For 25 years, TRIF has built Arizona's research capacity inside ASU, NAU, and UA. The Chair-Elect's call for innovative public-private partnerships is the cue to bolt a co-commercialization sleeve onto that engine — and Force for Health is bringing the first ready-to-deploy population health asset to do it.
We are actively pursuing innovative public-private partnerships that benefit our aligned principles — partnerships that turn the research and workforce assets of our public universities into measurable outcomes for Arizona communities.
This document is our response. It is anchored to ABOR's own published structure — the five board-approved investment areas, the FY27 funding priorities, and the discretionary ABOR Initiatives bucket — and it shows exactly where The Force for Health Network plugs in as a co-commercialization partner, not a vendor.
TRIF's structural advantage is rare in the U.S.: a dedicated, voter-protected revenue stream (12% of Prop 301 sales tax) appropriated continuously to ABOR. Most peer states fight for general-fund appropriations every year. Arizona doesn't. That stability is the platform we're building on.
Plus $45M Future Opportunity Initiative + $11M Regents Grants + $8.7M ABOR Initiatives = ~$149.8M total FY25 deployable.
The headline: ABOR's #1 FY27 priority is health workforce. Three of the four priorities are workforce/access. This is the political moment for FFH — every one of these priorities maps directly to a Force for Health asset already in market.
Most "health-tech partner" pitches show up at one door. We show up at all five, plus the discretionary ABOR Initiatives bucket. Every card below shows the FY25 TRIF spend in that area and the live FFH assets that bolt on as co-commercialization fuel.
TRIF is a top-10 state university research investment by absolute dollars and one of the few with a dedicated, voter-protected revenue stream. But on the public-private commercialization side, Arizona is structurally behind peer states. The table below shows what the leaders look like.
| State | Program | Annual $ | Source | Public-Private Model | Health Example |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AZ | TRIF (Technology & Research Initiative Fund) | $138M | Sales Tax | Mostly grants to universities · limited direct private match vehicle | ASU Biodesign, UA Valley Fever, AI diagnostics |
| NC | NC Biotech Center + NC Innovation | $85M + $500M one-time | General Fund | Recoverable grants · company-inception loans · industry consortia | Heat Biologics · Precision BioSciences · Humacyte |
| GA | Georgia Research Alliance (GRA) | $28M state · 5-10× private match | General Fund | Equity Eminent Scholars + GRA Ventures seed equity · 1:1+ private match required | Clearside Biomedical · AbVitro (acq. Juno) |
| MA | Mass Life Sciences Center (MLSC) | $50–60M / yr ($1B / 10-yr) | GO Bonds | Capital grants · tax credits · co-investment · internships | Moderna early support · Cambridge cluster build-out |
| OH | Ohio Third Frontier | $50M / yr ($2.3B / 20-yr) | Voter-Approved Bonds | Match TVSF co-invests with private seed funds · JobsOhio Series A | NeuroWave Systems · Cardiox |
| TX | CPRIT (Cancer Prevention & Research) | $300M / yr ($6B / 20-yr) | Constitutional Bond | Equity Product Development Awards = direct equity-style co-invest | Molecular Templates · Asuragen · cancer-co relocations |
| CA | CIRM (Inst. for Regenerative Medicine) | $300M / yr (Prop 14 · $5.5B) | Voter-Approved Bonds | Co-funding with biotech industry · academia-industry grants | Orchard Therapeutics · Forty Seven (acq. Gilead $4.9B) |
| PA | Ben Franklin Technology Partners | $14M state · 3:1 leverage | General Fund | Equity Convertible debt to startups · 4 regional centers | ~$25B economic impact since 1983 · many med-device exits |
| MD | TEDCO + MD Stem Cell Fund | $25M + $9M | General Fund | Equity Seed Fund · Builder Fund · Pre-Seed direct equity | Personal Genome Diagnostics · ZeptoMetrix |
| VA | Virginia Innovation Partnership Corp (VIPC) | $25M | General Fund | Equity Virginia Venture Partners direct stakes · CRCF matching grants | Dominion Diagnostics · Luna Innovations |
| CT | Connecticut Innovations (CI) | $50M / yr investing | Quasi-public | Equity Direct equity · Bioscience Innovation Fund ($200M tobacco settlement) | Arvinas (Yale spinout · IPO) |
| UT | Utah Innovation Fund (2023) | $15M | General Fund | Equity Direct equity in U of U / USU / BYU spinouts — newest model in U.S. | Recursion Pharmaceuticals (USTAR-era) |
| IN | Indiana 21st Century R&T Fund | $20M | General Fund | Direct grants to companies · co-invested with Elevate Ventures | Endocyte (acq. Novartis $2.1B) |
| NJ | NJ Innovation Evergreen Fund | $500M target (auction-funded) | Auction proceeds | Equity Direct equity in NJ startups | Princeton/Rutgers spinouts |
| MI | MTRAC + Michigan Strategic Fund | $20M+ | General + Tobacco | 5 university-based gap-funding hubs (Life Sci hub at U-M) | Esperion Therapeutics · Tangent Medical |
| TX (legacy) | Texas Emerging Technology Fund | $0 | Closed 2015 | Was equity grants · wound down by Gov. Abbott | Mixed historical biotech bets |
| WA (legacy) | Life Sciences Discovery Fund | $0 | Closed 2015 | Was matching grants · 1:1 private (tobacco settlement) | Adaptive Biotechnologies early grant |
MD · VA · CT · UT — all return tax dollars when companies exit. AZ does not, today. A TRIF-adjacent equity sleeve would put AZ in their company.
CPRIT (TX) · CIRM (CA) · MLSC (MA) · Andy Hill CARE (WA) · MD Stem Cell · NC Biotech health · GRA biomed.
SSTI (State Science & Technology Institute) maintains the canonical apples-to-apples comparison across all 50 states — recommended cite for the deck and FY27 narrative.
The frame for ABOR: TRIF gave Arizona a 25-year head start on dedicated research funding. The Chair-Elect's call for innovative public-private partnerships points exactly at what comes next — bolting a co-commercialization sleeve onto TRIF's research engine. Even 5–10% of TRIF (~$7–14M / yr) directed into a public-private vehicle with required private match would put AZ on par with GRA's deployment scale immediately, and give ABOR a portfolio of equity-bearing health/workforce spinouts within five years. Population health intelligence — PHIT — is exactly the kind of platform play (university data + private operator + state policy interest) that has produced GRA's biggest wins.
Each tier is structured as a true co-commercialization arrangement: ABOR brings the institutional fabric (universities, FY27 priorities, statewide reach), FFH brings the operating platform (PHIT Score, Academy, Reality Health Games, Coach Lucy AI), and we share both the upside and the published outcomes data.
A discrete ABOR Initiatives line item that pilots PHIT Score across 3–5 Arizona counties, anchored to one of the three universities.
Every Arizona county scored, tracked, and gamified through PHIT — paired with a workforce-pipeline activation across all three universities. The "demonstration of GRA-style co-commercialization in Arizona."
ABOR gets the equity-bearing co-commercialization vehicle the GA / NC / MD models prove out — with PHIT as the anchor portfolio asset. Returns to taxpayers when the platform scales nationally.
FFH is not a slideware vendor. PHIT Data Hub is live today, the Academy ships with SCORM/xAPI, and the Force for Health Institute (PPF fiscal sponsor) is ready to receive tax-deductible match. Below is the realistic 90-day path from our review meeting to first deliverables.
This is the partnership Pacheco described in her call to viewers — public universities, private operating capital, measurable Arizona outcomes. We're ready to walk it through with you next week.
Schedule the Review Meeting →