Consensus Study Report

NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001

This study was supported by a contract between the National Academy of Sciences and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-60145-0
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/29295

This publication is available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242; https://nap.nationalacademies.org.

The manufacturer’s authorized representative in the European Union for product safety is Authorized Rep Compliance Ltd., Ground Floor, 71 Lower Baggot Street, Dublin D02 P593 Ireland; www.arccompliance.com.

Copyright 2026 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and National Academies Press and the graphical logos for each are all trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America.

Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2026. A Vision for the Manufacturing USA Program in 2030 and 2035. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/29295.

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. Tsu-Jae Liu is president.

The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.

The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.

Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.

Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.

Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.

Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release.

For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.

COMMITTEE ON A VISION FOR THE MANUFACTURING USA PROGRAM IN 2030 AND 2035

THERESA KOTANCHEK (NAE) (Chair), Evolved Analytics LLC

WILLIAM B. BONVILLIAN (Vice Chair), Massachusetts Institute of Technology

DAVID ADLER, American Affairs

FELICIA J. BENTON-JOHNSON, Clemson University

STEPHANIE W. BUTLER, WattsButler LLC

JIAN CAO (NAE), Northwestern University

DIANNE CHONG (NAE), Boeing Research & Technology (retired)

STEPHEN R. FORREST (NAS/NAE), University of Michigan

THOMAS R. KURFESS (NAE), Georgia Institute of Technology

SUJAI SHIVAKUMAR, Center for Strategic and International Studies

CARROLL THOMAS, National Institute of Standards and Technology (retired)

CRISTINA U. THOMAS (NAE), 3M (retired)

CHARLES H. WARD, ARCTOS Technology Solutions

Study Staff

J. BRYSTOL ENGLISH, Senior Program Officer, Study Director

REBECCA DEBOER, Research Associate, Center for Advancing Science and Technology (CAST) (January 2026)

BRENT HEARD, Senior Program Officer, CAST (April 2026)

SAMANTHA KORETSKY, Research Associate, PSSI

HEATHER LOZOWSKI, Senior Finance Business Partner, PSSI

JOE PALMER, Senior Project Assistant, PSSI

SARAH ROVITO, Senior Program Officer, CAST (through May 2025)

MICHELLE SCHWALBE, Senior Program Area Director, Physical Sciences, Systems, and Infrastructure Program Area (PSSI)

BRITTANY SEGUNDO, Program Officer, PSSI

ERIK SVEDBERG, Senior Scholar, PSSI

KATIE WULLERT, Program Officer, CAST (through May 2025)

NOTE: See Appendix D, Disclosure of Unavoidable Conflicts of Interest.

Reviewers

This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.

We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:

Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by A. Galip Ulsoy (NAE), University of Michigan, and Michael F. McGrath, McGrath Analytics LLC. They were responsible for making certain

that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.

Acknowledgments

The committee would like to thank the following individuals who contributed to the members’ understanding of the Manufacturing USA program and its institutes, other domestic and international programs, particularly best practices and ways to strengthen technology transfer, scale-up, workforce development, regional manufacturing ecosystems, and institute engagement and cross-network collaboration: Corey Adams, Universal Robots; Guendalina Anzolin, University of Cambridge; Robert Atkinson, Information Technology and Innovation Foundation; Wayne Austad, Idaho National Laboratory and Cybersecurity Manufacturing Innovation Institute; John Balchunas, National Institute for Innovation in Manufacturing Biopharmaceuticals (NIIMBL); Billy Bardin, Dow; Diana Bauer, Department of Energy (DOE); Hilary Benedict, Government Accountability Office (GAO); Chuck Brandt, ARM Institute; Patrick Bressler, Fraunhofer Microelectronics Group; Carol Burns, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; Celeste Carter, National Science Foundation Advanced Technological Education (retired); BoGaun Chen, Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI); Gabriela F. Ciocarlie, Cybersecurity Manufacturing Innovation Institute; Adrienne Cloud, SMARTech Construction; Annie Colarusso, Allegheny Conference; Michel Conklin, BotsIQ; Michael Cook, Rockwell Automation; Huijuan Dai, DOE; James F. Davis, Collaborative Ecosystems for Smart Manufacturing Innovation Institute; Melik Demirel, The Pennsylvania State University; Keith DeVries, Department of Defense (DoD); Sheryl Ehrman, San Jose State University; Ellen Ellsworth, MassMEP; Stan Farnsworth, NextFlex; Gary Fedder, Carnegie Mellon University (CMU); Nigel Francis, LIFT; Jeffrey W. Frankston, DoD; Philip Freeman, Boeing Research and Technology; Douglas Friedman, BioMADE; David Furrer, Pratt & Whitney; Daniel Gamota, NextFlex; Bob Geer, American Institute for Manufacturing Integrated Photonics (AIM Photonics); Michael Gilroy, Center for Regional Economic Competitiveness; Peter F. Green, National Renewable Energy Laboratory; Peter Gumbsch, Fraunhofer Institute for

Mechanics of Materials; Constantin Häfner, Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft; Joseph Hedges, City of San Jose; Ed Herderick, America Makes; Greg Hudas, DoD; Robert W. Ivester, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST); Christy Johnson, Advanced Regenerative Manufacturing Institute (ARMI); Dean Kamen, ARMI | BioFabUSA; Barry Kennedy, Irish Manufacturing Research; Lode Lauwers, Interuniversitair Micro-Electronica Centrum VZW; Kelvin H. Lee, NIIMBL; Rebecca Lewis, NextFlex; Lonnie Love, Sandia National Laboratories; David Low, Advanced Remanufacturing Technology Center, Agency for Science, Technology, and Research (A*STAR); Rob Luce, SME Education Foundation; Stephen Luckowski, DoD; Jennifer MacDonald, ARMI; Jyoti K. Malhotra, NIST; Michael Matthews, Fabric8Labs; Sherri McCleary, Digital Foundry at New Kensington; Raymond McGuire, Partner4Work; David McFeeters-Krone, Intellectual Assets; Jonathan Miller, Air Force Research Laboratory; Scott Miller, NextFlex; Petra Mitchell, Catalyst Connection; Ira Moskowitz, Advanced Robotics for Manufacturing Institute (ARM Institute); Christopher Murray, GAO; Eoin O’Sullivan, University of Cambridge; Ignasi Palou-Rivera, Rapid Advancement in Process Intensification Deployment Institute; Mark Peevy, Technical College System of Georgia; Kathryn Peretti, DOE; Paul Perkins, Amatrol, Inc.; William H. Peter, Oak Ridge National Laboratory; Mark Poliks, Binghamton University, State University of New York; Abishek Ramesh, High Value Manufacturing Catapult; Adam Rawlett, U.S. Army Research Laboratory; Stephen Recchia, DoD; Livia Rice, ARM Institute; Jeff Rueckhaus, GAO; Peter Russo, New Approach Development, LLC; Christopher Saldaña, DOE; Terri Burgess Sandu, Loraine County Community College; Yukihiro Sato, Ministry of Economy, Trade, and Industry, Government of Japan; Karen Savala, NextFlex; Chad Schron, Tooling U–SME; Phillip Singerman, Center for Strategic and International Studies; Nebiat Solomon, DOE; Charlene Stokes, DoD; Lisa Strama, National Center for Manufacturing Sciences; Lizabeth Stuck, Manufacturing x Digital (MxD); Stephen Su, ITRI; Courtney Taylor, AccelerateMS; Suzy Teele, ARM Institute; Melanie Tomczak, BioMADE; Art Wall, NextFlex; John D. Williams, Boeing Research & Technology; Sandra DeVincent Wolf, CMU; Jennifer Wolk, Office of Naval Research; Franz Wuerfmannsdobler, United States Manufacturing Innovation Council; Todd Younkin, SMART USA and Semiconductor Research Corporation; Paul Zielinski, Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer.

The committee would specifically like to thank those who helped support the study on behalf of the NIST Office of Advanced Manufacturing, including Mike Molnar, Kelley Rogers, Robert Rudnitsky, Said Jahanmir, Frank Gayle, Brad Conrad, Michael Britt-Crane, Donald Ufford, and Joseph Long.

Contents

BOXES, FIGURES, AND TABLES

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

PREFACE

SUMMARY

Best Practices of Leading Manufacturing Countries

Vision for the Future of the Manufacturing USA Program

1 INTRODUCTION

The U.S. Manufacturing Challenge

Origins and Development of Manufacturing Institutes

Assessment of the Manufacturing Institutes

Study Statement of Task

Study Process and Data Gathering

Structure of the Report

2 INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM COMPARISON AND BENCHMARKING

International Models

Key Themes, Best Practices, and Recommendation Synthesized from International Models

Design, Staffing, and Operation of the Institutes

Combining Technologies: Cross-Disciplinary Strategies

International Collaboration Opportunities

3 TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AND SCALE-UP

Definitions and Concepts of Technology Transfer

Industry and other Stakeholder Needs

Measuring Success: Metrics and Evaluation

Roles for the Advanced Manufacturing National Program Office

4 CROSS-INSTITUTE AND CROSS-AGENCY NETWORKING

Interagency Engagement

Collaboration with Federal Laboratories

Cross-Institute Networking

5 REGIONAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

The Local Connection

Key Challenges

Institutes as Ecosystem Integrators

Building the Region’s Advanced Manufacturing Skilled Workforce

Connecting to State and Other Federal Resources

6 WORKFORCE EDUCATION AND DEVELOPMENT

Workforce Education Challenge in the United States

Best Practices in Workforce Education Adopted at Manufacturing Institutes

Findings and Recommendations

7 VISION FOR THE FUTURE

A New Institute Vision

The Work Ahead

8 STUDY RECOMMENDATIONS

APPENDIXES

Appendix A Statement of Task

Appendix B Public Meeting Agendas

Appendix C Committee Member Biographical Information

Appendix D Disclosure of Unavoidable Conflicts of Interest

Appendix E Manufacturing USA Program-Specific Information

Boxes, Figures, and Tables

BOXES

2-1 Without a Whole-of-Government Industrial Strategy, the United States Will Continue to Lag Behind in Advanced Manufacturing

3-1 Technology Road-Mapping as a Core Institute Tool

3-2 NextFlex’s Best Practice for Small and Medium Enterprise Engagement

4-1 Digital Foundry Model—Supporting Technology Transfer for Small and Medium-Sized Manufacturers

FIGURES

2-1 Organization for Small and Medium Enterprises and Regional Innovation (SMRJ) policies for SME grants

2-2 Industrial policy support by instrument over time

2-3 Pyramid describing foundational technologies and their importance to advanced manufactured products

2-4 Comparison of institutions for technology diffusion

E-1 U.S. map showing the location of each institute in the Manufacturing USA network

TABLES

1-1 Current 17 Institutes in the Manufacturing USA Program

2-1 Comparison of Manufacturing Institute Program Offerings

E-1 Current 17 Institutes in the Manufacturing USA Program

Acronyms and Abbreviations

Preface

Manufacturing is critical to the nation’s national security and economic well-being. The last 15 years have witnessed the rise of the techno-economic state with competitor nations practicing systematic industrial policy. Nearly all of the leading competitor nations to the United States have detailed national manufacturing strategies that are aligned with their national economic strategies. These strategies integrate industry efforts with government support at critical gaps, including for research, development, and implementation of new manufacturing technologies; for financing the scale-up of these manufacturing technologies; for regional adoption of these technologies; and for workforce development to support them. The United States has various programs along some of these lines, including the Manufacturing USA program. Overall, however, a coordinated strategy for alignment and adoption of advanced manufacturing across agencies and organizations and integrated with industry is missing. It is a critical missing ingredient. Without it, a coherent program for more rapid adoption of new manufacturing technologies into a new system for corresponding economic development is lacking. Each year that it is absent and not being implemented, U.S. production leadership erodes, affecting the nation’s national security and economic well-being.

The task of this committee was to develop a new vision of where the Manufacturing USA program should be in the 2030 to 2035 time period. The report is forward-looking. It notes the current challenges the program faces and then moves to much more detail on what new features and efforts the program should undertake to help meet the manufacturing challenges that the United States faces. To be most effective and productive, the Manufacturing USA program needs to be a part of a formal U.S. Industrial Strategy. Therefore, key findings and recommendations center around the need for the United States to issue a formal industrial strategy, integrating technology development, scale-up financing, standards leadership, trade, and workforce development in a coherent national framework; to form a new governance model that enables collaboration across

agencies and institutes; to better reach small and medium-sized manufacturers with new technologies and processes; to support entrepreneurial firms in bringing new technologies to manufacturing; to improve technology transfer capability through stronger in-house staff, establishing pilot production facilities, working on foundational manufacturing technologies, and establishing business development teams; to accelerate regional growth by establishing regional development teams; and to expand the scope of manufacturing workforce education efforts.

The study was conducted over the course of 9 months. During this time, the committee held 30 public meetings and several workshops and roundtables, speaking with experts across industry, academia, and government. The committee also received input from institutes through questionnaires. The committee thanks the individuals who provided input and made contributions to this study; their input was crucial in writing the report. The committee also thanks the director of Physical Sciences, Systems, and Infrastructure, Michelle Schwalbe, and senior program officer and study director, Brystol English, for their help and guidance in performing this study, and expresses special appreciation to project staff Erik Svedberg and Samantha Koretsky for their efforts in authoring this report.

Theresa Kotanchek, Chair
William B. Bonvillian, Vice Chair
Committee on a Vision for the Manufacturing
USA Program in 2030 and 2035