[[09-12|25-09-12]] [link to apply](https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSeZqPKQqvb8xAjNRCMeXN23kyeiOO1DoW2db13OkeggDkbfrw/viewform) The MIT Science Policy Initiative (SPI) is coordinating the fifteenth annual Executive Visit Days (ExVD) on **October 26th to October 28th** in Washington, D.C. The program's aim is to explore the role of the federal government in science, engineering, technology, and innovation. This is a great opportunity to network and learn about career paths in government, executive agencies, and more. We will meet with a number of executive agencies to discuss science and technology policy issues. Past speakers have included the former presidential science advisor (Kelvin Droegemeier), as well as officials from the Department of Energy, National Institutes of Health, National Science Foundation, NASA, and others. What you will gain: - A broad understanding of the U.S. science and technology policy ecosystem - Small group interactions with prominent leaders in government - The chance to connect with a like-minded cohort What is expected: - Initial meeting to meet the cohort and discuss expectations - Full attendance of all events. The program will run from October 26th to October 28th.  - You must participate in writing up the final trip report. Each attendee will be expected to contribute 1-2 paragraphs to summarize our meetings. in 2024 [review](https://news.mit.edu/2024/science-policy-initiative-executive-visit-days-1126), > The first day started with meeting the team of the MIT Washington Office. Subsequently, the group held meetings with the Special Competitive Studies Project (SCSP), White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H), and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). On the second day, meetings continued with the Department of Energy (DoE), National Science Foundation (NSF), Institute of Defense Analysis (IDA), and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The meetings offered insights into each agency's activities and showed how each agency's work is related to science policy. in 2023 [review](https://news.mit.edu/2023/mits-science-policy-initiative-holds-13th-annual-executive-visit-days-1128) > Due to the many complexities of modern life, we are simultaneously reaching tipping points in many fields — AI, climate change, biotechnology, among many others. For this reason, science and science policy must increasingly move in lockstep for the good of society, and it falls on us as scientists-in-training to make that happen.” in 2022 [review](https://news.mit.edu/2022/mits-science-policy-initiative-holds-12th-annual-executive-visit-days-1216) >  First, it grants participants an insider perspective on how federal agencies work, the challenges they face, and how they can enact change. Second, representatives from each agency, many of whom are MIT alumni, discuss their paths toward careers in science policy, including their motivations for pursuing such careers and the steps they needed to take to transition from academic research to science policy. Lastly, ExVD serves as an opportunity for participants to network with students, postdocs, and professionals outside of their fields but united by common interests in science policy. ---- final answer: ### Discuss one policy area you're interested in learning more about. Why does it interest you? (no more than 200 words): > I want to dig into how federal agencies turn bold ideas into “evidence‑linked promises.” In plain terms: how a claim becomes a test, and a passed test unlocks real support. This pulls me in because it’s where planning meets reality. When projects have many moving parts and teams spend lots of effort just to make sense of data, ultra‑precise promises can corner you. When agencies publish clear tests, simple templates, and milestone rules, precision helps. For example, using famous entrepreneurship examples, Tesla’s “about 200 miles” matched the unknowns; Better Place’s “exact three‑minute swap” over‑committed. I’m curious how DOE, NIH, NSF, NASA, and OSTP design protocols, set shared formats, and send “if you pass, we back you” signals that lower the effort to turn evidence into decisions, reveal real hurdles early, and set fair bands for credible claims. This lines up with ExVD’s goals: seeing how agencies work from the inside, hearing career paths into public service, and understanding how change happens through rules that are simple, fair, and teachable. ### How do you think you can use insights gained from the ExVD trip? This might be in a professional context, informing your studies, broadening your perspective as a citizen, or anything else. (no more than 200 words) > I’ll use ExVD in three practical ways. Professionally, I’ll build a short, friendly toolkit for founders: a one‑page weekly dashboard that tracks what value they’ve proven so far, where the real‑world tangles are, and how much effort they’re spending to turn raw data into decisions—plus starter templates that mirror federal forms and a small library of “claims that count” tied to recognized tests. In my studies, I’ll ground my research idea: when the real world is tangled and making sense of information is costly, a slightly broad promise can protect flexibility; as agencies make measurement easier, sharper promises win. As a citizen, I’ll turn what we learn into checklists that cities and campuses can use for pilots, borrowing federal rigor without heavy overhead. I will fully join the prep meetings, attend every session, and help write the trip report. Most of all, I’ll use ExVD’s small‑group time to map who owns the test, who controls the funding, and who aligns timing—then share those notes with the cohort so more people can find their path into science policy. --- didn't submit but useful in general... I’m eager to learn more about innovation policy for entrepreneurship, especially in mobility and advanced manufacturing. I specialize in Bayesian and evolutionary entrepreneurship, and my work centers the founder—rather than the investor—in entrepreneurial decision-making. This founder-centric lens has implications for agency, commensurability, and faster, more flexible firm evolution. Understanding how policy translates technical information into usable knowledge—and then into wise choices—would help me see where current tools work and where gaps remain. I’m particularly interested in how IP regimes, public R&D, procurement (e.g., SBIR), standards, and workforce policy shape entry, scaling, and diffusion. My goal is to identify policies that lower the fixed costs of starting and iterating so we can move toward an era of ‘one person, one venture,’ expanding participation while improving productivity.