Quote:
Originally posted by Mikeman602
Well I have some things to say and I do not mean to offend anybody. I just think that it is almost unfair that some teams that are funded by big compines like NASA and Lockeed have a lot of money to blow on their robot and also have pro-engineers to help them build it. A smaller team like mine who can barley get the $5K to enter and is very very lucky to get any help from an engineer.
|
The vast majority of the teams funded and co-funded by NASA are far from "well off" by any definition that you would want to use. The NASA grant process is designed to help new teams get started and introduced to the FIRST program. To do that, we pay the registration fee for selected rookie teams to attend one regional competition event, and provide a small travel fund to allow a representative of the team to travel to the kick-off to retrieve their kit of parts. This total is limited to $6000, and is provided for no more than two years. Anything that the teams do above and beyond that is entirely up to them (and we encourage them to do as much alternative fund raising as they can, as early as they can).
Our philosophy is to provide as many new teams as we can with at least a minimum amount of financial assistance so they can participate in the program and compete (and hopefully inspire the student participants). If they are able to use our resources as a starting point, and leverage additional support from other sources, more power to them. If this leads to their ability to survive and thrive as an independent team after they are no longer eligable for NASA funding, then we consider it a success.
A very small number of teams (about eight out of the 193 teams receiving NASA co-funding this year) do receive some additional funding and engineering support, as they are working directly with one of the NASA field centers. The engineering support typically takes the form of NASA employees volunteering their evenings and weekends to work with teams. I make absolutely no apologies for any of this - instead I commend them all for their willingness to share their knowledge, expertise and experience with the next generation of engineers, technologists and scientists.
I am not taking a position on either side of the argument originally posted by Mikeman602. But I just want to make sure that if people are going to cite NASA as an example when making a point, that they understand what we are really doing (and what we are providing).
-dave