological development through the priorities set by the Supreme Council of Science and Technology. Support the full cycle of scientific research and product development based on knowledge and technology (published researches – Patents – semi-industrial models – products). Support dissemination of data and information on science and technology. Conduct on-going detailed evaluation of indicators of science and technology and scientific researches, and patents, and their impact on the economy in preparation for submission to the Supreme Council of Sciences and Technology.

In addition, Presidential Decree 218 also states:



The Fund is managed by a Board formed by a decree of the Chairman of the Cabinet, headed by the competent Minister of Scientific Research and membership of: • Three distinguished scientists in various fields of science and technology; • Three persons from the service and productive sectors; • The Executive Director of the Fund; and • One representative of each the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Economic

Development. The following diagram presents a suggested parallel between the U.S. and the NSF on the one hand, and Egypt and the STDF on the other:

Figure 4. USG/GOE Organizations Charts for NSF/STDF

Thus the two structures are remarkably similar in both form and function. This is perhaps not too surprising, since the now Executive Director of STDF and others spent significant time, before the Egyptian structure was set up, studying successful models in other countries in the world to judge best practices. Naturally, there are differences: for example, the NSF Director is an ex-officio member (see above) of the National Science Board, whereas, the STDF Executive Director is a full member (see Presidential Decree 218 above) of the STDF Board of Directors. Also, note that the National Science Board does weigh in (with a number of other organizations within the Executive and Legislative Branches) on national science policy, whereas in the

Office of Science and Technology Policy

National Science Foundation

National Science Board

Supreme Council for Science & Technology

Science & Technological Development Fund

STDF Board of Directors

Policy

Practice

U.S.A. NSF Hierarchy Egypt STDF Hierarchy



Egyptian model that function is played by the SCST. Note also that Articles 2, 4, and 7 above in Presidential Decree 217 make it clear that the voices of business and civil society participate in setting the national agenda for scientific research, and thus, national science policy has a market driven component. In some sense, though, the diagram above is misleading, because, as mentioned earlier, the number of agencies, units, and committees that influence national science and technology policy in the United States is extensive and distributed across the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of government, as mentioned earlier. For example:

In the National Science and Technology Policy, Organization, and Priorities Act of 1976, Congress established OSTP within the Executive Office of the President. Thus OSTP must report to both the Executive and Congressional branches. In different administrations the OSTP has been more or less important as an advisory body. The mission of the OSTP is to:

Advise the President and others within the Executive Office of the President on the impacts of science and technology on domestic and international affairs; Lead an interagency effort to develop and implement sound science and technology policies and budgets; Work with the private sector to ensure Federal investments in science and technology contribute to economic prosperity, environmental quality, and national security; Build strong partnerships among Federal, State, and local governments, other countries, and the scientific community; and Evaluate the scale, quality, and effectiveness of the Federal effort in science and technology.10

The Executive branch also has the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) and the President’s National Science and Technology Council (NSTC).

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) assists the President in overseeing the preparation of the federal budget and supervises its administration in Executive Branch agencies. Specific actions include formulating the President’s spending plans, evaluating the effectiveness of agency programs, policies, and procedures, assessing competing funding demands among agencies, setting funding priorities, and ensuring that agency

10 See http://www.ostp.gov/html/whatwedo.html.



reports, rules, testimony, and proposed legislation are consistent with the President’s Budget and with Administration policies.11

The directors of OSTP and OMB collaborate to issue an annual memorandum outlining the President’s priorities and the Research and Development Investment Criteria. This is very much like the role of the Supreme Council for Science & Technology in the Egyptian context.

The House and Senate Committees on Appropriations also play an important role in S&T policy. The research funding jurisdiction in Congress is spread across several committees. For example, the funding for NSF (along with NASA, NIST, and OSTP) and is under the jurisdiction of the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations’ Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies. Other agencies and their funding (and thus indirectly policy) are under such House and Senate Committees as the Appropriations’ Subcommittee for Energy and Water Development, the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense. The NSF mission was itself established by federal mandate in the preamble to the National Science Foundation Act of 1950 (Public Law 810507):

To promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other purposes.12

Thus, certainly in the United States, the actions of the NSF are strongly influenced by governmental bodies both in the area of policy and also funding for different research areas, as these governmental bodies interpret and define national need. The SCST determines national priorities for research and development. The STDF Board of Directors then uses these priorities to advise the STDF on the appropriate balance of award types and number of awards by category. The current national priorities are:

1. Renewable Energy; 2. Water; 3. Food and Agriculture; 4. Health; 5. Space Science; 6. ICT; and 7. Humanities.

For each of these national priorities, STDF is working on plans to tailor specific program competitions to that national priority. However, in the first year there was no attempt to cater specifically to these areas, though a review of the approved proposals shows a reasonable distribution across these categories. As noted above, the NSF also is subject to the influence of national priorities in the United States. In fact, a great part of the impetus to create NSF came 11 From http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/organization/role.html. 12 See http://www.nsf.gov/policies/egov_inventory.jsp).



out of the USG’s recognition that scientific research had played a prominent and positive role in World II. For a more recent example, when Former President Bush instituted his No Child Left Behind initiative after being elected in 2000, the NSF was tasked with competing what came to be known as the Math and Science Partnership program that directly addressed this national priority. Article 9-12 of the Financing of the Fund activities section of the Bylaws (see Annex VII) directly stipulated the range of funding that the STDF will provide, and it is in accordance with the Terms of Disbursement requirements:

Article (9) The Fund will provide funding for activities in the following areas:

1. Scientific research projects. 2. Basic and applied scientific researches. 3. Programs supporting innovations. 4. Venture capital projects (initiative) relating to the application of the research

findings and technological development. 5. Programs of emerging companies associated with the fields of science,

development, technology, and innovation. 6. Grant programs to young researchers and full-time scientific research. 7. Other research fields in a framework of openness, transparency and

competitiveness according to the priorities established by the Supreme Council of Science and Technology, and according to the controls approved by the Fund Board of Directors.

Article (10) In providing funding for scientific research projects, the following should be taken into consideration:

1. Identification of the problems facing the productive, service, and government sectors, and receive requests from those sectors to implement projects to find solutions to those problems.

2. Prepare the form "Research Project" including a diagnosis of the problems, description of the actual needs, future vision, targeted goals, proposed funding plan, and schedule.

3. The project is announced to the scientific research community and those Directors for submission of research proposals.

4. The Fund, through the use of a technical committee will select the best offer to contract for its implementation.

5. Funding will be based on a feasibility study of the project (economic model – targeted goals – mechanisms for replication, and follow-up, etc.) according to a phased schedule linked to progress of work.

6. Follow-up on the contracted projects will be performed by specialized evaluation committees.



Article (11) When providing funding for venture capital projects related to the application of findings of researches, technology development, it should be taken into account to fund: 1. Contribution to the share of public money for the agreements concluded between the

two government sectors (public and business) and the private sectors, as well as agreements "care and financing" for not-for-profit research and technological development, and to provide financial sources from sources of its funding to cover the share of public money for national agreements or the local component for projects with international partnerships.

2. Contracts for assistance and participation in financing research and technological development, not seeking financial or direct profits, with research centers and institutions and public agencies (service and economic), and the entities under their jurisdiction, and the civil society organization, public and private corporations, and competent funds, etc.

3. Contribution in capitals for funds or agencies or public or holding companies competent in scientific research or aiming at technological development or those established by the State or public agencies (service and economic) for that purpose.

4. Loan guarantees and credit facilities provided by the public sector banks and the National Bank for Investment to researchers and research centers, public and private sector companies working in the area of technological development.

Article (12) When financing activities of the Fund, the following should be taken into account: 1. The request for basic and applied science researches, and projects of emerging

companies related to science and technological development, innovation through an annual work plan approved by the Fund's Board of Directors, and arbitration shall be by the specialized committees and funding decision will be made by the Executive Director.

2. Youth research grant programs and full-time scientific researchers, programs supporting innovation and other research areas approved by the Fund's Board of Directors will be funded through public competitions or individual requests based on feasibility studies conducted and arbitrated by specialized committees, and a decision for funding will be made by the Executive Director according to the rules approved by the Fund Board of Directors.

The following is a list of the current programs that have been initiated by STDF based on this direction and guidance from the SCST and the STDF Board of Directors:

Funding Scientific Research and Technological Development The STDF provides:

• National Research Grants. This activity started in April 2008, and will be continued. However, STDF plans to fund a larger number of projects. The categories of awards include: Young Researcher Grants; Reintegration Grants; and Basic and Applied Research Grants; Industry-Academia Partnership Research Grants; Technology Transfer



Grants (in partnership with ETTIC); Business Competitiveness Grants; and Internship Grants for undergraduates.

• Jointly Sponsored Research Grants. This activity is currently running and will be

continued. The categories include US- Egypt Joint Grants and German Egyptian Research Fund (GERF).

• Equipment Grants. This program aims at improving S&T infrastructure in Egyptian

universities and research institutes.

• Mobility Programs. There currently are two mobility programs: the U.S. Egyptian junior scientists visits and the German Egyptian Scholarship project (GESP).

• Creating a joint funding program with the Industrial Modernization Center, including a

monitoring plan with the associated database and filing system for managing and tracking IMC projects.

35%

9%14%

5%

11%

7%

19%AgricultureBasic ScienceEngineeringICTMaterialsMedicalPharma/Chemistry

Figure 5. Disciplinary Distribution of Awards

These awards correspond to the national priorities set by the SCST and communicated through the STDF Board of Directors. Figure 6 provides an approximate breakdown of awards by home institution of the applicant:

Figure 6. First Year STDF Award Distribution National Research Center 27 Agriculture Research Center 15 Cairo University 12 Central Metallurgical Research and Development Institute 12 Mubarak City 9



Figure 6. First Year STDF Award Distribution Alexandria University 5 Monofia University 4 British University in Egypt 3 Beni Sweif University 2 Assuit University 2 Ain Shams University 3 VACSERA Holding Company 1 Supreme Council of Antiquities 1 South Valley University 1 National Institute for Measurement and Standards 1 Nile University 1 Hepatology and Tropical Medicine Research Institute 1 Mansoura University 1 Helwan University 1 Heliopolis Academy 1 Al Azhar University 1 Electronic Research Institute 1 Egyptian Meteorological Authority 1 Desert Research Center 1 Atomic Energy Authority 1 American University in Cairo 1 El Menia University 1 Zagazig University 1

There is evidence that in the first year the STDF made awards that will have an impact on both the private and public sector, and also to different institution types within those sectors. That is, since several of the Research Centers funded, for example the Agriculture Research Center and the Central Metallurgical Research and Development Institute (see last section), are very much market driven with direct ties to private and commercial interests, the awards to such research centers have an impact on the private sector. For example, according to the interviews, only 30 percent of the budget for the Agriculture Research Center is provided by the Government, much of the rest of the budget must be generated by research and services to agricultural interests. However, as noted in the last section this first year competition was the first of a wave of different types of funding opportunities that STDF intends to provide, and was chosen for the first year because it would be the easiest type to conceive, plan and execute in the time available. STDF has plans for future years for funding opportunities that will more directly target the private sector. For example:



Industry - Academia Partnership Research Grants This is a joint initiative between STDF and multinational and national companies that conduct R&D activities. The program aims to link scientists at universities and research institutions with researchers at R&D units within those companies (e.g., IBM, VACSERA, Siemens). STDF will fund scientists at research institutions and partner companies will fund their researchers. This partnership will build the capacities of scientists on both sides and will direct research at research institutions towards industry needs. Technology Transfer Grants (in partnership with ETTIC) This program will target technology transfer in certain areas of particular importance to Egypt (e.g., wind energy turbines). The grants will not be on a fixed, repeating calendar schedule, but instead will be announced on demand. Business Competitiveness Grants These grants will be directed mainly to companies based in Egypt. Calls will be very specific (e.g., manufacturing of different components of wind turbines) and will be announced on demand. Internship Grants: This initiative is concerned with placing science and engineering undergraduates in R&D units at multinational companies/ institutions inside or outside Egypt for a period of 2-3 months per year for apprenticeships in research and development. This program will help embed the culture of scientific research in the undergraduate system and therefore will help create a new generation of undergraduates with strong research skills. The target is to allocate 20 undergraduates in various companies by the year 2009/ 2010. The evaluation and selection of candidates will be carried out by the companies in alignment with the objectives of the grant.

Autonomy – Staff Management (4.1.2, 4.1.3, 4.1.7, 4.2.2)

4.1.2 Is STDF an independent authority that employs staff under a special payment system, allowing payment of competitive salaries and does the salary system allow flexible funding from public, private, and international sources? 4.1.3 Is there a majority of professional staffing? 4.1.7 Is the STDF autonomous to manage a highly motivated staff, including recruiting and dismissal based on performance and work needs, and using contracting and other modes of flexible forms of employment? 4.2.2 Does STDF employ modern management practices?

Staff Analysis Twelve of 20 STDF employees are professional staff. The Evaluation Team also performed a careful analysis of the staffing levels and ratios, through position descriptions, workflow



diagrams, CV analyses, interviews, and outcomes of the first year of STDF work. The outcomes were satisfactory. Of the current 20 staff, most key unit heads have been hired. The other staff who have been hired to date were essential to the first year of operations and comprise the Operations and Financial and Working groups. The balance of professional to support staff seemed appropriate to the Evaluation Team, as evidenced by the volume of work successfully completed during the beginning of the first year of operations. Figure 7 contains a list of the current staff, titles, and their occupational category.

Name Position Category

Dr. Aly El Shafei Executive Director Professional Dr. Abeer Shakweer Planning & Monitoring Manager Professional Mr. Safwat Salim Financial & Administrative Manager Professional Eng. Mohamed Nagaty Innovation Manager Professional Ms. Gailan Abdel Gawad Operations Manager Professional Dr. Mahmoud Sakr Project Officer Technical Mrs. Hala Ahmedy Technical Evaluation Committee Coordinator Admin Mrs. Nagwa El Sayed Statistical Data Collector Admin Mrs. Azza Hamdy Mobility Programs Coordinator Admin Mrs. Mehrivan Ragab Contracting Officer Admin Mrs. Doaa Nagy Assistant to Evaluation Committee Coordinator Admin Mrs. Maryam Fawzi Technical Evaluation Committee Administrator Admin Mr. Hesham Mostafa International Cooperation Specialist Technical Ms. Naglaa Mohamed Web Administrator Technical Mrs. Raghda Attia Financial Coordinator Admin Mr. Saleh Mohamed Administrative Coordinator Admin Mr. Atef Eissa Legal Affairs Officer Technical Mr. Abdel Halim Mohamed Abdel Halim

Financial Accountant Technical

Mr. Khaled Zaki Financial Accountant Technical Mr. Hassan Salama Financial Accountant Technical

Figure 7. Staff List, Title, and Category

The Evaluation Team was given CVs for all STDF staff and, based on reviews of the CVs and the staff interviews, found all of the staff very well qualified for their positions. The current plan is, by the end of the fiscal year 2008/2009, to fill the following STDF positions:

• Impact Assessment Unit coordinator; • Observatory unit coordinator; • 2 Publicity officers; • Media consultant;



• Impact Assessment consultant; • 4 Technology commercialization specialists; • 2 secretaries; • 2 Public relations specialists; • 2 Business developers; and • 6 Project officers.

See Annex IV for a copy of the advertisement for the STDF positions. The project officers will be responsible for monitoring the progress of awards that have been made. The Observatory unit coordinator, the two publicity officers, the media consultant, the impact assessment consultant, the two public relations specialists, and the two business developers are hires needed to provide the STDF core competencies necessary to support the initiatives that are laid out in the National Priorities section below and elaborated at length in the STDF Three Year Plan.

Staff Salaries and Hiring Policies By May 2009, a Human Resources consultant responsible for developing a salary scheme for STDF staff will be assigned. The task is expected to end by July of 2009, and the new salary scheme is to be effective by the end of September of 2009. By Presidential Decree and the STDF Bylaws, STDF positions are not government positions. For example, from the Bylaws (see Annex VII):

Article (15) The Executive Director of the Fund prepares the regulations for wages, incentives and bonuses, and personnel affairs in a fashion that conforms to the nature of the Fund's activities in order to achieve its objectives with no restriction of Government regulations and systems. These regulations are presented to the Board of Directors for approval.

As a consequence, STDF has been able to offer much more competitive salaries than the government for positions with similar job descriptions and requirements, and still provide the same benefits as government positions. The price that an STDF employee pays for this superior salary structure is loss of some security.

Article (35) The employee whose evaluation report is ranked weak for two consecutive years is presented to the personnel affairs committee. If it was evident from examination of his condition that he is better qualified for another job in the same grade of his position, he will be transferred to it. However, if the committee believes he is not qualified to work in any position in the same grade of his position in a satisfactory manner, his services will be dismissed but he will retain his rights for pension and bonus.



The STDF expectations for a position are well articulated, and all of the STDF staff that the Evaluation Team interviewed expressed considerable satisfaction with the arrangement. Given the talent level that the Evaluation Team observed, the comfort of these employees with the offered arrangement is understandable. As an aside, the Evaluation Team was told that when a government employee was reviewing the STDF files and records, she apparently inquired, and presumably not entirely in jest, whether or not there were STDF positions for which she could apply. Figure 8 provides a monthly salary comparison between the Government and STDF employees in three different categories. Staff benefits are not included, and are comparable between the two employers.

Government Monthly Salary STDF Monthly Salary

Financial Officer L.E. 300 L.E. 4500

Technical Researcher L.E. 450 L.E. 6500

Director of Administration L.E. 600 L.E. 14,000

Figure 8. Comparative Monthly Salaries (without benefits) Thus the differences in STDF salaries are greater by a typical factor of 15 with similar benefits. The STDF also has plans for staff professional development as part of its continuous improvement strategy, such as providing subscriptions to online database and international journals in the area of S&T management.

Management Practices As noted in the Introduction and Background section, the original formulation that informed the organizational design and management structures date back to the 2006 Proposed Restructuring Plan for Science and Technology in Egypt document. These ideas were refined over the last three years and have resulted in an organizational structure, as documented in both the STDF first Annual Report and the STDF current three year plan that is research-based, modern, and efficient. STDF consists of five main Working Groups (see Figure 9 below):

• Planning and Monitoring Working Group; • Projects Working Group; • Innovation Working Group, • Operations Working Group; and • Finance Working Group.



Figure 9: STDF Organizational Structure

The primary mission of the Planning and Monitoring Working Group is to ensure that all STDF activities align with the S&T policies and strategies as developed by the Supreme Council of Science and Technology, and to develop and monitor the S&T indicators. The primary mission of the Operations Working Group (OWG) is to ensure that submitted proposals are evaluated, selected, and awarded according to STDF rules and regulations; the primary mission of the Financial Working Group (FWG) is to oversee and manage the financial resources of STDF in alignment with STDF rules and regulations approved by its Board of Directors. The primary mission of the Project Working Group (PWG) is to ensure that funded projects are implemented in accordance to STDF technical standards, rules and regulations. The primary mission of the Innovative Working Group (IWG) is to support and enhance the innovation cycle and to promote innovation in order to positively affect socioeconomic development. In interviews with all of the staff, the Evaluation Team saw clear lines of communication within and between these units. A set of implicit measures of the adequacy of this initial staffing plan is found in the results of the first year Annual Report. As the annual report notes:

The grants are divided into National Research Scheme (NRS) and Joint Research Scheme (JRS) (i.e., U.S.-Egypt joint fund and GERF). Since the announcement of its first call for

Projects’Selection

Committee

Planning

Impact Assessment

Partnership

S&T Observatory

Information Dissemination

IINCO

National

Planning

Impact Assessment

Partnership

S&T Observatory


Planning

Impact Assessment

Partnership

S&T Observatory


IINCO

National

IINCO

National

IINCO

National

Technical Assistance (Information Technology)

Project officers

Sub Evaluationcommittees

Project officers

Sub Evaluationcommittees

Executive Director

Executive Director

Partnerships

Projects/ programs

VC

Partnerships

Projects/ programs

VC

Finance InnovationPlanning & Monitoring Projects

Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC)

Operations Working Group

Contracting unit

Board

STDC



proposals In April, 2008, 839 proposals were submitted to STDF in different grant categories and covering all fields of science. For the NRS, 543 proposals were submitted to the three grant categories: Reintegration (Re); Young Researcher (YR); and Basic and Applied (B&A), and 71 proposals were accepted…. For the U.S.-Egypt joint research projects, 166 proposals were submitted to Cycle XII, of which 40 proposals were approved and 160 proposals were submitted to Cycle XIII and are currently under the technical evaluation. A total of 93 proposals were submitted to the GERF and the final results will be announced on March 2009. For all grant types, 111 projects were accepted with a total budget of L.E. 68M, of which L.E 60M have been awarded through the NRS and L.E. 8M through the U.S.-Egypt joint grant.

At the time of the staff interviews conducted by the Evaluation Team, 567 proposals had been submitted to the NRS (resubmissions are not counted as different proposals). Of these, 470 were administratively eligible upon receipt. All of the ineligible proposals were returned to the applicants with instructions for correcting administrative errors in the proposals. Approximately 90 percent of these applicants did resubmit. Figure 10 illustrates these submission numbers.

567

20393

863

0100200300400500600700800900

1000

NRS U.S. -EgyptGrant

GERF Total

Figure 10. STDF Submitted Proposals

To date 86 awards have been announced and 173 declined (the rest are still in process). Most of the applicants whose proposals were declined were given suggestions, based on the reviews, for improvements, and were encouraged to reapply. Of the 173 declined there have been 135 resubmitted once, and 73 resubmitted twice. At the time of the interviews with the staff, applicants were being asked to wait for resubmission until an improved web-based system comes on line on April 1, 2009. In the first year proposals were processed as they were received. This does not make possible comparing groups of proposals to compare quality, but since there were sufficient funds in the first year to award all proposals thought to have suitable merit, this was not an issue. STDF is planning to eventually introduce fixed submission deadlines during the year, as the volume of applications increases.



Further evidence that STDF is using modern management practices are found in their plans for future structures that they are planning to put in place. The following is an enumeration of some of those structures.

Innovation Infrastructure The STDF plans to create infrastructure to develop and support innovation by:

• Developing appropriate and flexible funding mechanisms for S&T in a manner that supports innovation and the four phases of the cycle of innovation;

• Creating a Joint Innovation Pilot program with the IC2 institute at University of Texas, to

investigate the commercial potential of Egyptian technologies; 13

• Developing Intellectual Property Rights rules and regulations; • Establishing Venture Capitalists and encouraging participation by foreign venture funds

specialized in technology; • Supporting academic staff and Centers of Excellence; • Providing a Faculty for Factory program;

• Raising awareness of the role of STDF;

• Providing training on proposals evaluation to enhance the quality of the review process;

• Establishing an E-library Service to provide all international journals available at the

National Information Network for applicants registered at STDF according to their fields of specialization; and

• Running an annual competition for young researchers.

National Science and Technology Policy STDF also intends to provide services to inform national science and technology policy by:

• Developing Science, Technology, and Innovation indicators for Egypt;

• Continuously monitoring the developed indicators and indices;

• Providing requested data on S&T;

13 IC2 is a program out of the University of Texas at Austin that is working in partnership with STDF to help with models of commercialization – see the Sustainability section below for more details.



• Establishing a Science and Technology Observatory to support STDF in identifying R&D priorities in Egypt, and providing a continuous update on the state-of-the-art in different fields of science and technology both nationally and internationally;

• Developing a framework for impact assessment of S&T including developing models that

relate different fields of science with a set of socio-economic indicators;

• Recommending S&T strategy outline and developing roadmaps for the identified priorities;

• Reporting on state-of-the-art S&T at universities and research institutions in Egypt;

• Mapping the future of technology to help industries identify and address the technology

challenges and technology breakthroughs that are critical to their future; and

• Drafting a policy intended to act as a catalyst for improving the existing S&T environment.

Assessment and Quality Improvement The STDF intends to provide an impact assessment for STDF funded projects and improve STDF processes and structure by developing and implementing a:

• Set of indicators tailored to the type of projects/ grants and their objectives; and • Tailored monitoring and evaluation process for STDF with the help of an expert in such

models.

Communications and Marketing In order to more effectively raise awareness of the importance of S&T and the role of the STDF in S&T, the STDF intends to develop and implement a:

• Marketing strategy; • Communication strategy; and • Reporting strategy, including:

o Semi-annual STDF progress reports; o STDF Annual Report, due June of every year; o Biennial report (to be developed) on the status of STI; o Statistical Reports (issued monthly); o An annual report on the state of the art in S&T (different fields of S&T will be

considered each year); and o Quarterly policy briefs.



Process Management Another measure for modern management processes is the ability to handle complex tasks in an efficient manner that allows for continuous improvement. The primary ‘event’ that drives most of the currently staffed STDF structure is the proposal process: competition announcement and proposal submission, processing, review, and completion (either through rejection or through implementation). The organization chart is designed to facilitate the workflow necessary to handle this sequence of processes for the primary event, using modern management strategies embedded in a system that includes evolving feedback loops for quality control and improvement. The following Figure 11 diagram depicts this workflow structure and its relationship to the organization chart.

Figure 11. Proposal Processing Workflow Diagram

To facilitate communications and processing, the STDF has created, and at the time of this report was updating, an extensive website that contains a wealth of information for applicants, potential applicants, institutional administrators, and others. The primary web pages include (see www.stdf.org.eg):

P&M

Preparation/ Announcement

ofCall for

proposals

Announcement of results

Technical Evaluation

Committee Review

SC

Proposal

Check forEligibility

P&MInside and Outside Stakeholders

SC

Final Decision

Rejected projects

Acceptedprojects

Contracting

Implementation

Impact Assessment

AndDissemination

OWG

PWG

Monitoring &Evaluation

P&M

OWGEvaluators (up to 3 experts in the field

to be determined by TEC)Review

Projects’ rankings and Recommendations

P&M

OWGSuper ordinate experts representing each

area of national priority

OWG & FWG

SC - Selection Committee P&M - Planning and Monitoring Group OWG - Operations Working Group PWG - Projects Working Group



1. List and description of STDF programs and their URLs:

a. Young Researchers Grant http://www.stdf.org.eg/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3&Itemid=3

b. Reintegration Grants http://www.stdf.org.eg/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4&Itemid=13

c. Basic and Applied Research Grants http://www.stdf.org.eg/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5&Itemid=14

d. Egyptian U.S. Joint Research Grants http://74.126.194.91/files/US-Egypt/USST08/guide.pdf

e. Egyptian U.S. Junior Scientist Development Grants http://74.126.194.91/files/US-Egypt/USJB08/guide.pdf

f. Egyptian German Research Fund http://74.126.194.91/files/Final%20call%20100808.pdf

g. Mobility Grants http://www.stdf.org.eg/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=42&Itemid=149

2. Guide for Applicants

http://74.126.194.91/files/STDF%20Guide%20for%20Applicant.pdf

3. Intellectual Property Rights information http://74.126.194.91/files/IPR%20rules%20and%20regulations.pdf

Process Management Outcomes There were three primary measures applied to judge the outcomes of the processes put in place to handle the work flow of applications and their processing: 1) volume of actual applications processed; 2) an analysis of the application process from a quality control perspective; and 3) ‘customer’ satisfaction with the process. The volume of actual applications processed and the status of those applications at the time of the interviews with staff is discussed above. The Evaluation Team felt that this performance was remarkable given the volume of work and its complexity in terms of startup issues, number of categories of awards, amount of feedback provided to initially unsuccessful applicants, and the number of types and actual number of organizations to be contacted (for successful proposals). In order to evaluate the application process from a quality control perspective, the Evaluation Team asked for a sample of proposal ‘trajectories’ with dates corresponding to the ‘milestones’ suggested by the diagram in Figure 12 provided by the Evaluation Team.



Figure 12. Application Process Analysis Tool The Evaluation Team created this schematic by selecting a subset of the STDF Proposal Processing Workflow Diagram, and then expanding on that subset in a way that displays the central role of the Principal Investigator (applicant), labels the transition points in the formal process (counter-clockwise along the outside arc of the diagram), and possible points of communication with the applicant. Specifically the request to the Operations Working Group Director was, for a small representative sample of proposals, to provide estimates for the times between processing events counter-clockwise along the circumference of the arc, and estimates of the number and types of interactions with the PI along the spokes. In addition, Figure 13 below provides a grid whose entries in the ‘Applicant Column’ represent specific proposals, the numbers in the ‘Transitions’ row represents the transition points with those labels in the Application Process Analysis Tool, and the numbers in the cells in the body of the table represent the number of days to reach that point from either the start (in the case of the first non-empty entry in a row) or from the previous point in the process that has a non-empty entry in that cell in the table. Thus in the first row, the ‘42’ indicates that it was 42 days from time of application to submission to the Technical Evaluation Committee (in cases where no further interactions with the applicant were necessary to satisfy the administrative review, the transition label 1 is superfluous).

Proposal

Check for eligibility

Rejected

Accepted

Contracting

Implementation

TechnicalEvaluation

Recruit Evaluators

ProjectEvaluation

Rankings and

Evaluations

Final Decision

PrincipalInvestigator

Request Modifications

1

2

1A3

4

5

6

7

7A

8

8A

8B

9

9A

10

10 A11

11A Readiness of Check

12A12



Transitions 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total StatusApplicant

A 42 39 59 15 27 15 45 242 check not readyB 248 12 25 30 1 1 317 RejectedC 80 53 52 3 4 192 RejectedD 55 4 25 112 18 214 ImplementationE 152 25 37 13 22 53 302 EvaluationF 33 9 4 2 7 24 167 246 Implementation

Figure 13. Sample Transition Times (in Days) Between Nodes in Process Analysis Tool The above table represents first the total time (in days) taken from date of application to reach either the date of its final status or the date of the staff interviews, in those cases where the final status had not yet been achieved. The table also breaks this total time down according to the transition times between nodes in the Process Analysis Tool above. Figure 14 represents the number and types of contacts with the PI (and in case F with the PI’s institution) at those nodes in the above schematic at which such contacts were made. These do not include the formal notification of status to the PI, in those cases where such notification applies.

Transitions 1-2 9 10 12Applicant

A 0 4 emls, 2 phnB 5 emlsC 0 D 1 eml >2 phnE 7 emlsF 0 2 emls >2 phn >2 phn, 2 visits

Figure 14. PI Contacts Made During Application Processing (see Figure 10)

First it is noteworthy that the Operations Management Group was able to produce this information with one day’s notification from the Evaluation Team – this speaks well of their information and database management, and of their overall organizational coherence. Second, it is noteworthy that the Operations Management Group Director immediately recognized the value of such an analysis, and by the next day had her staff implementing an improvement that she had made on the application process analysis tool, and also writing code so that the information about transition times was automatically collected, compiled, and formatted in a summary manner. Although some of the time intervals (up to ten months) represented in this small sample (the Evaluation Team requested examples of a range of process times) were long, there was often a mitigating story that Fig. 11 documents. For example, note that it took applicants B and E a very long time simply to satisfy the administrative requirements of the application submission. And during this time the STDF Operations Working Group sent five or more emails to each individual. For applicant F, everything was going smoothly until first contact with the applicant’s institution after the award was made – almost all of the subsequent delay can be accounted for by a rather unusual reaction that the institution had to the announcement of the award. This unusual reaction was explained to the Evaluation Team by the STDF staff and also by the applicant, during an interview. Also, this problem is even mentioned in the STDF First Annual Report,



which reflects the transparency with which STDF is attempting to operate. Another mitigating factor was the great variation in time it took to recruit reviewers and the great variation in time it took reviewers to complete their review work. Although this is a perennial problem in all review processes, the OWG is developing some approaches that could help reduce these spreads in response times. In general the Evaluation Team felt that the processing times were within acceptable ranges, and especially given that this was the first year of operations. Also, it is clear that the OWG had several procedures in place to track exceptional cases, and they already were planning various quality improvement approaches to both hone internal procedures and also more effectively to communicate expectations to reviewers, applicants and the applicants’ institution.

Peer Review (Implicit in 4.1.5)

Process The process for peer review of STDF proposals has been well thought out, designed and monitored for the academic and research cultures from which it must draw. Peer review has many challenges – integrity of process, recruitment of suitable reviewers with appropriate areas and depth of expertise, conflict of interest issues, confidentially of ideas presented in applications, time delays in the actual reviews, or reviews that are not of sufficient quality, to name a few. The STDF Executive Director and senior staff are well aware of these challenges in the abstract and also within Egyptian academic and research cultures. The relevant part for peer review in the Proposal Processing Workflow Diagram (Figure 15) is repeated below:

Figure 15. Application Peer Review Process The eligibility check is an administrative function that is handled by the OWG. The Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC) is selected by the Executive Director in consultation with the Board. The primary role of this committee is to give a cursory review of the proposals and then recommend, for each application, a suitable pool of reviewers. The selection criteria to the TEC is a combination of demonstrated research excellence, leadership positions in academic, research, and industrial settings, and strong awareness of the pool of researchers in specific areas of concentration as determined by national policy that is communicated by the Board through the

Technical Evaluation

Committee Review

SC

Check forEligibility

Final Decision

OWGEvaluators (up to 3 experts in the field

to be determined by TEC)Review

Projects’ rankings and Recommendations

P&M

OWGSuper ordinate experts representing each

area of national priority



Executive Director. Currently there are seven members of the TEC, but in an interview, the Executive Director indicated a desire to double the size of the committee to have, among the members, more disciplinary redundancy, broader disciplinary expertise, and a greater collective knowledge of the pools of qualified reviewers. For each application, the TEC provides the OWG with the names for a suitable pool of reviewers and the OWG recruits 2-3 reviewers. If a reviewer is unable to complete the review in a reasonable time or provides an inadequate review, then the OWG recruits a new reviewer. The OWG also seeks an additional reviewer if the reviews provided have significantly different assessments of the merits of the application. Reviewers are given a small stipend to compensate for the review work. As noted in the Process Management Outcomes section above, there is considerable variance in response times of reviewers. The reviewers are provided with a scoring rubric and also with a copy of the STDF’s Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct – a copy of that document can be found in Annex 3 of the Draft Annual Report. This provides an explanation of the reviewer’s role and the professional standards that should govern the reviewer’s behavior. The Executive Director has had to take corrective actions on occasion in the whole chain of this review process, for example when evidence emerged that a reviewer might have behaved in a way that violated the agreed to professional standards. The OWG then culls from the reviews an overall ranking of the proposal and a recommendation to fund or not fund. This information and recommendation is then reviewed by Selection Committee that is made up of the Executive Director and several senior staff, and a final determination is made to fund or not fund. However, these decisions are presented to the Board that on rare occasion, because of perceived national need, has decided to fund a proposal that had credible reviews but that had not been approved initially by the Selection Committee. Board input is particularly valuable in proposals related to the IC2 since these proposals are selected on the basis of both intellectual merit and significant commercialization potential.

Stakeholder Perception In the pool of institutional leaders and applicants interviewed by the Evaluation Team, reactions to the quality of the proposal reviews were generally good, especially when contrasted with the review quality of competitions prior to the establishment of the STDF. In fact several applicants made exactly such comparisons. There were several complaints, both by institutional leaders in terms of perceived bias in terms of the differences between their own institution’s applicants and guesses by the leaders of those institutions of the reviewers, and by the applicants in terms of reviews that did not reflect sufficient knowledge of the subject area of the application. The Evaluation Team discussed these issues at length with these individuals, and also with the STDF Executive Director and STDF staff. STDF is creating a database of reviewers that contains information on the reviewer’s performance, both in terms of punctuality and review quality. The OWG also shared with the Evaluation Team the Evaluation Form provided to the reviewers and a selection of reviews for the proposals listed above. In general the Evaluation Team judged that the STDF leadership team had taken a wise and effective approach to the overall review structure, to the methods used to select reviewers, and to processes to help improve the review process into the future. Several stakeholders suggested using international reviewers in some cases, for example in cutting edge, interdisciplinary areas where the qualified pool of Egyptian



researchers may be too limited. The Evaluation Team also judged the execution of these approaches to be sound and professional, although naturally they will require continual fine-tuning and improvement in future cycles as one would expect, since there is always room for continued improvements. .

STDF Board of Advisors (4.1.8, 4.2.4) 4.1.8 Is STDF governed by a board of scientists, private sector investors, other non-governmental stakeholders, and some government representatives, to provide sound business practices in managing the institute and its research endeavors? 4.2.4 Is STDF governed by a Board of scientists, private sector investors, other non-governmental stakeholders, and some government representatives, which is free from government control on its research agenda and plan and other operations? The current governance structure in which the STDF resides is represented by Figure 16 below.

Figure 16. STDF Governance Structure

The Supreme Council for Science & Technology (SCST) was established by Presidential Decree 217 (see Annex V):

The Council aims to promote and enhance science and technology to achieve the purposes of development in Egypt, through the identification of strategic directions for the country in areas related to scientific research and technology in the context of decentralization, and participation with the universities, scientific and research centers, scientific institutions, the public sector, and the civil society.

Supreme Council for Science & TechnologyChaired by the Prime Minister

Science & Technological Development FundExecutive Director

Science & Technological Development FundBoard of Directors

Chaired by Minister for Higher Education and State Minister for Scientific Research



Note that there is a direct reference in this text of strategic directions in the areas related to scientific research and technology “…in the context of decentralization…” SCST membership also is specified by the decree:

The Council is formed by a Presidential Decree by the President, chaired by the Chairman of the Cabinet and membership of:

• Competent Minister of Scientific Research – Reporter; • Competent Ministers of Defense and Military Production; Electricity and Power;

Economic Development; Higher Education; Communications and Information Technology; Trade and Industry; and Agriculture and Land Reclamation;

• Two Ministers proposed by the Cabinet subject to annual renewal; • Five distinguished scientists in the field of science and technology; • The Executive Director of the Science and Technology Development Fund; and • Three public figures to be nominated by the Chairman of the Cabinet.

Thus the STDF Executive Director is a voting member of the SCST. The SCST membership also includes five distinguished scientists in the field of science and technology. Several of the current SCST members hold citizenships outside of Egypt. The Science & Technology Development Fund (STDF) and its Board of Directors was established by Presidential Decree 218 (see Annex VI):

(First Article)

A fund is established called "Science and Technology Development Fund" with a public legal identity, and it follows the competent Minister for Scientific Research, and is based in Cairo. (Second Article)

The Fund will:

• Ensure funding of the scientific research and technological development through the priorities set by the Supreme Council of Science and Technology;

• Support the full cycle of scientific research and product development based on knowledge and technology (published researches – Patents – semi-industrial models – products);

• Support dissemination of data and information on science and technology; and • Conduct on-going detailed evaluation of indicators of science and technology and

scientific researches, and patents, and their impact on the economy in preparation for submission to the Supreme Council of Sciences and Technology.



(Fourth Article)

The Fund is managed by a Board formed by a decree of the Chairman of the Cabinet, headed by the competent Minister of Scientific Research and membership of:

• Three from the distinguished scientists in various fields of science and technology;

• Three from the service and productive sectors; • The Executive Director of the Fund; and • A representative of each the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of

Economic Development.

The term of the office is three years, subject to renewal. The current members of the Board were recommended by the STDF Executive Director to the Minister for Higher Education and State Minister for Scientific Research and approved by the Prime Minister. The members represent government, industry, and academia, and together they form a multidisciplinary team. The following is a list of STDF’s board of directors:

• Chairman, Dr. Hany Helal, Minister of Higher Education and State for Scientific Research);

• Dr. Aly El-Shafei, STDF’s Executive Director; • Aly El-Tahry, Co-founder of Beltone Financial ; • Mr. Helmy Abouleish, Co-owner of SEKEM; • Mr. Khalil M. Kandil, Chairman of Kandil Industries Group; • Dr. Mourad M. Bakhoum, Professor at Cairo University, Faculty of Engineering,

consulting with ACE Consulting Engineers; • Dr. Hisham Haddara, Professor at Ain Shams University, Faculty of Engineering; • Dr. Lobna Mohamed Abdellatif, Professor at Cairo University, Faculty of Economics and

Political Science; • Dr. Ashraf El-Araby, Representative of the Ministry of Economic Development • Ms. Sanaa El Sayed, Representative of the Ministry of Finance.

Note that the Board membership has representatives from group that are key stakeholders for STDF. Thus the composition of the Board is consistent with the Terms of Disbursement requirement that STDF being governed by a board of scientists, private sector investors, other non-governmental stakeholders, and some government representatives The role of the Board of Directors is stipulated in the Bylaws (see Annex VII):

Article (5) Competence of the Board of Directors The Board of Directors is the authority dominating its affairs and business, and is entitled to make decisions as seen appropriate to achieve its objectives, specifically:

1. Drawing up the general policy of the Fund to follow up on its implementation.

2. The adoption of the budget for the Fund.



3. Determining the rules of spending the Fund’s money on activities that serve its goals. 4. Accepting contributions and donations received by the Fund and are in line with its goals. 5. Issuance of the decisions and bylaws of the Fund. 6. Issuance of the bylaws for personnel affairs, wages, incentives, and awards to the Fund personnel. 7. Examination of all matters which the Chairman of the Board of

Directors believes they are under the jurisdiction of the Fund. The Board of Directors was appointed and had its first meeting held on March, 2008. Ten meetings had been held at the time of the evaluation. The Evaluation Team attended part of the March, 2009 meeting. At these meetings the members of the board oversee, discuss, and approve different activities of STDF.

Sustainability and Public/Private Funding (4.1.9, 4.2.5, 4.2.6) 4.1.9 Is STDF seeking significant private sector contributions to the funding of projects?

4.2.5 Is STDF being given the necessary budget allocations to ensure its empowerment to achieve its goal and vision? 4.2.6 Is STDF planning for sustainability through joint private and public funding sources for research?

Government STDF received a government authorization of L.E. 100,000,000 for 2008/2009. It should be noted that half of this budget was provided by the Ministry of Industry, and this is an important commitment by government industrial representatives to STDF. STDF also received L.E. 12,000,000 from the Ministry of International Cooperation for 2008/2009. STDF has two separate accounts, one in the National Investment Bank and one in the Center Bank of Egypt. The money from the government is deposited in the National Investment Bank, since those funds must be committed to be spent by the end of the fiscal year (or they revert). L.E. 25,000,000 was deposited in the account at the beginning of the fiscal year, and each time the fund goes below L.E. 15,000,000 STDF has requested and received an additional L.E. 25,000,000. At the time of the review, STDF had awarded L.E. 80,000,000, of which L.E. 26,000,000 already has been encumbered. Government L.E. 200,000,000 has been allocated to STDF by the Ministry of Economic Development and approved by the Prime Minister for the year 2009/ 2010.

Industrial Funding As noted in the last section, half of the first year’s budget was provided by the Ministry of Industry. This certainly constitutes industrial funding in some sense, since these are funds that would otherwise go directly to industry that both the Ministry of Industry and presumably its industrial and business stakeholders agreed was a good use of those funds. As noted in the



Funding Scientific Research and Technological Development subsection of the National Priorities section above, the awards given this year include a significant number to several of the Research Centers, for example the Agriculture Research Center and the Central Metallurgical Research and Development Institute are very much market driven (for example, according to the interviews only 30 percent of the budget for the Agriculture Research Center is provided by the Government, much of the rest of the budget must be generated by research and services to agricultural interests). Thus, not only does the Ministry of Industry provide funding for STDF, but then this funding is thus “leveraged” through significant contributions by industry to these centers.

Technology Transfer and Private Funding Private funding can only come to STDF through philanthropy or by attracting investments, for example through venture capital, that sees the potential commercial payoff of the IP rights flowing from supported research. STDF is pursuing both avenues. It should be noted that one the interviewees who is very active in the financial world said that, in terms of the second approach, the IP potential of research and development is significant enough that STDF might consider “auctioning” off the opportunity for the right kind of entity to manage the IP potential that STDF supported research represents. A subcommittee of STDF’s Board of Directors has been formed to investigate these technology commercialization alternatives. According to the 1991 law no. 203, STDF has the right to own a holding company. The holding company could establish affiliated companies with the private sector. IC2 has been recommended as a consultant for this advanced technology management company. As an interdisciplinary research unit of the University of Texas at Austin, the IC² Institute has advanced the theory and practice of Entrepreneurial Wealth Creation. The theories and hypotheses developed at IC² are tested in life-scale through several world-recognized programs, for example through its Global Commercialization Group that helps to catalyze emerging knowledge-based economies throughout the world. In 2008, IC2’s Global Commercialization Group completed a three-and-one-half month pilot project for STDF. Forty-five Egyptian technologies were evaluated for commercial potential and ten finalist-technologies were selected for further research relative to the U.S. market. Representatives of the ten finalists presented information on the innovations to an international panel of judges, and four winning technologies were awarded STDF grants, as well as ongoing support and training to help bring the technologies to market. Additionally, STDF managers were trained at IC² Institute in technology assessment and technology commercialization. STDF will start with the 10 technologies selected by the joint pilot project with IC2. The Board of Directors subcommittee has recommended the establishment of a company in cooperation with the private sector and owned by STDF for managing new technological projects. The intent is that the company will:

• Study the submitted projects from technical and financial aspects; • Investigate the international market needs for the proposed technologies; • Assess the proposed technology development plans; • Investigate how to negotiate issues related to Intellectual Property Rights; and • Investigate the optimum project management option, for each proposed technology, to

maximize the benefits of STDF.



The STDF intends to consider the following factors when deciding on the most appropriate project management mechanism for the company:

• Selecting a strategic partner; • Positioning the company as a technology incubator; • Establishing an emerging company; and • Negotiating with VC’s for funding the technology.

In preparation for establishing such a plan the STDF will:

• Complete market study for the new technology; • Complete a financial study for the proposed project; • Develop a business plan; • Provide financial, technical and administrative skilled labor for the company with

scientists providing technical expertise; • Develop a suitable exit strategy; and • Present all studies to Board of Directors for approval and funding.

A schematic for the current STDF version of a model for technological development is provided in Figure 17 below.

Figure 17. STDF Plan for Technological Development

STDF

Technology Development

Venture Capital

Advanced Technology Holding Company

PC PC PC PC PC PCPC PC PC PC PC PC

IC2

Partner

IC2

Partner

Basic Research

papers

Basic Research

papers

Applied Research

patents

Applied Research

patents


Prototypes


Prototypes

ProductDevelopment

Products

ProductDevelopment

Products



Intellectual Property Rights An internationally recognized key for moving ideas to commercialization is the issue of intellectual property rights. STDF is taking this very seriously. For example, from a structural perspective, the STDF Innovation Office has IP as one of its primary focuses. In addition STDF has created a policy that affects the IP rights of those inventors whose relevant research is supported by STDF funding. This policy is explained in the IPR rules and regulations section of the STDF website.14

As a tool for protecting scientific and technological discoveries with commercial potential, Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) play an important role in promoting innovation and economic development of a country. For a knowledge-based, innovation-driven economy, IPR provides incentive for enterprises and individuals to create and innovate; a fertile setting for the development of, and trade in, intellectual assets; and a stable environment for domestic and foreign investment. Egypt has a great potential benefit from developing and exploiting intellectual property as a part of its economic development strategy based on technological upgrading and integration into the world economy. IPR protection offers a patentee an exclusive right to prevent a third party from an unauthorized act of making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing the patented product or process. This monopoly is given to the inventor in exchange for exposing the details of his/ her technological development. 4. STDF Revenue Sharing Mechanisms According to the Egyptian Law for IPR No. 82 for 2002, Article 7, financial ownership rests with the funding agency, however the revenue is to be shared on case by case upon negotiation with inventors. A fair compensation is to be made for the inventor if no negotiation was made. In all cases the inventor is named. The following revenue sharing mechanisms are to be applied by STDF. 4.1 Basic & Applied Research Grants In all cases, STDF will patent an invention in Egypt in order to preserve the inventor's right to fill an international patent application for a period of 30 months. This will allow STDF to undertake a feasibility study for patenting the invention internationally. In case STDF decides to internationally patent an invention, STDF will cover patenting process fees and will be the patent assignee. STDF reserves the right to leave its position as an assignee at any time, or transacts the patent to a subsequent assignee. The revenue sharing scheme will range from 2-15% for the inventor, and will be determined based on the market size, table 1.

14 See http://74.126.194.91/files/IPR%20rules%20and%20regulations.pdf.



If STDF decides not to internationally patent an invention, the inventor, or a third party has to cover the patenting process fees. The patent will be owned by the inventor or the third party, however STDF will have 10% share of the revenue in return of initial incubation of the patent.

It should be noted that although, in the United States, NSF does not make an IP claim on discovery that comes all of NSF funded research (this is covered by the 1980 legislative Bayh-Dole Act), STDF plays a larger role, by design, then NSF does in this domain. In particular, it is not part of the NSF mission to be responsible for moving ideas to commercialization. In the case of Egypt, because of current conditions, the Evaluation Team felt that the STDF approach is preferable. The primary reason for this opinion is that in IP issues there have to strong organizations that not only protect IP interests, but also promote them in a way that benefits both commercialization and the inventor. In Egypt this infrastructure has not yet been well established. Clearly STDF can help organize such infrastructure over time, and playing a coordinating, central role with respect to other stakeholders such as universities and research centers makes considerable sense.

Partnerships STDF is establishing to partnerships to provide greater overall coherence within the Science and Technology realm. A MOU was signed with the Egyptian Academy for Scientific Research for cooperation in conducting workshops. The Ministry of Electricity, Arab Organization for Industrialization and other Egyptian companies were contacted to develop a plan for strengthening wind energy technologies in Egypt. The STDF Executive Director has reached out to the leaders of many stakeholder organizations to consult and look for ways to collaborate and together establish new best practices. Those leaders interviewed who have been working with the Executive Director feel that the relationship is mutually beneficial to their respective organizations and promising for the success of the STDF as a catalytic change agency.

Terms of Disbursement Summary

This section attempts to summarize some of the salient findings for each of the Terms of Disbursement. The analysis of the Terms of Disbursement Verification section above follows the study’s methodology. In particular, as outlined in both the Executive Summary section and Annex I:

A particular challenge found in many such evaluation studies is that researchers have tended to focus on discrete elements, such as documents, funding and assessment practices associated with the reform. For example, Anderson & Helms15 argue that reformers need to “come to grips with the totality of this complex situation” in order to fully understand these complex dynamic systems. Interviews were based on a qualitative case study approach. The qualitative case study approach is a methodology for conducting an empirical inquiry into a “contemporary phenomenon within its real life

15 Anderson & Helms. (2001). The ideal of standards and the reality of schools: Needed research. Journal of research in science teaching. 38(1): 3-16.



context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident.”16

The nuances of such a textured evaluation are largely lost in any attempt to summarize. Thus the reader is forewarned that what follows is intended for ease of reference only, and not as a substitute for the full analysis on which it depends. In what follows we use the numbering and formatting of the Terms of Disbursement that were introduced in the Terms of Disbursement Verification section.

Benchmark 4.1 Benchmark 4.1 begins with the language:

Benchmark 4.1: Issuance of presidential decree and executive order establishing the Egyptian National Science Foundation (ENSF) (now STDF) with the necessary budget allocations for the first year of operations made. The ENSF (now STDF) will be an autonomous, demand-driven organization for funding and managing scientific research that will be free from all constraints limiting the efficiency of governmental research organizations and linked to private sector competitiveness.

There then follow the Terms of Disbursement, and Benchmark 4.1 ends with:

Means of Verification for Benchmark 4.1: To assist USAID in determining if the Terms of Disbursement have been met, the GOE will provide:

1. Copy of presidential decree establishing the ENSF(now STDF) with the characteristics outlined in the Terms of Disbursement. 2.Copies of relevant documents governing operations of the ENSF, such as Bylaws, and an approved Policies, Procedures, and Guidelines Manual delineating the rules governing the operations of the ENSF (now STDF), which indicate that the ENSF (now STDF) has the characteristics outlined in the Terms of Disbursement.

We will first summarize the Terms of Disbursement, and then address the overall Benchmark. 4.1.1 Is the STDF autonomous for funding and managing scientific research and development in support of business and industry? National research priorities are set by the Supreme Council for Science and Technology (SCST, including GOE personnel and five distinguished scientists) and STDF funding of grants during 16 Stake, R. (1994). Case Studies. In N.L. Denzin, Y. (Ed.), Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications p. 13.



the first year mirrored national priorities. The Evaluator’s note that there is evidence that STDF made awards that impact both the public and private sector and in the future additional opportunities for funding will more directly target the private sector including: Industry-Academy research grants, Technology Transfer grants and Business Competitiveness Grants. These private activities are further supported by the STDF Bylaws, for example, Article 10 (in part), “In providing funding for scientific projects, the following should be taken into account: 1. Identification of the problems facing the productive, service, and government sectors, and receive requests from those sections to implement projects to find solutions to those problems.” As another example, Article 11, relative to providing venture capital, states (in part) that such contributions should include, “…the share of public money for the agreements concluded between the two government sectors (public and business) and the private sectors…,” as well as, “…assistance and participation in financing research and technological development…,” and, “…contribution in capitals for funds or agencies or public or holding companies competent in scientific research or aiming at technological development or those established by the State or public agencies (service and economic) for that purpose.” 4.1.2 Is STDF an independent authority that employs staff under a special payment system, allowing payment of competitive salaries and does the salary system allow flexible funding from public, private, and international sources? The First Article of Presidential Decree 218 states that STDF is a “public legal entity.” The Bylaws shows a salary and contracting system that is novel relative to GOE staffing. For example, for comparable government jobs, salaries for STDF positions are on the order of 15 times greater than the Egyptian salary scale. The funding sources in the first year of operations is from public sources, but the financial accounts system and STDF Bylaws are consistent with funding salaries from other sources. 4.1.3 Is there a majority of professional staffing? STDF employs 20 persons; 12 are professional or technical and 8 are administrative – 60% professional/technical; 40% administrative, confirming a majority of professional staff. Also, the Evaluators determined that the current mix of professional and technical staff is appropriate for the challenges and work loads. 4.1.4 Can the STDF determine research priorities in response to research demands of private business and industry, taking into consideration national priorities? National research priorities are set by the Supreme Council for Science and Technology (SCST, including GOE personnel and five distinguished scientists) and STDF funding of grants during the first year mirrored national priorities. The Evaluators note that there is evidence that STDF made awards that impact both the public and private sector and in the future additional opportunities for funding will more directly target the private sector including: Industry-Academy research grants, Technology Transfer grants and Business Competitiveness Grants; These private activities are further supported by the STDF Bylaws, for example, Article 10 (in part), “In providing funding for scientific projects, the following should be taken into account: 1. Identification of the problems facing the productive, service, and government sectors, and



receive requests from those sections to implement projects to find solutions to those problems. Further Article 11 states, relative to providing venture capital, that there should be local components for international partnerships, public and private corporations, and loan guarantees and credit facilities providing credit to public and private sector companies (among others). 4.1.5 Is the STDF competing funded research between private and public affiliated researchers? Figure 6 shows the number of awards by home institution of the principal investigator, resulting in 5 awards to 3 private institutions, and 106 awards to Egyptian researches at 25 public institutions including many universities and research centers. However, the Evaluators note that several of the public institutions, in particular the national research centers, have substantial non-public funding (for example, in the case of the Agriculture Research Center the breakdown is approximately 30% public funding and 70% private funding). Thus the support to researchers whose institutions have a significant affiliation with the private sector is arguably larger than just the fraction of awards that went to principal investigators at private institutions. In addition, the Evaluators found evidence that the STDF has plans to organize, advertise and fund additional forms of research competition, some of which will be targeted at the private sector. 4.1.6 Is the STDF able to manage research projects for results? The Evaluators investigated process management of grants in detail, from the flow of announcements and call for proposals, to contracting, to implementation, as well as impact assessment and monitoring and the evaluation components. During the first year the emphasis was on advertising the initial competition and then managing the application, adjudication, and notification processes. At the time of the evaluation only a handful of awards were fully implemented, and thus the Evaluators were not able to collect evidence on actual research project management. However, the systems are designed to do so and STDF is in the process of hiring and training the necessary staff to be able to manage research projects for results. 4.1.7 Is the STDF autonomous to manage a highly motivated staff, including recruiting and dismissal based on performance and work needs, and using contracting and other modes of flexible forms of employment? Article 15 of the Bylaws gives the “Executive Director of STDF the right to prepare the regulations for wages, incentives, and bonuses and the personnel affairs regulations in a fashion that conforms to the nature of the Fund’s activities in order to achieve its objectives with no restriction of the Government regulations and systems.” Some examples of motivating activities include a salary structure roughly 15 times that of wages for comparable government positions. Additionally, the Bylaws for wages, incentives and bonuses detail categories for overtime, incentives for distinction, promotion, bonuses, and additional remuneration for those with expertise to perform specific tasks (e.g. limited contracts, one time performance). Both full time employees and contractors may receive bonuses and distinction payments. The Bylaws provide rules for the contracting for temporary employees, and payment schedules (amounts to be paid) are published. STDF manages its own recruitment of



professional/technical and administrative staff, and has the authority to terminate employment for lack of performance 4.1.8 Is STDF governed by a board of scientists, private sector investors, other non-governmental stakeholders, and some government representatives, to provide sound business practices in managing the institute and its research endeavors? The STDF Board of Directors via Presidential Decree 218 includes: (Headed by) the Minister of Higher Education and Scientific Research; three distinguished scientists from various fields; three persons from services and productive sectors; the Executive Director of STDF; one representative of each the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Economic Development In sum, the Board membership has 4 Government of Egypt officials (40%) and 6 science or service/productive section representatives (60%). During the first year of STDF operations, the Board met almost monthly, and the minutes from those meetings confirm that the Board is providing sound business practices for managing the STDF and its research, IP, and commercialization endeavors. 4.1.9 Is STDF seeking significant private sector contributions to the funding of projects? STDF (and its Board of Directors) is pursuing strategies to both encourage philanthropic contributions and to attract private investments, and is even considering “auctioning” off the opportunity to manage the Intellectual Property rights potential of STDF supported research. According to the 1991 Law No. 203, STDF has the right to own a holding company and that company could establish affiliated companies with the private sector. These associations with the private sector, including private sector members on the STDF Board of Directors, suggests private section involvement and the “auctioning” activity, plus existing and developing activities of mutual support with the US and German governments, as well as the University of Texas-Austin’s IC2, further suggest that STDF is developing strategies to secure private and international contributions to Egypt’s research activities.

Benchmark 4.1 Summary As stated above, Benchmark 4.1 has three parts: an introductory paragraph, the Terms of Disbursement, and Means of Verification. For the last part, the GOE provided the Evaluation Team with:

• A copy of presidential decree 218 establishing the STDF, and with the characteristics outlined in the Terms of Disbursement;

• Copies of the relevant documents governing the STDF, including the ByLaws and the Minutes of all of the meetings (held up until the time of the evaluation) of the STDF Board of Directors. These documents clearly indicate that the STDF has the characteristics and oversight outlined in the Terms of Disbursement

The summaries of the Terms of Disbursement are in the previous section. For the introductory paragraph, and as discussed in the Terms of Disbursement 4.2.5 below, the necessary budget allocations were made for the first year of operations. In addition, the introductory paragraph of



Benchmark 4.1 stipulates that STDF “…will be an autonomous, demand-driven organization for funding and managing scientific research that will be free from all constraints limiting the efficiency of governmental research organizations and linked to private sector competitiveness.” This stipulation was broken up into the parts that constitute the Terms of Disbursement and were covered in the Terms of Disbursement section, except for explicitly addressing the “…that will be free from all constraints limiting the efficiency of governmental research organizations…” The Evaluators found no constraints that were applied to STDF that would limit the efficiency of governmental research organizations.

Benchmark 4.2 Benchmark 4.2 begins with the language:

Benchmark 4.2: Full operation of ENSF (now STDF) with above characteristics with necessary GOE budget allocations for second year operations made.

There then follow the Terms of Disbursement, and Benchmark 4.2 ends with:

Means of Verification for Benchmark 4.2: To assist USAID in determining if the Terms of Disbursement have been met, the GOE will provide: 1. Evidence of second year budget allocations made to the ENSF (now STDF) enabling it to perform its full range of envisioned duties and responsibilities. 2. Copy of annual report demonstrating that ENSF (now STDF) has autonomously and successfully operated for its first year achieving its main goals and objectives, and undertaking the necessary organizational steps and staffing actions to achieve these goals, (e.g., qualified professionals recruited at competitive salaries, funding demand-driven research serving real needs). 3. A positive review of first year technical and managerial operations by an impartial qualified team of research management experts and scientists, jointly assigned by the Ministry of State for Scientific Research and USAID.

We will first summarize the Terms of Disbursement, and then address the overall Benchmark. 4.2.1 Has the STDF been set up in the first year as an autonomous research funding and management foundation? Presidential Decree No. 218 of 2007 established the Science and Technology Development Fund. The First Article establishes fund as a public, legal entity, the Second Article lays out the objectives of the Fund, the Third Article identifies funding sources, the Fourth Article establishes the Governing Board, the Fifth Article grants the Board of Directors authority to make decisions appropriate to achieving objectives via decisions issued by a majority votes of



the attendees, the Sixth Article defines the role of Executive Director of STDF and that the Executive Director reports to the Board of Directors for review and approval of performance of STDF, the Seventh Article provides the authority for a special budget and special bank account, and the Eight Article authorizes the Board of Directors of STDF on issues of financial and administrative by-laws governing the Fund’s work without restriction to the government regulations and systems in place. This Presidential Decree, the ensuing Bylaws, and the actions of the Board of Directors and the STDF are consistent and in fact support the creation of STDF as an autonomous research funding and management foundation. 4.2.2 Does STDF employ modern management practices? Modern management practices are reflected in structure, function, and feedback mechanisms. The STDF Organization Chart and its implementation to date are consistent with modern management practices. The organization chart is designed to facilitate the workflow necessary to handle this sequence of processes for the primary event, using modern management strategies embedded in a system that includes evolving feedback loops for quality control and improvement. The functioning of the organization also reflects suitable implementation of the organizational planning. For example, at the time of the Evaluation, 567 proposals had been submitted to the first year competition that STDF had created. Of these, 470 were administratively eligible upon receipt. All of the ineligible proposals were returned to the applicants with instructions for correcting administrative errors in the proposals. Approximately 90 percent of these applicants did resubmit. Further evidence that STDF is using modern management practices are found in their plans for future structures that they are planning to put in place in several different areas that will substantially extend the current organization chart. 4.2.3 Is the STDF demand driven and serving the needs of a competitive private sector, and other national priorities? The Second Article, Presidential Decree No. 217 states that the Supreme Council for Science and Technology aims to promote and enhance science and technology to achieve the purposes of development in Egypt, through the identification of strategic directions for the country in areas related to scientific research and technology in the context of decentralization, and participation with the universities, scientific and research centers, scientific institutions, the public sector, and the civil society. The Third Article states that the Objectives of the Council include: strategic planning; adoption of a national plan; adoption of values and objectives of a scientific organization; and promoting the governance of a science and technology system to keep pace with global development and to maximize the capacities available for that development. These policies have been translated through the STDF Board of Directors to first year STDF actions and future plans that are consistent with and in fact support these criteria. 4.2.4 Is STDF governed by a Board of scientists, private sector investors, other non-governmental stakeholders, and some government representatives, which is free from government control on its research agenda and plan and other operations?



The STDF Board of Directors, as also described above in 4.1.8, is responsible for translating national science policies and needs into STDF actions. The national policies and needs are, by Presidential Act 217, determined by the Supreme Council for Science and Technology membership. Supreme Council membership includes a variety of stakeholders aimed at providing strategic direction for S&T including the Prime Minister (chair), nine GOE Ministers, five distinguished scientists, and three public figures (nominated by the chair of the cabinet). The Eighth Article of Presidential 217 reads, “The Council’s decisions, plans and programs are to be executed as soon as approved, and all the State agencies must implement the plans and programs established by the Council in the field of science and technology. The President of the Council may adopt some of the decisions as recommendations to be presented to the Cabinet for a decision.” Thus, as in the U.S., the government determines the broad parameters of national needs in science and technology, and the agency (and its Board) are then responsible for its research agenda, plan, and operation in service to those national priorities.

4.2.5 Is STDF being given the necessary budget allocations to ensure its empowerment to achieve its goal and vision? STDF received a government authorization of L.E. 100,000,000 for 2008/2009. Half of this was provided by the Ministry of Industry – an important commitment by government industrial representatives to STDF. STDF also received L.E. 12,000,000 from the Ministry of International Cooperation for 2008/2009. STDF has two separate accounts, one in the National Investment Bank and one in the Center Bank of Egypt, and each provides different advantages. L.E. 25,000,000 was deposited by the GOE at the beginning of the fiscal year, and each time the fund goes below L.E. 15,000,000 STDF has requested and received an additional L.E. 25,000,000. At the time of the review, STDF had awarded L.E. 80,000,000, of which L.E. 26,000,000 already has been encumbered. Government L.E. 200,000,000 has been allocated to STDF by the Ministry of Economic Development and approved by the Prime Minister for the year 2009/ 2010. 4.2.6 Is STDF planning for sustainability through joint private and public funding sources for research? In the Financing of the Fund activities, Article 9, of the Bylaws, it is stated that STDF will provide funding for activities in the following areas: scientific research projections; basic and applied research, programs supporting innovations, venture capital projects, emerging company projects, grant programs to young researchers, other research fields in the framework of openness, transparency and competitiveness. Although the means for funding these programs from sources other than the GOE are only in the early stages of planning and exploration, the STDF already has substantial, relevant ties with the U.S., Japan and Germany.

Benchmark 4.2 Summary As stated above, Benchmark 4.2 has three parts: an introductory sentence, the Terms of Disbursement, and Means of Verification.



The introductory sentence requires 1) full operation of the STDF with the characteristics spelled out in Benchmark 4.1 – this has been done; and 2) necessary GOE budget allocations for second year operations – this has been done as discussed in 4.2.5 above. The summaries of the Terms of Disbursement are in the previous section. For the Means of Verification the GOE:

• Provided the Evaluation Team with evidence of second year budget allocations for STDF sufficient to perform its full range of envisioned duties and responsibilities;

• Provided the Evaluation Team with copies of the STDF first annual report that have

helped demonstrate that STDF has autonomously and successfully operated for its first year achieving its main goals and objectives, and that it is undertaking the necessary organizational steps and staffing actions to achieve these goals; and

• Cooperated in the research and interviews that have contributed to this Report that

constitutes the required positive review of the first year STDF technical and managerial operations.



Annex I. Report Methodology With the background noted at the beginning of the report, the Evaluation Team faced the challenge of verifying Benchmarks 4.1 and 4.2 of a very new agency, the Science & Technology Development Fund, in a complex environment of stakeholders. As Dr. Aly El-Shafei’s report documents,17 a number of the features in the historical context of research and technology in Egypt worked indirectly against achieving a knowledge-producing based economy. Thus, not only was this new agency faced with the normal problems associated with the creation and start-up of a new entity, but it also, to be successful, would have to adopt a role of catalytic change agent within the relevant administrative, research, intellectual property, and commercial cultures within which it would be embedded. The Evaluation Team attempted to address these two issues by assessing the achievement of the Benchmarks from two somewhat different perspectives:

1) From the point of view of governance, organizational structure, and process alone; and 2) From the point of view of seeing this new agency as a catalytic change agent in a

complex culture situation that it “inherited.” These two perspectives are not necessarily at odds, but the second perspective can provide an important context for interpreting data that is collected using the first. This was the strategy adopted by the Evaluation Team. For the first perspective, it should be noted that many of the benchmarks are concrete and have been assessed directly by securing and analyzing STDF documents and records and by interviewing a small number of key individuals. Members of the STDF staff provided relevant documentation and helped arrange interviews with key stakeholders. As noted earlier, the Evaluation Team read or reviewed and analyzed over 25 relevant documents and websites and conducted 35 interviews with more than 70 key informants of institutions and organizations that are significant stakeholders in Egyptian Science and Technology. A partial list of the collected documents is included in Annex II. Annex III contains a list of people and their organizations interviewed by the Evaluation Team. The following Annexes contain Presidential Decrees 217 and 218, the Science & Technology Development Bylaws, and a further document that the Review Team also considers a significant source of evidence for Benchmark verification. All of these materials cited and the interviews provide the factual evidence base for the conclusions of this report. At USAID’s request, the body of this report has been organized around a close review of the various Terms of Disbursement. The first analysis carried out by the Evaluation Team used a structurally oriented taxonomy that, in effect, reorganized and grouped the components of the Benchmarks in a way which the Team felt provided a more coherent view of the STDF and progress to date. The Taxonomy:

17 Dr. Aly El-Shafei. Proposed Restructuring Plan for Science and Technology in Egypt.



I. Governance – Is the STDF being governed by a board of scientists, private sector investors, other non-governmental stakeholders, and some government representatives, to provide sound business practices in managing the institute and its research endeavors?

II. STDF structure and management – Is the organizational design and management

structure of the STD efficient and adequate for fulfilling the goals set forth in the agreement? Are the staffing patterns and strategies of the STDF adequate for adjudicating research proposals and managing and monitoring funded research for results, and is there an appropriate professional-to-support staff ratio to accomplish these functions?

III. STDF staffing – Are the recruitment, retention, and human resource performance

measurement policies and practices of the STDF sound and will they lead to the hiring and retaining of competitive professional staff? Is the STDF sufficiently autonomous that it can manage a highly motivated staff, including recruiting and dismissal based on performance and work needs, which uses contracting and other flexible forms of employment?

IV. Autonomy – Is the STDF an autonomous, demand-driven organization for funding

and managing scientific research that will be free from all constraints limiting the efficiency of governmental research organizations and linked to private sector competitiveness?

V. Peer review – Are the peer review and current proposal review systems fair,

transparent, autonomous and coherent?

VI. National priorities – Do the funded research decisions reflect a balance between national research priorities and responsiveness to market needs, as well as the balance between shorter and longer term research?

VII. Sustainability – Are the budgeting, planning, and other outreach and marketing

activities sufficient to properly address sustainability issues?

In order to represent perspective 2) above, the design strategy for the interviews was informed by research on methodological practices in evaluating complex organizational structures and associated reforms. A particular challenge found in many such evaluation studies is that researchers have tended to focus on discrete elements, such as documents, funding and assessment practices associated with the reform. For example, Anderson & Helms argue that reformers need to “come to grips with the totality of this complex situation” in order to fully understand these complex dynamic systems. Informed by such insights, this review, when considering the qualitative aspects inherent in some parts of terms of disbursement 4.1 and 4.2 and the corresponding categories of the taxonomy, combined its close look at a wide sampling of available written, published, and electronic documentation related to the Science & Technology



Development Fund implementation and an interview strategy commensurate with the challenges of early change in a complex culture of related practices across a variety of institutional types. Interviews were based on a qualitative case study approach. The qualitative case study approach is a methodology for conducting an empirical inquiry into a “contemporary phenomenon within its real life context, especially when the boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident.”18 The methodological approach is to analyze the STDF implementation process through the analytic lens of institutional culture. For this document, culture is defined as patterns of behavioral norms, beliefs, and values that are differentially internalized and expressed by individuals and larger collectives, each operating within the structural and social constraints of different administrative units. The underlying research paradigm guiding the interview approach was that of ethnographic research, where the Evaluation Team attempted to study the STDF’s first year implementation effort within the relevant Egyptian science, technology, institutional, and industrial contexts. The Evaluation Team did this in a grounded and multi-dimensional fashion, based largely on factual evidence and the perspectives and experiences of “local participants,”19 as well as the experience and expertise of the Evaluation Team itself.

18 Stake, R. (1994). Case Studies. In N.L. Denzin, Y. (Ed.), Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications p. 13. 19 Agar, Michael. (1996). The Professional Stranger : An Informal Introduction to Ethnography, San Diego : Academic Press.



Annex II. Document List Below is a list of the documents reviewed by the Evaluation Team in doing its assessment.

• Purposed Restructuring Plan for Science and Technology in Egypt – July 2006 • Support for Human Development & Economic Sector Development; Memorandum of

Understanding Between The Arab Republic of Egypt acting through its Ministry of International Cooperation (MIC) and The United States of America acting through its U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) – September 2007

• Assessment of the Egyptian Science and Technology Fund; Global Evaluation &

Monitoring II; GEM II BPA Number EDH-E-00-08-00003-00; Proposal submitted by the Aguirre Division of JBS International; January 2009

• Presidential decrees number 217- 2007 and 218- 2007 establishing the authority for the

creation of the Science & Technology Development Fund entity;

• Agenda and Minutes for the seven 2008 meetings of the STDF Board of Directors

• Agenda and Minutes for the first STDF Board meeting in 2009

• Copy of detailed 2008 advertisement for STDF vacancies (posted in El Ahram National Newspaper): Project Officers (7); Impact Assessment Unit coordinator; Information Dissemination Unit coordinator; International cooperation specialist; Planning Unit coordinator; Projects’ Administrator; S&T observatory coordinator; Secretaries

• Science & Technology Development Fund website – http://www.stdf.org.eg/

• Science & Technology Development Fund Introduction, vision, mission, objectives, etc

document

• STDF vacancies listing with position descriptions, qualification requirements, and other information http://www.stdf.org.eg/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=16&Itemid=63

• Reintegration grant information

http://www.stdf.org.eg/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4&Itemid=13

• STDF Young Researchers grant information – at STDF website http://www.stdf.org.eg/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3&Itemid=3

• STDF Basic and Applied Research grant information – at STDF website

http://www.stdf.org.eg/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5&Itemid=14



• STDF Guide for Applicants Manual – at STDF website

http://74.126.194.91/files/STDF%20Guide%20for%20Applicant.pdf

• U.S.-Egyptian grant and grant application information – at STDF website http://www.stdf.org.eg/

• Egyptian/German grant and grant application information – at STDF website

http://www.stdf.org.eg/

• Mobility grant information – http://www.stdf.org.eg/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=25&Itemid=70

• STDF Intellectual Property Rights document

http://74.126.194.91/files/IPR%20rules%20and%20regulations.pdf

• Draft STDF Annual Report – January 2009

• Draft STDF 3-Year Plan

• Technology Nomination / Application Form for the Egyptian Technology

• Commercialization Program – STDF Innovation Group

• Quicklook Report for Technology Commercialization Program analyses of several IP projects – STDF Innovation Group

• Technology Nomination / Application Form for Egyptian Technology Commercialization

Program – STDF Innovation Group



Annex III. Interview List Below is a schedule of stakeholder interviews conducted by the Evaluation Team.

Date Time Institutions Name Position Venue11am-2pm USAID Dr. Nancy Ahson Higher Education Team

Leader USAID

USAID Ms. Elizabeth Warfield

Director for Health and Education USAID

USAID Ms. Evelyn Rodriguez Perez Education Team Leader USAID

2-3pm USAID Dr. Adel Gohar USAID

11am-2pm USAID Dr. Nancy Ahson Higher Education Team Leader USAID

2-4pm USAID Dr. Adel Gohar USAID

11am-2pm STDF

Dr. Aly El-Shafei, MOIC mission and USAID education mission

STDF Executive Director, MOIC Ambassador & First Undersecretary and USAID mission concerned with Education

STDF

2-4pm STDF Dr. Abeer Shakweer

Planning and Monitoring Manager STDF

10am-3pm STDF Dr. Abeer Shakweer

Planning and Monitoring Manager STDF

2-3pm STDF Dr. Aly El-Shafei STDF Executive Director STDF

4-5pm STDF Eng. Mohamed Nagaty

Innovation Workgroup Manager STDF

22/02/2009 2-3:30pm MOHE Dr. Hany Helal Minister of H.E. MOHE

10-11:30am Beltone financial Eng. Aly El Tahry Co-Owner, Member of STDF

BODBeltone financial- Garden City

2-4pm Nile University Dr. Tarek Khalil PresidentNile University- 6th of October City

12-1:30pm DRTPC Dr. Ahmed Anis Chairman DRTPC

2-3pm Cairo University Dr. Hosam Kamel President Cairo University

10am-1pm STDF Operations Working Group STDF

2:30-4pm DAAD

Mr. Christian Huelshoerster and Mrs. Mona Ayoub

Director and Deputy dircetor DAAD premises

1/3/2009 11:30am-1:30pm CMRDI Dr. Mahmoud

Nasr Chairman CMRDI- Tebeen

10-11:15am Missions department

Dr. Mohamed Gaber Abou Ali Director MHESR

11am-12:45pm NRC Dr. Magdy El

Nashar Applicant STDF

1-3pm STFD Financial Group STDF

9-10:30am Ain Shams University Dr. Noha Zaki PI STDF

11am-1:30pm IMC

Hesham Wagdy and Adham Nadeem

Chairman IMC

6-7pm STDF Board Meeting Board Members STDF

11am-12pm

2/3/2009

25/02/2009

16/02/2009

17/02/2009

24/02/2009

19/02/2009

18/02/2009

4/3/2009

26/02/2009



Date Time Institutions Name Position Venue

5/3/2009 10-11:30am NRC Dr. Hany El Nazer Chairman NRC

12-1:30pm Cairo University Dr Mourad Bakhom

Professor - member of STDF BOD STDF

8/3/2009 10-11:30am Nile University Dr. Frederick BetzVisting Professor, Management of Technology, formerly NSF

Nile University

10/3/2009

11am-12:30pm

Alexandria library Alexandria

Library

1-2pm Alexandria university Dr. Morsi El Souda Awarded in the joint program

with IC2 Alexandria University

2:30-3:30pm Farous University Dr. Maha Moneer Awarded in the joint program

with IC2 Farous University

11/3/2009 10-11:30am ARC Dr. Ayman Farid

and PIs Director ARC- Giza

4-5pm MOHE Dr. Hany Helal Minister of H.E. MOHE

12/3/2009 10-11:30am Ain Shams

University

Dr. Ahmed Zaki Badr & Dr. Mahmoud El-Tayeb VP

President Ain Shams University

4-7pm STDF Dr. Aly El Shafei STDF Executive Director STDF



Annex IV. STDF Staff Advertisement Science and Technology Development Fund

Presedential decree 218 for the year 2007

Required for the Science and Technology Development Fund

The Science and Technology Development Fund, established by the presidential decree number 218 for the year 2007, is announcing the following vacancies: 1. Project officers (7 vacancies) Main Responsibilities:

Surveying Egyptian institutes for science and technology; Develop database for those institutes, their strength and

weaknesses; Monitoring the implementation of STDF projects by

various institutes; and Organize conferences and workshops in relation to on

going projects. Qualifications

Ph.D. in the last 10 years in one of the following fields: o Water science & technology (Code Water-Officer) o Energy science & technology (Code Energy-Officer) o Information & Communication Technologies (Code

ICT-Officer) o Agriculture science & technology (Code Agriculture-

Officer) o Life sciences (Code Life-officer) o Space sciences (Code Space- Officer) o Engineering (Code Engineering- Officer) o Basic sciences (Code Basic- Officer) o Humanities & social sciences (Code Social- Officer)

Has international publications; Experience in research project management; and Aware of the complete cycle of science and technology.

2. Impact Assessment Unit coordinator (Code IA-Coordinator) Main responsibilities:

Assessing the socio-economic impact of STDF various activities;

Developing, using, and monitoring S&T indicators; Investigate future targets for S&T indicators; and Monitoring and evaluating the overall management and

functioning of the science and technology system and the national system of innovation.

Qualifications M.Sc. in economics or other related field; and Min. 2 years experience in impact assessment and

indicators development OR

B.Sc. in economics or other related field; and Min. 5 years experience in impact assessment and

indicators development.

3. Information Dissemination Unit coordinator (Code ID-

Coordinator) Main responsibilities:

Developing and implement information dissemination strategies;

Monitoring the impact of the developed strategies; Organize workshops and events for information

dissemination and public awareness; and Developing reports and policy briefs to various

stakeholders. Qualifications

B.Sc. in mass media, journalism, or other related field; Excellent communication skills; Experience in developing information dissemination

strategies; and Min. 5 yrs experience in organizing workshops and events.

4. International cooperation specialist (Code IC-Specialist) Main Responsibilities:

Identifying and reporting on possible cooperation opportunities;

Preparing and administering cooperative agreements; Organizing events in relation to international cooperation;

and Monitoring progress of cooperative agreements and

assessing the impact on STDF.

Qualifications B.Sc. in a related field (M.Sc. is an asset); Min. 5 years in international cooperation; and Excellent communication and negotiations skills.

5. Planning Unit coordinator (Code PU-Coordinator) Main Responsibilities:

Formulating short-term, long-term and annual development plans for STDF in alignment with its goals and objectives;

Compiling, analyzing and reviewing the plan performance on monthly and quarterly basis to take timely corrective measures for successful implementation of the plan;

Measuring STDF performance, and review the existing situation in order to formulate plans for enhancing STDF performance;

Ensuring that STDF activities are aligned with national strategies and priorities; and

Analyzing the budget position of STDF, especially for yearly investment allocation.

Qualifications

B.Sc in Management, development or other related field (M.Sc. is an asset);

Min. 5 years experience in planning, preferably in relation to S&T activities;

Experience in business models development; and Excellent IT and reporting Skills.

6.Projects' Administrator (Code PA) Main Responsibilities:

Checking projects against STDF eligibility criteria; Developing database on applicants, projects and other

related information; Monitoring projects alignment with time schedules; Notifying applicants with projects' status; and Developing statistics on projects.

Qualifications B.Sc. in economics or other related field; Excellent communication and reporting skills; Min. 5 years experience in administration; and Excellent IT skills (Microsoft office).

7. S&T observatory coordinator (Code STO-Coordinator) Main Responsibilities:

Coordinate with experts surveying S&T regional and international activities;

Developing call for proposals for S&T observatory related studies;

Coordinating and monitoring the progress of the ongoing studies; and

Organizing events related to the activities of the observatory.

Qualifications

M.Sc. in science/ engineering or related field; Excellent communication and reporting skills; Min. 5 years experience in research in relation to S&T; and Excellent IT skills (Microsoft office).

8. Secretaries (Code Sec.) Main Responsibilities:

Assist with routine work; Archiving STDF materials; Preparation of meetings (agenda, reports, all documents

necessary for discussion during the meeting); Attend and take minutes of meetings.

Qualifications

B.Sc.in a related field; Minimum 3 years of secretarial work; and Excellent communication and IT skills.

To apply for the above mentioned vacancies, please email your CV to Vacancies @stdf.org.eg Please state the code of the position you are applying for. Deadline for submission is 10.07.2008.



Annex V. Presidential Decree 217(SCST)

Decree by the President of the Arab Republic of Egypt

Number 217 of 2007

For Establishing and regulating the Supreme Council of Science and Technology

The President Having considered the Constitution And the Law regulating universities issued by Law 49 of 1972, and Law No. 53 of 1973 for the State General Budget and the amending Laws, and Law No. 69 of 1973 concerning the systems for science researchers in scientific institutions, and Presidential Decree No. 377 of 1998 regarding regulating the Academy for Scientific Research and Technology, and approval of the Cabinet in the session of 23/5/2007, and the presentation of the Chairman of the Cabinet,

Decreed

(First Article)

A council is established in the Cabinet called "The Supreme Council of Science and Technology"

(Second Article)

The Council aims to promote and enhance science and technology to achieve the purposes of development in Egypt, through the identification of strategic directions for the country in areas related to scientific research and technology in the context of decentralization, and participation with the universities, scientific and research centers, scientific institutions, the public sector, and the civil society.

(Third Article)

To achieve the objectives, the Council is competent in the following: 1. The strategic planning to use scientific research in development, setting future visions

and tasks entrusted to them, and the priorities at the national level. 2. The adoption of the national plan for scientific research in the country, achieve the

objectives of the strategic planning, and proposing appropriate policies to ensure their implementation to achieve their objectives in coordination with the competent ministries.

3. Adoption of the values and ethics of the science and technology system and its staff. 4. Work to promote the governance of science and technology system and its development

to keep pace with the global development and to maximize the capacities available for its development.



5. The Adoption of standards of progress of the executive plans and follow-up to achieve the goals of the national plan.

6. Assessment of studies on the national position of science and technology compared to what is happening globally.

7. Taking a direction to prepare studies that would lead all sectors of society to assume their roles in the field of science and technology.

8. The preparation of draft laws and regulatory procedures to implement the proposed policies.

(Fourth Article)

The Council is formed by a Presidential Decree by the President, chaired by the Chairman of the Cabinet and membership of:

- Competent Minister of Scientific Research - Reporter. - Competent Ministers of Defense and Military Production; Electricity and Power;

Economic Development; Higher Education; Communications and Information Technology; Trade and Industry; and Agriculture and Land Reclamation.

- Two Ministers proposed by the Cabinet subject to annual renewal. - Five distinguished scientists in the field of science and technology. - The Executive Director of the Science and Technology Development Fund. - Three public figures to be nominated by the Chairman of the Cabinet.

The term of the office is three years, subject to renewal. Decisions of the Council are issued by majority votes of attendees. In case of equal votes, the side of the President prevails. The Chairman of the Council may call for attendance at meetings any of the officials or experienced representatives from government agencies, scientific institutions, business organizations or others from the active civil society, to discuss any of the topics within his competence without counting their votes.

(Fifth Article)

The Council holds a meeting at least every three months, and a special annual meeting to follow-up on the implementation of its policies, plans and programs in light of the periodic reports submitted by various State agencies working in the field of science and technology.

(Sixth Article)

The Ministry competent in the scientific research will assume the General Secretariat of the Council and follow-up the implementation of its decisions.

(Seventh Article)

Ministries, agencies, and local government units and the business sector are to provide the Council with data, reports and researches related to its work and requested from them. They are



also to provide the Council with periodic reports regarding the procedures taken to implement the Council's policy, its plans and programs.

(Eighth Article)

The Council's decisions, plans and programs are to be executed as soon as approved, and all the State agencies must implement the plans and programs established by the Council in the field of science and technology. The President of the Council may adopt some of the decisions as recommendations to be presented to the Cabinet for a decision.

(Ninth Article)

This Decree will be published in the official Gazette and shall take effect from the day following the date of publication.

(Hosny Mubarak) Issued by the Presidency of the Republic on 27 Jumada II 1428 AH, corresponding to July 12, 2007. Copy to: His Excellency the Minister of Higher Education and His Excellency the Minister of Scientific Research. Secretary General of the Cabinet (Dr. Samy Saad Zaghloul)



Annex VI. Presidential Decree 218 (STDF)

Decree by the President of the Arab Republic of Egypt Number 218 of 2007

For the Establishment of the Science and Technology Development Fund

The President Having considered the Constitution And the Law of Public Bodies issued by Law 61 of 1963, and Law No. 53 of 1973 for the State General Budget and the amending Laws, and Law No. 69 of 1973 concerning the systems for science researchers in scientific institutions, and Law No. 127 of 1981 regarding Government Accounting, and Presidential Decree No….of 2007 for the Establishment of the Supreme Council for Science and Technology, and in the session of 23/5/2007, and the presentation of the Chairman of the Cabinet,

Decreed

(First Article)

A fund is established called "Science and Technology Development Fund" with a public legal identity, and it follows the competent Minister for Scientific Research, and is based in Cairo.

(Second Article)

The Fund will: - Ensure funding of the scientific research and technological development through the

priorities set by the Supreme Council of Science and Technology. - Support the full cycle of scientific research and product development based on

knowledge and technology (published researches – Patents – semi-industrial models – products).

- Support dissemination of data and information on science and technology. - Conduct on-going detailed evaluation of indicators of science and technology and

scientific researches, and patents, and their impact on the economy in preparation for submission to the Supreme Council of Sciences and Technology.

(Third Article)

The Fund resources and sources of funding consist of:

a. Appropriations which may be allocated by the State to the Fund. b. Grants and loans approved by the State, and what maybe made available as a local

equivalent to them.



c. Donations, subsidies and contributions accepted by the Board of Directors that are not inconsistent with the objectives of the Fund.

d. Proceeds of the investment of the Fund resources.

(Fourth Article)

The Fund is managed by a Board formed by a decree of the Chairman of the Cabinet, headed by the competent Minister of Scientific Research and membership of:

- Three from the distinguished scientists in various fields of science and technology. - Three from the service and productive sectors. - The Executive Director of the Fund. - A representative of each the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Economic

Development.

The term of the office is three years, subject to renewal. The Chairman of the Board of Directors may call for attendance at meetings any of the officials or experienced representatives from government agencies, scientific institutions, business organizations or others from the active civil society, to discuss any of the topics within his competence without counting their votes.

(Fifth Article)

The Board of Directors is the authority dominating its affairs and business, and is entitled to make decisions as seen appropriate to achieve its objectives. The Council holds a meeting at least once a month by an invitation from its Chairman. Decisions are issued by majority votes of attendees. In case of equal votes, the side of the President prevails.

(Sixth Article)

The Executive Director of the Fund will be appointed by a Decree from the Chairman of the Cabinet determining his financial treatment, based on a nomination from the Minister competent in scientific research affairs. He will be in charge of the implementation of the public policy approved by the Board of Directors, the conduct of the work of the Fund, and reporting on performance and follow-up to the Board of Directors for review and approval. He also represents the Fund before the court and in his connections to others. A number of personnel may be assigned from the concerned ministries to work in the secretariat of the Fund and to carry out the work.

(Seventh Article)

The Fund will have a special budget including all the revenues expected to be collected and the expenses estimated to be spent during the fiscal year. The fiscal year will begin and end with the



State fiscal year. The surplus of funds in the Fund will be carried forward from one fiscal year to another. A special bank account will be opened at the Central Bank.

(Eighth Article)

The Board of Directors will issue the financial and administrative by-laws governing the Fund's work without restriction to the government regulations and systems in place.

(Ninth Article)

This Decree will be published in the official Gazette and shall take effect from the day following the date of publication.

(Hosny Mubarak) Issued by the Presidency of the Republic on 27 Jumada II 1428 AH, corresponding to July 12, 2007. Copy to: His Excellency the Minister of Higher Education and His Excellency the Minister of Scientific Research. Secretary General of the Cabinet



Annex VII. Bylaws

The Financial and Administrative Bylaws of the Science and Technology Development Fund

Financial and Administrative Bylaws

Article (1) Definitions The terminologies used in the bylaws are interpreted as follows: "Republican Decree" means the Republican Decree establishing and regulating the Science and Technology Development Fund, "Bylaws" means these bylaws of the internal system of the Science and Technology Development Fund, "Council" means the Board of Director of the Science and Technology Development Fund, "Members" mean members of the Board of Directors. "Executive Director" means the Executive Director of the Science and Technology Development Fund. "Expert" means the expert assigned by the Fund. "Employees" mean the employees working in the Fund. "Competent Minister" means the Minister competent in scientific research affairs. "Competent Authority" means the executive director of the Science and Technology Development Fund or his designee in any of the competence included in the bylaws. First: Objectives of the Fund

Article (2) The Science and Technology Development Fund is a legal identity established by Presidential Decree No. 218 of 2007, and follows the Minister competent in scientific research affairs, based in Cairo. Article (3) The Fund will:

- Ensure funding of scientific research and technological development through the priorities set by the Supreme Council of Science and Technology.

- Support the innovative capacity of the science and technology system. - Support the full cycle of scientific research and product development based on

knowledge and technology (published researches – Patents – semi-industrial models – products).

- Support dissemination of data and information on science and technology. - Conduct on-going detailed evaluation of indicators of sciences and technologies, and

scientific researches, and patents, and their impact on economy for submission to the Supreme Council of Sciences and Technology.



Second: The Fund Management

Article (4) the Board of Directors The Fund is managed by a Board formed by a decree of the Chairman of the Cabinet, headed by the competent Minister of Scientific Research and membership of:

- Three from the distinguished scientists in various fields of science and technology. - Three from the service and productive sectors. - The Executive Director of the Fund. - A representative of each the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Economic

Development.

The term of the office is three years, subject to renewal. The Chairman of the Board of Directors may call for attendance at meetings any of the officials or experienced representatives from government agencies, scientific institutions, business organizations or others from the active civil society, to discuss any of the topics within his competence without counting their votes. Article (5) Competence of the Board of Directors The Board of Directors is the authority dominating its affairs and business, and is entitled to make decisions as seen appropriate to achieve its objectives, specifically: 1. Drawing up the general policy of the Fund to follow-up on its implementation. 2. The adoption of the budget for the Fund. 3. Determining the rules of spending the money of the Fund on activities that serve the

goals. 4. Accepting contributions and donations received by the Fund and are in line with its goals. 5. Issuance of the decisions and bylaws of the Fund. 6. Issuance of the bylaws for personnel affairs, wages, incentives, and awards to the Fund

personnel. 7. Examination of all matters which the Chairman of the Board of Directors believes they

are under the jurisdiction of the Fund. The Council meets by an invitation of the Chairman at lest once a month. Decisions are issued by majority votes of attendees. In case of equal votes, the side of the Chairman prevails. The Executive Director of the Fund prepares the agenda for the Council's meetings. Article (7) The Executive Director of the Fund will be appointed by a Decree from the Chairman of the Cabinet determining his financial treatment, based on a presentation by the Minister competent in scientific research affairs. Article (8)



The Executive Director of the Fund will be in charge of the implementation of the public policy approved by the Board of Directors, the conduct of the work of the Council, and in this regard he will:

• Prepare the financial forms for the management of the Fund resources, means of spending and utilization to achieve the Fund's objectives.

• Prepare the annual budget of the Fund at the beginning of the fiscal year in preparation for submission to the Council.

• Prepare the final account of the Fund at the end of the fiscal year for submission to the Council.

• Receive initiative requests related to the Fund's activities, review them and ensure their conformity to the rules approved by the Fund's Board of Directors.

• Prepare the agenda for the Board of Directors and the relevant documents required. • Supervise the workers in the Fund and the employment of staff in accordance with the

rules of Personnel Affairs established by the Board of Directors. • Propose the system for remuneration of the Fund employees. • The implementation of the decisions for funding the various activities approved by the

Council. • Coordination between the Council and the various agencies in regards to the Fund's work. • Submission of periodic performance reports on the cycle of the Council's Board of

Directors on the Fund's work. • Represents the Fund in relations to others and before the court. • Performance of work and task as may be assigned by the Council. • Follow-up on implementation of the Council's decision. Financing of the Fund activities

Article (9) The Fund will provide funding for activities in the following areas: 1. Scientific research projects. 2. Basic and applied scientific researches. 3. Programs supporting innovations. 4. Venture capital projects (initiative) relating to the application of the research findings and

technological development. 5. Programs of emerging companies associated with the fields of science, development,

technology, and innovation. 6. Grant programs to young researchers and full-time scientific research. 7. Other research fields in a framework of openness, transparency and competitiveness

according to the priorities established by the Supreme Council of Science and Technology, and according to the controls approved by the Fund Board of Directors.

Article (10) In providing funding for scientific research projects, the following should be taken into consideration: 1. Identification of the problems facing the productive, service, and government sectors, and

receive requests from those sectors to implement projects to find solutions to those problems.



2. Prepare the form "Research Project" including a diagnosis of the problems, description of the actual needs, future vision, targeted goals, proposed funding plan, and schedule.

3. The project is announced to the scientific research community and those Directors for submission of research proposals.

4. The Fund, through a … and technical committee will select the best offer to contract for its implementation.

5. Funding will be based on a feasibility study of the project (economic model – targeted goals – mechanisms for replication, and follow-up, etc.) according to a phased schedule linked to progress of work. 6. Follow-up on the contracted projects will be performed by specialized evaluation committees. Article (11) When providing funding for venture capital projects related to the application of findings of researches, technology development, it should be taken into account to fund: 1. Contribution to the share of public money for the agreements concluded between the two

government sectors (public and business) and the private sectors, as well as agreements "care and financing" for not-for-profit research and technological development, and to provide financial sources from sources of its funding to cover the share of public money for national agreements or the local component for projects with international partnerships.

2. Contracts for assistance and participation in financing research and technological development, not seeking financial or direct profits, with research centers and institutions and public agencies (service and economic), and the entities under their jurisdiction, and the civil society organization, public and private corporations, and competent funds, etc.

3. Contribution in capitals for funds or agencies or public or holding companies competent in scientific research or aiming at technological development or those established by the State or public agencies (service and economic) for that purpose.

4. Loan guarantees and credit facilities provided by the public sector banks and the National Bank for Investment to researchers and research centers, public and private sector companies working in the area of technological development.

Article (12) When financing activities of the Fund, the following should be taken into account: 1. The request for basic and applied science researches, and projects of emerging companies

related to science and technological development, innovation through an annual work plan approved by the Fund's Board of Directors, and arbitration shall be by the specialized committees and funding decision will be made by the Executive Director.

2. Youth research grant programs and full-time scientific researchers, programs supporting innovation and other research areas approved by the Fund's Board of Directors will be funded through public competitions or individual requests based on feasibility studies conducted and arbitrated by specialized committees, and a decision for funding will be made by the Executive Director according to the rules approved by the Fund Board of Directors.

Article (13)



The Fund's Board of Directors will determine the proportion of funding available for each of the projects and programs, and the Executive Director will issue a decision accordingly, after presentation to the Fund's Board of Directors, to determine the amounts of funding and the researchers' obligations. Article (14) At the end of each fiscal year, the Fund will prepare a follow-up report on the funded projects and programs with an assessment of the returns of funding. Fourth: Regulations for wages, incentives, bonuses and personnel affairs Article (15) The Executive Director of the Fund prepares the regulations for wages, incentives and bonuses and the personnel affairs regulations in a fashion that conforms to the nature of the Fund's activities in order to achieve its objectives with no restriction of Government regulations and systems. These regulations are presented to the Board of Directors for approval. Article (16) An accounting unit will be established specifically for the Fund to carry out the accounting of the Fund, prepare monthly and quarterly data and accounting for each of its financial activities. The accounting unit includes comprehensive data on the estimated revenues and actual collections, and comparison of expenditures to the budget, to be submitted to the Board of Directors for approval. The accounting unit will also prepare, during the three months following the end of the fiscal year, a Balance Sheet reflecting the revenues and actual expenditures for submission to the Board of Directors for approval. Personnel Affairs Bylaws

Contents

1. General provisions - Article (1) – Article (12) 2. Job placement - Article (13) – Article (28) 3. Measurement of efficiency of performance Article (29) – Article (35) 4. Promotions from Article (36) to Article (38) 5. Wages and bonuses from Article (39) to Article (40) 6. Remunerations and allowances, in-kind benefits and health care from Article (41) to

Article (43) 7. Travel allowances and transportation expenses Article (44) to Article (57) 8. Transfers, assignment, secondment, scholarships and training, Article (58) to Article (65) 9. Leave – from Article (66) to Article (81) 10. Duties and responsibilities of employees and prohibited businesses –Article (82) to

Article (83)



11. Investigations with employees –Article (84) to Article (98) 12. End of service –Article (99) to Article (112)

Chapter One

General Provisions

Article (1) Application of the provisions of these regulations means: a. The Fund: The Science and Technology Development Fund b. The competent Minister: The Chairman of the Board of Directors and the Minister of

State for Scientific Research c. Board of Directors: The Fund's Board of Directors d. The competent authority: The Executive Director of the Science and Technology

Development Fund or his representative in any of his competence.

Article (2) Periods are counted in calendar A.D. as set forth in these regulations. Article (3) The official working hours are 37.5 hours at 7.5 hours daily for five days starting 9:00 am until five o'clock in the evening with a half hour for lunch. Article (4) The competent committee issues a decision for the formation of the personnel affairs committee comprising an odd number no less than three and no more than five members including the chairman of the committee. The personnel affairs committee may invite employees to attend a meeting if they have familiarity with the topics considered who have no counted vote. The technical secretariat of this committee is chaired by the Director of personnel affairs or his representative with no counted vote. The committee decisions are implemented after approval by the competent authority. Article (5) The personnel affairs committee is competent in the following; The appointment, transfer, promotion and provision of periodic and promotional allowances to employees encumbering Grade 1 jobs, and approval of sufficiency reports presented about them.

• Report on the extent the nature of the scientific and practical experience conforms to the nature of the position to be filled.

• Elimination of disciplinary retributions for those holding Grade 1 positions and below.

• Ending the service of the employee or transfer to another job if he was proved to be incompetent during the probationary period, in addition to two consecutive poor performance reports.

• Other subjects the competent authority believes necessary to present to the committee.



Article (6) The personnel affairs committee meets by invitation from the Chairman or the competent authority, and the invitation is sent at least three days before. Decisions and recommendations are issued by majority votes of attendees. In case of equal votes, the side of the Chairman prevails, and the committee deliberations are confidential.

The committee sends the decisions and recommendations to the competent authority during one week for approval. If the competent authority did not approve all the committee's recommendations or some of them, a written justification for that action is prepared, and the unapproved items are returned to the committee for reconsideration in light of those reasons, given a specific term, if the term has passed without the committee's views expressed, the competent authority's decision shall take effect. If however the committee maintained its opinion during the term specified, it would send suggestions to the competent authority to take decisions about them and the decision of the competent authority in this case, is final. Article (7) The organization structure of the Fund takes into account the main and sub- activities, and coordinating and facilitating the performance of work in order to achieve the goals of the Fund. It is issued by a decision of the Board of Directors, and the Board can make any changes to the structure in accordance with the development of work and the needs. Article (8) A schedule of the jobs is developed by the Fund develops in accordance with the organization structure, together with the job descriptions for each position, delineating the duties, responsibilities, and the requirements, in terms of education, experience, skills and other requirements that should be fulfilled in the candidates. They are classified and arranged in typical-groups, and evaluated for inclusion under one of the grades. Job descriptions may be re-evaluated, or modified to develop new jobs or abolish existing jobs in light of the need of work. The Board of Directors approves the job schedules and job descriptions and the decisions issued for their re-evaluation. Article (9) The Fund's Board of Directors is entitled to fund or modify the funding of the jobs included in the approved Schedule of the list of functions in light of the actual needs. Article (10) The Fund's Board of Directors may duplicate some of the typical positions other than the supervisory positions approved in the organization structure, according to the need of the work and within the limits of the financial allocations of the positions budged for. Article (11) The Fund's jobs are divided into the following typical groups:

a) Senior management group. b) Specialized functional groups. c) Legal functional group.



d) Clerical and technical functional group. e) Professional functional group. f) Service aid functional group.

Each group is considered a distinctive unit in terms of appointment, promotion, transfers, secondment, and contracting. The Board of Directors may develop other typical groups of positions according to need, or merge a typical group with another one. Article (12) Positions will be filled by appointment, promotion, transfers, secondment, assignment, or contracting, subject to satisfying all the necessary conditions required for the position.

Chapter Two

Job Placement

First: Permanent Positions

Article (13) Appointment begins in the lowest positions of the typical group as reflected in the approved schedule of the Fund's positions, with the exception of the senior management positions. Another exception is a range of 20% of vacant positions in the Fund in each grade of a typical group after the approval by the Personnel Affairs committee. (Arabic is not clear). Article (14) Except for the Executive Director's position, appointment in the senior management positions is in accordance with the provisions of Law No. (5) Of 1991. Article (15) Appointment in vacant positions is performed by advertising. The advertisement shall include the information related to the position and the conditions for filling them. The vacant positions shall be advertised in at least two daily newspapers or any other widely spread means of advertising, or within the Fund, as deemed necessary by the competent authority. The competent authority determines the positions that are to be filled through testing and the ones to be filled without testing. Article (16) Appointment in positions that are filled through testing according to precedence set forth in the final arrangement of the test results. If they are equal in qualifications, priority will be given to the highest grade of the certificate, the earliest graduation date, and the oldest in age. If experience is required, appointment will be according to the experience commensurate with the nature of the job functions. Article (18) Conditions to be fulfilled for appointment in any of the positions:



• To have an Egyptian nationality. • To have the necessary scientific qualifications, experience, and skills to occupy the

position. • To be over 18 years of age. • To be commendable with good reputation. • Not to have been previously convicted in a criminal penalty or a freedom- restricting

penalty in an immoral crime, unless he was rehabilitated. • Not to have been dismissed from a public position by a decision or disciplinary ruling. • To fulfill all the conditions of the position required to be filled. • To have health fitness as confirmed by a competent medical authority, except for the

senior positions. This condition may be waived by a decision from the competent authority.

• To pass the test as the Fund deems necessary to be conducted. • To present the necessary appointment documents.

Article (19) Evaluation of the local and foreign scientific qualifications is governed by the applicable State laws and regulations. Article (20) Newly appointed employees will be on probationary period for six months from the date of reporting to work. His competence is determined during the probationary period, and if his incompetence was proved, his services will be ended, unless the personnel committee decides to transfer him to another position; and in this case, he would be placed on another probationary period. In all cases, in order to prove the employee's competence, he must successfully complete the training provided by the Fund. Article (21) The employee is notified of the decision of his appointment by a registered letter, if he does not report to work during 15 days from the date of the notice with no acceptable justification, the appointment decision becomes invalid. Article (22) At the time of appointment, the employee is entitled to the starting wages of the designated grade according to the salary schedule, effective with the date he reports to work. An employee retained by the armed forces is also entitled to his salary from the date of his appointment. As exceptions to the above, if an employee was re-appointed for a position from another group in the same grade or another grade, he would retain the salary he was receiving in the previous post provided his service was uninterrupted. This exception also applies to employees who formerly worked in the government, public authorities, local administration and universities, public sector and special cadres who have been appointed in the Fund. The exception further applies to a contracted employee when appointed for permanent positions provided his previous salary he retained does not exceed the end of the position grade he was appointed in. Article (23)



Taking into account the provisions of Article (5a), the competent authority is entitled to appoint employees who obtain higher degrees during their service, necessary to occupy vacant positions in the Fund, whenever they meet the conditions for those positions according to the employment schedule, excluding the two requirements necessary for occupying those positions, namely advertising and testing. An employee who is appointed in accordance with the previous clause is placed on the first step of his job grade plus one increment, or his previous salary in addition to it this increment, whichever is greater, even if he exceeded the end of the grade he was appointed in. An employee appointed in accordance with the provisions of this article with high degrees when appointed in a specialized position, seniority equal to half the period he spent in technical or clerical position before being appointed at the high degree, with a maximum limit of five years, even if he exceeded the date of obtaining the degree, after presentation to the personnel affairs committee. For employees occupying first and second grade of the clerical or technical group who obtain high degrees during their service are granted two increments at the job grade they occupy at the time they obtain the degree even if they exceed the end of the job grade. Article (24) Exception to provisions of Article (13), an employee may be re-appointed in his previous position he encumbered or in another similar position with the same original salary he was receiving while maintaining seniority for the period he spent in his previous job, if he meets the conditions required for occupying the job he was re-appointed in, provided his last report of his previous job was less than good; re-appointment to another job group is considered as new appointment. Article (25) Calculating the period of previous experience will be on the entire appointment and the employee is insured, as in the following cases:

• Years of experience spent in ministries, public authorities, local government, public sector companies, and universities whether the period was interrupted or uninterrupted.

• Years of work in Arab or foreign countries provided they are documented. • Years of work in the public sector in Egypt and Arab or foreign countries provided they

are certified and documented. • Years in the practice of liberal professions provided they are regulated by one of the State

laws and subsequent to registration with the syndicate, and in all cases, the years of experience must agree with the nature of the position's work, with reference to the Personnel Affairs committee

Second: Recruitment by contracting Article (26) The competent authority may contract with temporary employees with specializations necessary for the Fund's activity, and determine the adequate remuneration. A temporary employee may be appointed in a permanent vacant position in the Fund's budget when the employee receives at



least a "very good" annual report for the last two years before his appointment, and within the financial allocations in the budget, with the exclusion of two requirements: advertisement and testing. Article (27) The contracts with temporary employees shall include the following information:

• The names of the two parties of contract. • Personal information on the employee and period of contract. • The salary determined for the work referred to, compensations and other allowances. • Allowable leave for the temporary employees, type of leave, number of days, both paid

and unpaid. • Penalties imposed on employees in case of any functional violations. • The competent court to examine legal disputes. • Other information deemed necessary and in line with the provisions of these regulations. Third: Employment of foreign experts Article (28) Employment of national and foreign experts for certain jobs or tasks as the Fund may deem needed, with rare specialties and expertise hardly available in the Fund, after obtaining the approval of the competent authorities. The contract of the expert will be for an adequate period to complete the required work assigned to him. As needed, the contract may be renewed for another adequate period subsequent to the approval of the competent authority. The contract concluded with the expert shall include the following information:

• The names of the two parties of the contract. • Personal information about the expert. • Defined job or tasks assigned to the experts with duties and responsibilities. • Overall assessed salary • Penalties that may be imposed • The competent court for legal disputes • Other information deemed necessary to be added in line with the provisions of these

regulations.

Chapter 3 Measurement of performance efficiency

Article (29) A committee is formed to establish performance standards to be used in measuring the performance efficiency to conform to the nature of the Fund's activity and its goals, the types of jobs, to be approve by the competent authority.



Performance efficiency is measured periodically, and a final report is prepared for the efficiency evaluation for one calendar year during the months of January and February following the year of the evaluation, based on the records and information prepared by the Fund for that purpose, and on the results of training and any other information that may be helpful in measuring performance efficiency. The level of employee performance of his job duties is determined in accordance with a periodic report about the degree of efficiency of the performance of his duties on time, the regularity of his performance and other effective elements. Performance efficiency is measured using the designated form approved by the competent authority. Personnel are notified of the standards applied for measuring the performance efficiency, and the results of the periodic efficiency. The ranks of the efficiency assessment are excellent, very good, good, average, or low.

Grade achieved by employee Efficiency rank From 91-100 Excellent

From 81 to less than 90 Very good From 66 to less than 80 Good From 51 to less than 65 Average

Less than 50 Weak Evaluation of the performance of senior management jobs is the competence of the Executive Director of the Fund. Article (30) The direct supervisor prepares the efficiency report of the employee; the senior supervisor provides his comments; then it is presented to the personnel affairs committee after obtaining the employee's comments, then it will be approved by the competent authority. In preparing the report, all the information related to the employee's performance of his jobs, and circumstances of his performance should be taken into account. A report by the competent authority is issued to identify the direct supervisors and the senior supervisors. Article 31: The direct supervisor must notify the employee about firsthand observations regarding his work and how he performs it, especially with regard to any deficiency or lenience, but also on the excellent aspects. Such observations are filed in his personal file, and should be included in the annual report about him. The efficiency report ranked "weak" should be based on evidence of the direct supervisor's comments about the weak aspects in his performance during the period for which the report is prepared, in addition to other observations that impact on the efficiency report.



Article (32) In the event the employee complained about his efficiency report, he submits the complaint during one month from the date he was notified about it. The complaint will be presented to the high commission of grievances formed by a decision issued by the competent authority. The committee must make a determination on the complaints during one month on and provide its views for employees holding grade one positions and below. Complaints on efficiency reports of employees holding grade one positions are submitted to the competent authority. Article (33) Employees who were ranked "excellent" in their efficiency reports may be granted cash and in-kind benefits according to the competent authority's report. Article (34) In the event an employee was seconded within the Republic or assigned, his final report will be prepared according to the standards of work and accomplishments assigned to him. Reports previously prepared for the year are reliable in case the employee was approved for a special leave or a study leave. The efficiency report of a recruited employee is ranked "very good" as a rule, and if his efficiency rank in the pervious year was excellent, it will be evaluated as excellent as a rule. The efficiency report of an employee who was summoned or retained will be ranked excellent as a rule. The sick employee, if his sickness lasted for eight months or more, his efficiency report will be ranked as very good as a rule, if his report for the previous year was excellent, he will be ranked excellent as a rule. The effect of his efficiency report for the year prior to his illness is accepted for his eligibility for allowance or promotion. Article (35) The employee whose evaluation report is ranked weak for two consecutive years is presented to the personnel affairs committee. If it was evident from examination of his condition that he is better qualified for another job in the same grade of his position, he will be transferred to it. However, if the committee believes he is not qualified to work in any position in the same grade of his position in a satisfactory manner, his services will be dismissed but he will retain his rights for pension and bonus.

Chapter 4 Promotions

Article (36) Taking into consideration that the employee meets the conditions for occupying the position to be promoted to, the promotion will be from the position directly preceding it in grade and



relevant typical group, according to the selection ratios set out in the Schedule attached to these regulations for Grade one and below. Appointment or contracting for senior management positions will be based on the system approved by the Fund's Board of Directors. Article (37) An employee who was transferred to the Fund is not eligible for promotion except after a minimum of one year of service with the Fund. Article (38) Promotion decisions are issued by the competent authority as the case may be, and the promotion is effective from the date of issuance of the decision. The employee is eligible for the beginning salary of the position he was promoted to or any increments whichever is greater, effective with that date, without prejudice for his eligibility to receive the periodic increments in time. In all cases, a seconded employee, or an employee on any type of special leave is not eligible for promotion if the leave or secondment exceeded one year. Furthermore, if an employee was referred to the Disciplinary court or the Penal Code, or suspended from work, he is not eligible for promotion during the period he was referred to the court, or suspended. He will, however, be promoted retroactively from the eligibility date of the promotion if he was not convicted by the Penal Code, or received disciplinary penalty or was suspended for less than five days.

Chapter 5 Salaries and allowances

Article (39) The periodic increment is eligible starting July 1st following an employee's appointment, and after expiration of the probationary period, or from the due date of the previous periodic increment. In the event the employee's salary reached the beginning of the higher grade salary, the increment will be calculated at the same rate at the beginning of the higher grade, provided he does not exceed the end of the directly following grade. A decision is issued by the competent authority for granting the periodic increments. Promotion does not change the due date of the periodic increment. Article (40) The employee may be granted a promotional bonus as maybe determined by the Fund's Board of Directors even if he exceeded the end of the position grade, he will be paid as of the beginning of the month following the promotion based on the following conditions:

- The employee had made very special effort, or achieved economic cost savings, or raised the performance standard.

- The employee received an efficiency report ranked excellent for the past two years. - The number of employees provided this bonus should not exceed 10% of the total

number of employees in one year with the positions of each grade of the typical groups



individually (if the number of employees in these positions was less than five, only one receives it).

- The employee has spent two complete years in the service of the Fund. The competent authority issues a decision for granting the promotional bonuses based on nominations from the direct supervisors and after the approval of the personnel affairs committee for employees holding positions grade one and below. For employees holding senior management positions, the decision for granting the promotional bonuses is issued by the competent authority.

Chapter 6 Remuneration, allowances, in-kind benefits and medical care

Article (41) Based on a proposal by the competent authority, the Board of Directors establishes a system for payment of bonuses for extraordinary efforts, overtime, incentives and other bonuses, and the maximum level is determined to be consistent with the nature of the Fund's work and in a manner to ensure higher rates of performance in order to achieve its goals. Article (42) Based on a proposal by the competent authority, the Board of Directors establishes a system for payment of bonuses and in-kind benefits according to the nature and circumstances of work and to ensure achievement of its goals. A system is also established for medical treatment and medical care, as well for social, cultural, sporting and entertainment activities. Article (43) The Board of Directors may decide to establish a complementary insurance system for the Fund's employees; that is actuarial study of the system including funding sources and rights of members.

Chapter 7 Travel allowances and transportation costs

First: Travel allowances Article (44) It is a sum of money provided to the employee in return for the actual expenses incurred because of his absence from the headquarters of his official work, and for the nights he spent in travel, as a result of transfer, secondment, or the performance of tasks or work assigned to him by the Fund. Article (45) Travel inside or outside to accomplish specific tasks; and the traveler is required to prepare a report on his task and what he has achieved and present it to his direct supervisor. The assignment of employees to work abroad is issued by a decree from the competent authority or the competent minister. Assignment to work within Egypt is issued by the competent authority or its designee.



Article (46) The period for which travel allowance must be paid, whether inside or outside the Republic, should not exceed three uninterrupted months, and in cases of absolute necessity, this period may be exceeded. The jurisdiction lies with the competent minister or the competent authority as the case may be. Article (47) Per Diem for travel on assignment inside the Arab Republic of Egypt is based on the following categories:

- Per Diem rates for domestic travel for "one night" o Senior management employees LE 500 o The rest of other positions LE 300 o The competent authority may permit bearing the cost of actual lodging with

reduction in the Per Diem by one third. o Employees traveling to Toshka, Owaymat, Abu Simbul, Halayeb and Shalateen

and similar remote areas with high cost of living for which a decision by the competent authority is issued, will be paid the actual cost of lodging (lodging and meals) in addition to 1/3 of the per diem.

o The Fund may bear the transportation costs for all its employees. o No per diem is payable for domestic travel if the distance between the

destination and his headquarters is less than 30 kilometers. o Per Diem is reduced if the employee stayed in any of the government rest

houses, or was in the hospitality of the entity he is assigned to, by one third in case of lodging only, and two thirds for full board. The competent authority may decide not to make the reduction stated in the pervious clause in both cases.

- Per Diem rates for travel abroad: o In view of the nature of the Fund's work and its cooperation with donor

countries, the provisions of the United Nations Development Fund (UNDP) approved on the 1st of January of each year will be applied.

o Per Diem will be reduced for the employee assigned in an official mission abroad by one third for lodging only, and two thirds for full board (lodging and meals).

Article (48) Employees appointed with temporary contracts will be treated based on the positions they hold. Members of the Board of Directors will receive the same treatment as the Fund's Executive Director. Article (49) The competent minister is entitled to grant the Executive Director financial compensations for receptions and hospitality abroad without restrictions to the established rules for payment. Article (50) In the event the employee is assigned for missions abroad, the Fund will bear the costs for issuance or renewal of passport, entry and exit visas, health certificates, and departure fees.



Second: Transportation Costs Article (51) Transportation costs represent payments made to the employee for the actual costs of transportation in conjunction with the performance of his job duties, including travel fares, transportation, and transport/handling of luggage. Article (52) The employee traveling on a mission within the Republic is eligible for all the actual transportation costs. Article (53) The competent authority or its designee may provide the tickets for public transport means for employees whose jobs require continuous commuting in the city, and in this case the employee does not receive a fixed travel allowance. Article (54) Classes of public transport for employees are classified as follows: • First: Trains

o Super first class – for senior management employees and grade 1 positions o Super second class – for employees holding all other positions

In case members of committees or a group assigned to one task, the unified grade for all members will be the class for those holding higher position. An employee permitted to use super first class is entitled to sleeper train when traveling to remote governorates, as set forth in a decision from the competent authority; per diem will be reduced for the nights spent in trains by one third if meals were not included, and two thirds if meals were included. • Second: Ships

o Super first class – for senior management employees o First class – for employees holding grades 1 and 2 positions o Second class – for employees holding other positions.

• Third Employees in senior management positions and grades 1 and 2, as approved by the competent authority, are entitled to the use of taxicabs for commuting as the need of work required if the vehicles of the Funds were not available. Employees in senior management positions may allow their subordinates the use of taxicabs whenever urgent work necessitated, or in the event they were assigned to carry big cash amounts in excess of LE 2,000 or confidential/important documents. • Fourth: Air travel

o For domestic travel: Employees in senior management positions are entitled to the use of airplanes to move within the country after approval by the competent authority, and



employees holding other positions may also be allowed to the use of airplanes for urgent assignments.

o For international travel: round trip air travel for employees holding all position: The Fund's Executive Director is entitled to business class Employees holding other positions use tourist class unless the trip exceeds six

hours, then they are allowed the use of business class Employees accompanying foreign delegations and VIPs and customers for whom the Fund pays for their lodging and travel, are entitled to travel on the same class as the visitors and delegations. Article (55) In the event a worker from outside the Fund is assigned to perform a task for the Fund, he is financially treated as seen best by the competent authority according to the regulations and bylaws. Article (56) If an employee died during his service, or if his wife or any of his children supported by the Fund died, the Fund will bear the costs of transporting the body from the location of his work to the location where his family wishes to bury him. These costs include fees for transporting the body, shipping and fees for embalming the body, if needed, and the doctor's fees if embalming is necessary. Family members of the deceased who lived with him and were supported by him and had to change their residence because of his death, are entitled to the same transportation costs as the employee at the time his services ended. Article (57) Provisions for Per Diem and transportation costs for the State civil servants apply to the Fund's employees in matters not specifically contained in these provisions.

Chapter 8 Transfer, Secondment, scholarships and training

Article (58) An employee may be transferred to the State administrative units, or public authorities, local government, public sector or universities and vice versa, if his transfer would not cause him to miss his turn in promotion by seniority, or if the transfer was based upon his request. An employee may not be transferred from one position to another lower grade position. Employees are transferred by a decision by the authority competent for appointment. Article (59) An employee may be seconded by a decision from the competent authority, to perform temporary work in another position of the same grade of his position, or in a directly higher grade if the need of his original work necessitated that.



Article (60) In the event of the absence of the Executive Director, he may designate someone from the senior management positions in the Fund to manage the necessary functions. Article (61) By a decision from the authority competent in appointment; if work conditions permit, and upon the employee's written approval, he may be seconded to work within or outside the Republic. The decision will define the period of his secondment in light of the rules and regulations issued by the competent authority, and his full salary will be borne by the borrowing entity. The secondment period will be included in the social insurance contribution and entitlement to the periodic increments and promotions, taking into account the provisions of Law 79 of 1975 for the issuance of the Social Insurance Law as amended. The employee may be promoted during his secondment and prior to one year of his secondmnet; he may not be permitted for secondment prior to a minimum of one year from his promotion or appointment. Article (62) In case of secondment of an employee, his position will remain vacant, and in necessary cases, it may be filled by appointment or promotion by a decision from the competent authority for appointment, if the period of secondment was one year or more. Upon return of the employee, he will fill his original position, if still vacant, or any other vacant position of his grade, or he remains in his personal capacity in the original position, and his case will be settled when a position of his position grade becomes vacant. If the employee did not return to his job during sixty days after the end of his secondment, his services will be ended by law as of the date following the end of his secondment. Article (63) Employees in scholarships or study leave with or without pay, may be seconded under the same conditions and approved rules. The period of missions or scholarships or study leave will be counted towards his pension or bonuses or entitlement to periodic increments or promotions. Article (64) The competent authority prepares the regulations for training of employees inside and outside, which will be approved by the Board of Directors. Article (65) The Fund employees receive training to develop their capacities and skills and to prepare them to fill the positions they are nominated for, according to the training plan that achieves the following elements: Comprehension of all functional levels, specialties, adoption of the incremental approach to add knowledge and information, observance of the recent developments, with the addition of behavioral development as a key factor.



The period spent in training is a working period, during which the employee shall receive his salary and all his job benefits.

Chapter 9

Leave

Article (66) The employee may not quit his work except to use the leave entitled to him, within the limits of the approved leave in the following articles according to the controls and procedures developed by the competent authority. The calendar year starts from First January to the end of December as a base for the calculation of the leave granted to employees. Article (67) The employee is entitled to paid lave during official holidays and feasts determined by a decree from the Chairman of the Cabinet. Employees may work during the holiday with a double pay if required, or may be granted compensatory time off. The religious holidays for the non-Muslims are subject to provisions of the decision by the Chairman of the Cabinet in this concern. Article (68) The employee is entitled to paid casual leave for seven days in a year for emergencies when it is difficult for him to obtain other leave. Article (69) The employee is entitled to paid annual leave excluding official and public holidays, except for the weekend, in the following manner:

• 15 days in the first year after 6 months from the date he reports to work • 21 days for those who spent one whole year or more in service. • 30 days for those who completed ten years or more in service.

The competent authority may decide to extend the annual leave to not exceed 15 days for those who work in remote areas. It is not permissible to decrease or postpone annual leave or to end it except for very strong reasons in the interest of work. The employee must take annual leave for at least six consecutive days during the year. An employee maintains the balance of his annual leave provided he does not get annual leave for a period that exceeds 60 days in one year in addition to the annual leave due to him for that year. If the services of an employee ended before he uses the balance of his annual leave, he would be eligible to that balance not to exceed 60 days, calculated at the basic salary in addition to special bonuses, and such amounts are not subject to any taxes or fees. Article (70)



The employee is entitled after three years in service, to sick leave granted by the competent medical authority within the following limits:

• Three months fully paid. • Six months at 75% of his basic salary. • Six months at 50% of his basic salary, and 75% of the basic salary for those over 50 years

of age.

The employee is entitled to extend the sick leave for another three months without pay if the competent medical authority decided the possibility of his recover. The competent authority may extend the period for another six months without pay if the employee has a disease that requires a long treatment. Decisions to determine the kinds of diseases of this type will be made by the competent medical authority. The competent authority may also take into account the maximum limit of the total extensions referred to in this article, and may decide to extend the periods in which the employee may take sick leave at a lower salary; and may also decide to give that leave with full pay. The sick employee must notify his office about his sickness during 24 hours from his absence from work unless that was not feasible for compelling reasons determined by the competent authority or it designee. Article (71) An exception to these provisions is the sick leave granted to the employees suffering chronic diseases, for which a decision from the Ministry of Health is issued based on the approval of the General Administration of Medical Councils. He is granted fully paid exceptional leave until he recovers or stabilized and enabled to return to work. If it was determined he is fully incapacitated, in such case, the employee remains on paid sick leave until he reaches retirement age. Provisions regarding chronic diseases apply to the Fund employees just as they are applicable to the government employees. Article (72) Personnel Affairs Department establishes the procedures related to the employee's sick leave. A malinger employee is considered in breach of the duties of his post without prejudice to imposing disciplinary penalties on him. If the sick employee wished to end his sick leave and return to work, he must submit a written request to be approved by the competent medical authority. Article (73) An employee may not work with or without pay for any third party during his leave as stipulated in the previous articles. If it was proved he worked for another entity, the Fund may deprive him of his pay for extending his leave, or may claim back the salary he was paid without prejudice to the disciplinary accountability in all cases.



Article (74) Approval for leave without pay is granted as follows: The husband or wife are granted leave without pay if one of them traveled abroad for work or study for a minimum period of six months, this leave may not exceed the period of the husband/wife period abroad. These provisions apply whether the traveling husband was working in the government, local government, universities, or public or private sectors. The competent authority or its designee shall respond to the request of the husband or wife in all cases. The competent authority may grant the employee leave without pay for the reasons expressed by the employee and assessed by the competent authority according to the established rules. This leave may not be granted except after a minimum of six months from the date of appointment. Article (75) The competent authority may grant the employee who is irregular student in universities or high institute, fully paid leave for the actual days of examinations. Article (76) A female employee is eligible for leave without pay to care for her child for a maximum of two years each time, and only twice throughout her career. As an exception to the provisions of Articles 125 and 126 of the Social Insurance law, issued by law No. 79 of 1975 as amended, the Fund will pay its share and the employee's share of the social insurance according to that law, or the employee will be granted compensation for her salary equivalent to 25% of the salary she deserved on the date of extension of leave, based on her choice. Article (77) Employees may not be granted leaves provided in items 1,2 of Article 74 of these regulations during the probationary period. Article (78) Employees are eligible for paid special lave not counted among other types of leave provided in the previous articles in the following cases:

- Leave for Hajj for one month, only one time throughout his career. - A female employee is eligible for maternity leave for three months after childbirth, only

twice throughout her career. - An employee who is associated with a person with infectious disease and the competent

medical authority sees he should be prevented from practicing his job for the period specified.

- The employee who suffers a work-related injury and the period for his treatment is determined by the competent medical authority, is eligible for leave for the duration of the period determined, taking into account the provisions of Law 79 of 1975 as amended, issuing the Social Insurance laws with regards to the determination of the work injury and the compensations due.

Article (79) The competent authority may, according to the rules established, allow the female employee to work half working days in return for half the salary due her.



In such as case, she is eligible for half her annual and sick leave due to her, and the provisions of these regulations will otherwise apply to her.

Exceptions from the rule of Article 125 of the Social Insurance law, issued by Law 79 of 1975 as amended, she will pay the social installments due in accordance that law based on the reduced pay of the full pay, and the entire period will be included with the period of her contributions in the said system. Article (80) Recruited, retained and summoned employees are not eligible for any kind of the previously mentioned leave for the duration of their stay with the Armed forces.

Article (81) If the employee quits his work, he will be deprived of his pay for the duration of his absence without prejudice to the disciplinary accountability. The competent authority may deduct the interrupted period from his leave and grant him salary, if he had a balance to allow that.

Chapter 10

Employees Duties and responsibilities and prohibited businesses

Article (82) Employees must be subject to the provisions of these regulations and should implement them:

• To perform the work assigned to him by himself accurately and honestly, and the official

working hours should be allocated to perform the duties of his job. Employees may be requested to work after hours in addition to the daily schedule if it is in the interest of the business.

• To treat the public with respect and accomplish his work on time. • To preserve the dignity of his job according to public customs and to behave with due

respect. • To respect work hours and follow the procedures set forth in the regulations of the Fund. • To preserve and maintain the property and money of the Fund. • To maintain the confidentiality of the information of the business, which he has access to

by virtue of his work, such as information related to projects, and to refrain from the disclosure of any information except what has been published or disclosed.

• Inform the Fund of his place of residence and marital status and of any changes that occur within maximum one month from the date of the changes.

• To cooperate with his colleagues in performing the duties necessary to ensure the progress of work, and implement the tasks assigned to him.

• To carry out orders given to him accurately and honestly within the limits of the rules and regulations in place.



Every supervisor is responsible for the orders he gives as he is responsible for the proper functions of the work within his competence. Article (83) Employees are prohibited from:

• Violation of the rules and regulations stipulated in the laws and regulations in place, the instructions and releases organizing the implementation of the laws and regulations related to employees issued by the Board of Directors, or to refrain from implementation.

• Violation of the regulations established for tenders and auctions, warehouses, purchases and all financial regulations.

• Negligence or default resulting in the loss of the financial rights of the Fund. • Failure to respond to contradictions from the Central Audit Agency, or letters or delay in

responding to them which is considered as no-response when the employee provides a response only to procrastinate.

• Failure to provide the Central Audit Agency without acceptable justification, with accounting or documents supporting them on due dates or when other documents which it is entitled to examine or review, according to the law of its establishment.

• Disclosure of any declarations or statements about his job in newspapers or other means of publication, unless he was permitted in writing from the competent authority.

• Reveal any matters which he has access to in his position if it was confidential or based on instructions requiring that, and this commitment to confidentiality exists even after he quits his job with the Fund.

• To maintain for himself the originals of any official papers or to remove them from the designated files even they are related to work assigned to him personally.

• To violate the security measures issued by the competent authority. • To combine between his function and any other work in person or by a medium, if that

would harm performing the duties of his job, or if it is inconsistent with its requirements, without prejudice of the provisions of Law No. 125 of 1961 restricting appointment in one job only.

• To perform work for others with pay or remuneration outside the official working hours except with the permission of the competent authority.

Nevertheless, he may perform work with pay or remuneration in businesses related to custody or delegation by absentees or in legal aid, if the trust or absentee has legal aids who are related to him up to the 4th degree, and to be guardian on the money in which he is a partner or stakeholder or owned by a relative of the 4th degree, provided the competent authority is notified accordingly. The employee is prohibited from performing the following in person or through a medium:

• Accept any gifts, awards, commission, or loan associated with the performance of his job.

• To collect money for any individual or entity or to distribute any publications or collect signatures for illegitimate purposes.

• To participate in organization of meetings within the workplace without permission designated by the competent authority in observance of provisions of Law No. 35 of 1976 as amended establishing the law of the Labor Syndicates.



• To purchase estates or movables particularly if he has personal interest in, or in tenders, practices, or auctions related to the functions of his job.

• To practice any commercial businesses particularly if he has personal interest in contracting, tenders, practices or auctions related to the functions of his job.

• To participate in the establishment or the membership of a board of directors in corporations involved in all the fields of science and technology; this is not applied to members of the Board of Directors.

• To lease lands or estates with the purpose of using it in the circuits of performing the duties of his job, if that utilization is related to his work.

Chapter 11 Investigations with employees

Article (84) Any employee who exceeds the requirements of his job, or who appears in a manner that impacts on the integrity of the job is subject to disciplinary penalties. An employee is not exempted from penalties based on orders given to him by his supervisor unless it was proved that the violation resulted from an implementation of a written order from that supervisor despite the employee's warning that this order is in violation, and in this case the responsibility falls on the source of the order alone, and the employee has no civil accountability except on his own errors. Article (85) It is not permissible to impose penalty on the employee except after investigating with him in writing, hearing his statements and his defense, and the decision to impose penalty should not be for a reason. Yet, for penalties of warning and salary deduction not to exceed three days, interrogation or investigation should be oral, but its content is to be recorded in the decision issued for the penalty. Article (86) The Administrative prosecution is solely competent to conduct administrative investigations with incumbents of senior positions, and also to investigate in violations resulting from commission of acts included in clauses 2, 4 of Article 83 of these provisions. Article (87) The disciplinary penalties that may be imposed on the Fund's employees are:

1. Warning. 2. Postponement of the due date for the bonus for period not to exceed three months. 3. Salary deduction of not to exceed two months in a year, and deduction and deduction of

one quarter of the salary monthly is not permissible for implementation of this penalty. 4. Deprivation of half of the periodic allowance. 5. Suspension for a period not to exceed six months with payment of half the salary. 6. Postponement of the promotion when it becomes due for a period not to exceed two

years.



7. Reduction of the salary equivalent to the allowance. 8. Transfer to a position in the directly lower grade. 9. Transfer to a position in the directly lower grade with a reduction in salary to the level he

had before the promotion. 10. Retirement. 11. Dismissal.

For employees encumbering senior positions, only the following penalties are imposed:

1. Warning. 2. Blame. 3. Retirement. 4. Dismissal from service.

Article (88) The Board of Directors issues the bylaws including all kinds of violations and penalties and investigation procedures. The investigator on his own or at the request of the person he is conducting the evaluation, is to listen to the witnesses and to access the records which he finds useful in the investigation and inspection. Jurisdiction in the disposition of the investigation is as follows:

• For employees in senior management positions, each in their own competence is to maintain the investigation, impose penalty or warning or make salary deduction not to exceed thirty days in one year, so the penalty in one time does not exceed fifteen days.

• Direct supervisors are identified by a decision from the competent authority, each in their own capacity, to maintain the investigation, impose penalty or warning or make salary deduction not to exceed fifteen days in one year, so the penalty in one time does not exceed three days.

• The competent authority may maintain the investigation or impose the penalties included in items (1-6) of the first clause of Article (87), and the deduction period may not exceed sixty days in one year whether a deduction penalty was imposed, or a warning, or a salary deduction not to exceed fifteen days in one year, so the penalty was one-time or in batches, in addition to the penalties included in items 1, 2 of the second clause of the article referred to.

• The competent authority is entitled to impose the penalties included in items 6,7,8,9 of Article (87) and in major violations defined in the penalty regulations.

• The Disciplinary court is competent in imposing any of the penalties stipulated in Article (87).

• The Fund is competent to conduct investigations and impose penalties according to the provisions of these regulations on the employees seconded or assigned from other entities to work in the Fund.

In the case of secondment or assignment of one of the Fund employees to another entity, he will be subject to the disciplinary system applied in that entity during the period of his secondment or assignment. Article (90)



For each of the competent authority and the administrative prosecution, as the case may be, is entitled to suspend an employee from work as a precautionary measure if in the interest of the investigation, for a period not to exceed three months. This period may not be extended except with a decision from the Disciplinary court competent in period extensions. Suspension of an employee from his work will result in suspension of half his salary starting the date of suspension. The issue must be immediately presented to the competent Disciplinary court to decide on payment or no payment of the balance of his salary. If the matter was not presented to it within 10 days of the suspension date, the total salary will be paid until the court decides what actions to follow. In the case no decision was issued by the Disciplinary court within 20 days from the date the issue was presented to it, the total salary is paid to the employee; if he was acquitted or the investigation was filed, if he was penalized by warning or salary deduction of maximum five days, the amounts suspended will be paid to him. If he had a more forceful penalty, the authority will estimate what action to be taken regarding the suspended salary. If he was penalized by dismissal, his service will be ended from the date of suspension, and he may not be asked to return the salary paid to him.

Article (91) An employee who is provisionally detained or in execution of in implementation of a criminal ruling is suspend by force of law for the duration of his detention, and payment of half his salary will be suspended in case of his provisional detention or execution of a non-final ruling, and he will be deprived of all his salary in case of his detention in implementation of a final criminal ruling. Upon his return, the matter is referred to the competent authority to decide what action to be taken concerning the employee's disciplinary responsibility. If it was proved he was not responsible, the suspended half salary will be paid. Article (92) Promotion of an employee who had any of the disciplinary penalties detailed below, may not be considered except after the expiry of the following periods.

• Three months in the case of salary deduction or suspension from work for a maximum of 5-10 days.

• Six months in the case of salary deduction or suspension from work for 11-15 days. • Nine months in the case of salary deduction or suspension from work for a period

exceeding 15 days up to 30 days. • One year in the case of salary deduction or suspension from work for a period exceeding

30 days or salary reduction. • The period of postponement or deprivation in the case of penalty to postpone the

increment or deprive the employee from half of it. Periods of postponement referred to are counted from the date of the penalty, even if it overlapped with other periods resulting from previous penalty.

Article (93) In the event of a penalty of downgrading to a lower position, the employee will fill the position of a grade lower than the grade he filled when he was referred to the Disciplinary court, while he retains his eligibility for future periodic increments of the lower position taking into account the eligibility conditions and defining his previous seniority, in addition to the period spent in the



higher grade, retaining the salary he was getting when the penalty ruling was issued. His promotion may not be considered except after one and half year from the date of issuance of the penalty ruling. If a penalty for reduction to a lower grade was imposed on the employee with a reduced salary, he may not be considered for promotion except after two years from the date of the penalty ruling. Article (94) Promotion of an employee referred to the Disciplinary court or Penal Code, or suspended from work, may not be considered for the duration of the referral or suspension, and in this case the employee's position will be restrained for one year. If prolonged by the court and if it was found he was not convicted or he was penalized by warning, deduction or suspension from work for five days or less, then in considering his promotion his seniority in the position he is promoted to will be accounted from the date it was executed if he was not referred to the Disciplinary Court or the Penal Code, and he will be paid the salary for that position from that date. The employee is considered to have been referred to the Disciplinary court from the date of the competent authority's request the Central Accounting Agency from the Administrative Prosecution to file a disciplinary lawsuit against the employee. Article (95) Ending the service of an employee does not preclude for any reason except death, from subjection to a disciplinary trial if the investigation had begun before his service ended. In violations resulting in the loss of any of the rights of the public treasury may be subject to filing a disciplinary lawsuit even if the investigation had not begun before his service ended, for five years from the date of its end. An employee whose services ended may be subject to a fine penalty of not less than LE 1,000 and not more than five times his basic salary plus special bonuses, which he was getting monthly at the time his services ended. Exception to the provisions of Article (144) of the Social Insurance Law No. 79 of 1975 as amended, the fine is taken from the one-time compensation or the saved amount, if any at maturation, within the limit of restraint or the administrative restraint on his money. Article (96) The disciplinary lawsuit for the employee still in service is dropped after three years from the date of committing the violation, and this period is interrupted by any of investigation procedures, or accusation or trial and the period will apply again starting with the latest procedure. If there are multiple defendants, the period of interruption for any of them results in applying it to all of them, even if no measures were taken against them. However, if there was in fact a criminal crime, the disciplinary lawsuit will not drop except with the drop of the criminal lawsuit. Article (97) Disciplinary penalties imposed on an employee are wiped off after the following periods:



• Six months in the case of warning, blame, and salary deduction of no more than five days.

• One ear in the case of salary deduction of more than five days. • Two years in the case of postponement or deprivation of increments. • Three years in the case of other penalties except dismissal and retirement by a ruling or

disciplinary decision. In such cases, wiping off will be effected by a decision from the competent authority after the approval of the personnel affairs committee for positions of grade one and below, and for positions of senior management, by a decision for the competent authority for appointment. Wiping off he penalty results in considering it as never happened and does not affect the rights and compensations which resulted thereof.

Chapter 12

Termination of Service

Article (98) Deduction Penalties collected from employees are deposited in a special account. To be used for social, cultural and sporting activities for the employees according to the conditions and situation as determined by the competent authority.

Article (99) Employee services end for one of the following reasons:

• When he reaches the retirement age. • When he becomes incapacitated for service. • Resignation • Dismissal or retirement by a final disciplinary ruling. • Loss of nationality or the absence of reciprocity for citizens of other countries. • Conviction with criminal penalty in any of the crimes stipulated in the Penal Code or

similar Laws regarding freedom-restraining penalty in crimes involving moral turpitude or integrity, unless in rulings with suspended sentences.

However, if the ruling was issued for the first time, it will not lead to ending his services unless the personnel affairs committee a decision for cause based on the reasons for the ruling and the circumstances of the incident that the employee's staying in his position will contradict with the job requirements of the nature of his work.

Article (100) The employee's services end if he reaches the legal age to leave the service (60 years) taking into account the provisions of the law No. 79 of 1975 related the issuance of the Social Insurance laws as amended. Nevertheless, in cases of absolute necessity and for the interest of work and upon approval of the competent minister, services of an employee may be extended after he reaches 60 years by a period determined by the competent minister.

Article (101)



The competent authority may issue a decision to retire an employee based upon his request before reaching the legal age, provided the requestor's age at the time of request should not be less than 55 years, and the remaining period to reach the retirement age is less than one year. The insurance rights are settled for the retired employees in accordance with the provisions of the preceding paragraph, calculating the period of his contributions in the Social Insurance system and adding the period remaining to reach the legal age, or two years whichever is less. The employees mentioned above may not be re-appointed in the Fund

Article (102) The employee whose services ended will be notified by registered mail at his residence address stated in his service file. Article (103) The competent authority for appointment may issue a decision to retire an employee who is less than 55 years of age based upon his request if he alone, or with the participation of others, established one of the productive projects according to the controls issued by a decision from the minister competent in administrative development. In such a case, two years are added to the period calculated for his pension and the above mentioned employees may not be re-appointed in the Fund. Article (104) The employee's health incompetence is proved by a decision from the competent medical authority, and he may not be dismissed from his work because of health incompetence before the expiration of his sick and annual leave, unless he requested ending his services without waiting for expiration of his leave. Article (105) The employee may submit his resignation from his position in writing. The employee's service does not end except with a decision issued accepting his resignation. A decision determining the request for resignation must be completed within thirty days from the date of its submission, or else resignation will not be considered accepted by law, unless the request is suspended for a condition or associated with a restriction, and in this case the employee's service is not ended unless it includes a decision to accept the resignation in response to his request. During this period, accepting the resignation may be postponed for reasons related to the business interest, with a notification to the employee, provided the period of postponement does not exceed two weeks in addition to the thirty days included in the preceding clause. If the employee was referred to the Disciplinary court, his resignation is not accepted except after a ruling is issued in the lawsuit with no penalties of dismissal or retirement. The employee must remain in his work until the issuance of the decision accepting the resignation or after the time stipulated in this article as the case may be.

Article (106) The employee is considered to have submitted his resignation in the following cases: • If he quit his work without permission for fifteen consecutive days, unless he submits, within the following fifteen days, a proof that quitting his work was due to an acceptable



reason, and in this case, the competent authority decides not to deprive him of his salary for the period of acquittal, if he had a balance of leave that allows him to consider this period as leave, or else, he will be deprived of his salary for that period. If he did not provide reasons to justify his acquittal, his services will be considered ended from the data of his acquittal from work. • If he quit his work without justification accepted by the administration for thirty

interrupted days in one year, and in this case his services will be considered ended from the day following completion of this period.

In both cases, the employee must be warned in writing after his acquittal for five days in the first case and ten days in the second cases.

• If he joined a foreign organization without a permit from the government of the United

Arab Republic, in this case his service are considered ended from the date he joined the foreign organization.

The employee is not considered to have resigned in all cases if there were any disciplinary measures taken against him during the month he quit his work or he joined the foreign organization.

Article (107) The employee is paid his salary until the day his services ended for one of the reasons stated in Articles (87) and (99) of these regulations. However, in the case of his dismissal for health incompetence, the employee is eligible for full salary or reduced as the case may be, until he uses up his sick leave or he retired voluntarily. If the services were ended based on the employee's request, he is eligible for his salary until the data of the decision accepting his resignation or the elapse of the period after which resignation is considered accepted. Article (108) If a decision was made to retire him or to dismiss him from the date of the decision unless he was suspended from his work then his services will be ended as of the date of his suspension. The employee against whom a decision was issues is eligible for compensations equivalent to his salary up to the day he was notified of the decision if he was not suspended from work. A suspended employee may not be asked to return the salary payments made if a decision was me to retire or to dismiss him. Article (109) If an employee died while in service, he will be paid an equivalent amount of six months of the total salary he was getting before his death (basic salary including added allowances, and special bonuses not added), in order to meet the costs of the funeral, to be paid to his widow or adult children who must provide evidence of spending these amounts, in addition to proving a bonus for three months according to the Social Insurance Law No. 79 of 1975. Article (110)



Counting the periods set forth in these regulations is by calendar year. Article (111) Decisions issued regarding personnel affairs are published in periodic bulletins, a decision is issued by the competent authority regarding their distribution and placement on bulletin boards. The publication of bulletins, instructions, administrative orders and placement on bulletin boards in an apparent location in the workplace, or by electronic means is considered legal evidence that all employees were notified about them, without prejudice to the distribution of the decisions issued to the departments of the Fund. Article (112) The provisions of the State Law for civil servants No. 47 of 1978 as amended are in force in the text contained in these regulations, and do not conflict with its provisions.



Bylaws for wages, incentives, and bonuses For employees of the Science and Technology Development Fund

First: The groups concerned with the system: Premium are paid for extraordinary efforts as a compensation for additional work done, and incentives and bonuses for employees working at the Science and Technology Development Fund, and for those used from inside or outside the State administrative body or public authorities, local government, public sector or universities, in the categories and rates indicated in the enclosed Schedule No. 1. First Category: Includes employees appointed in permanent positions, full time assigned, seconded from the State administrative body, public authorities, local government, public sector or universities. Second Category: Includes part-time staff seconded from the State administrative body, public authorities, local government, public sector or universities. Third Category: Includes staff contracted according to the decree of the Minister of State for Administrative Development No. 25 of 1997. Fourth Category: Includes workers whose expertise can be used to perform specific tasks for a limited period from the State administrative body, public authorities, local government, public sector or universities. Fifth Category: Includes workers whose expertise can be used to perform certain jobs from outside the State administrative body, public authorities, local government, public sector or universities. Second: Rules and controls of payments: Payments are made for extra ordinary efforts and for overtime, incentives and other bonuses for the above mentioned categories according to the enclosed Schedule No. 1 and the related controls such as: Extraordinary efforts: Rates for extraordinary efforts are determined in light of the achievements during the official working hours assessed qualitatively and quantitatively, in excess of the ordinary work. Compensation for overtime: Compensation for overtime is paid in light of the additional work performed after the official working hours. Remuneration for Academic and Applied Researches:



Remunerations are determined based on what an employee presents in researches, innovative applied studies that assist in the improvement and development of the work systems and promote performance efficiency. Normal Incentives: These are determined in light of the achievement rates that exceed the normal rates, and the extent to which they achieve goals, rationalize performance and commitment to behaviors and job responsibilities. Incentives for Distinction: These are paid according to the level of effort of employees in the specialized and rare fields, and are determined by the competent authority or its designees in terms of eligibility and categories. Promotional Bonuses: These are provided in return for exclusive services or businesses or proposals that assist in the improvement of the work systems and raising the efficiency of performance or achieve savings in expenditures, after approval of the competent authority or its designees. Other Remunerations: These are provided to those whose expertise were used to perform specific tasks and for a limited period of time from the State administrative body, public authorities, local government, public sector or universities. Payments are determined by the competent authority or its designee, for remunerations assess in light of the volume of work as technically evaluated, and the efforts exerted for its achievement. Bonuses for services rendered: These are provided to non-working individuals from the State administrative body, public authorities, local government, public sector or universities, for services rendered for limited periods of time. Third: General provisions for payment:

1) The competent authority for the implementation of the provisions of this system is the Executive Director of the Fund.

2) Calculation of all the incentives and remunerations are based on a percentage of the basic salary:

a) 1/2 for full time employees, including the salary plus periodic and special bonuses added to the salary according to the provisions of each bonus.

b) 2/3 for contractors, including contracted remuneration (contract salary) plus special bonuses added to the salary according to the provisions of each bonus.

3) It is permissible to combine more than one remuneration including those for extraordinary work and overtime within the limits established for each of them in one month.

4) Incentives are paid monthly if the employee satisfied the number of actual days in a month including official holidays and weekends, and in the event the employee was absent in any working day, the matter is submitted to the competent authority or its designee to determine whether to reduce the remuneration or to stop its payment.



5) The competent authority or its designee may decide not to pay or to reduce the incentives and remunerations indicated in the enclosed Schedule No. 1.

Fourth: Rules and controls of contracting for temporary employment

a. Contracting is performed according to the enclosed Schedule No. (2) based on the following rules and controls: • Contracting with staff with rare specialties and those with practical and scientific

expertise not available in any of the Fund's employees, is performed within the limits of the Fund's financial resources.

b. Recruitment through contracting on the items of seasonal salaries is subject to the assessment of the Fund's Executive Director based on his responsibility in running the business and meeting its needs.



Schedule No. 1 Unusual efforts and compensation for extra work, incentives and bonuses (monthly)

Grade Employees Compensation for

unusual work Compensation for Overtime

Bonuses for academic and

applied researches

Science Incentives

Incentive for

Distinction Other

Bonuses Promotional

Bonuses

from % To % From

% To % From

% To % From

% To %

First

Appointed in permanent posts and/ full time assignment/ secondment 150 400 50 200 50 300 100 400

Distinction and other promotional bonuses are in accordance with

specified rates by competent authority

Second Part time secondment 100 300 - - 50 200 50 200

Third Contracted 50 200 50 200 50 200 50 200

Fourth

Employees from the State Administration to perform work in unavailable specialization unavailable in employees of previous grades and for specific period

Fifth

Employees outside the State Administration with experience in services rendered for specific period Bonuses will be paid to fourth and fifth grades as determined by the competent authority

The competent authority or its representative is entitled to reject granting the privileges stated in this schedule or to reduce them to a minimum



Schedule No. 2 Contracting with temporary employees (seasonal wages)

With rare specialties with specialized practical and scientific experiences

Post – Equivalent Grade

Years of Experience Qualifications

Contracted Wages Remarks

Beg. Of Contract

End of Contract

Counselor (A) Super - University. Degree +

experience in rare specialties equivalent to minimum level to remain in lower positions

650 2000

Special bonuses are added as set

forth in the Egyptian laws in

this regard

Counselor (B) High 1 500 1800 Counselor (C) General Director 2 400 1600

Specialist/researcher/expert/trainer/auditor (First) - First Grade 2

Adequate High degree in rare specialty and practical experience 350 1300

Specialist/researcher/expert/trainer/auditor (Second) - Second Grade 6


Specialist/researcher/expert/trainer/auditor (Third) - Third Grade 8


Technician/clerk/ professional (Fourth) Fourth Grade

5

Above average education or Middle school education + the number of years of specialized experience equivalent to minimum level to remain the lower jobs 150 800

Technician/clerk/ professional (Fifth) Fifth Grade

5 Below Middle School education or mastering reading and writing and adequate experience 100 500

SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY & DEVELOPMENT FUND BENCHMARK ASSESSMENT REPORT

Documents

Transcript of SCIENCE TECHNOLOGY & DEVELOPMENT FUND BENCHMARK ASSESSMENT REPORT