85.7 F
San Fernando
Friday, Mar 29, 2024

Foundation for Changing Lives

David Hankin, CEO of the Alfred Mann Foundation, has been at the helm of an unusual nonprofit organization, one that develops revolutionary medical devices that have given people the ability to use their hands, walk and hear again. Founded by Alfred Mann, who started numerous aerospace and medical device companies (including Mannkind and MiniMed), and Dr. Joe Schulman, Hankin said he could not possibly overemphasize inspiration the organization? namesake still casts on him and his team. Question: How did the Alfred Mann Foundation come to be? Answer: After Al Mann had built a company called Pacesetters into the second largest pacemaker manufacturer in the world, he sold the company to Siemens and he and his son Brian decided to endow the Alfred Mann Foundation in 1985. The first leader of the foundation, my predecessor, Dr. Joe Schulman got to work on the mission of developing medical technologies that might not be economically feasible to a for-profit organization. Joe was here until 2007. Q: Why is Alfred Mann? name only a household name here in northern L.A. County? A: In many ways, it should be a household name. But he? a quiet, private person in many ways. However, he has laser focus on trying to eradicate the worst medical conditions known to man. It sounds like a line, but it? really true. I spend a lot of time with him and I can tell you he believes it. He lives it. And it? what his entire life has been about. He? 83-years-old and he has not slowed down. Q: He still works full days? A: Full days? He still works as many as 120 hours a week. Every meal is a business meeting. He has tremendous energy because he wants to create as many solutions to problems that have plagued humanity for eons during his lifetime. Q: What are some of the primary conditions Mann and the Foundation seek to eradicate, and what has the foundation? role been in developing them? A: He? spent a lot of time working on diabetes over the years. He created a company that did an insulin pump, a short-term glucose sensor, a long-term glucose sensor all for the treatment of diabetes. Of course he? also got Mannkind, which is working on an inhalable insulin pump, which Al believes will ultimately reverse the effects of diabetes. If he? right it? probably his greatest contribution to humanity. Q: Will it be as revolutionary as Epogen was to dialysis patients or Nupogen to chemotherapy patients? A: Maybe; maybe not. It all depends on whether it works or not; whether it gets accepted into the medical community. Just because you create a great solution doesn? mean it? going to get accepted by the medical community. I?l give you a great example: In Pacesetter Systems, Al and Joe created a pacemaker with a rechargeable battery that lasted up to 25 years in some cases. The problem was it eliminated the need for re-implant surgery and wasn? accepted into the medical community, because it was taking money out of the doctors?pockets. There are a lot of stakeholders in these economies that you have to address. Q: So, were there any lessons learned in that process? A: Yes, of course. There? so many factors that you have to consider when you?e creating a new medical device. We spend an inordinate amount of time planning and asking ourselves questions relating to the economic and to some extent the political dynamics of a new product. It? technical planning; it? business planning; it? staging; it? product-development planning, manufacturing planning. You?e got to understand, for example, if the cost of goods is acceptable to the market. And also, you?e got to look at the competitive landscape. Q: Give me an idea of how the Alfred Mann Foundation proceeds on a new project. A: Typically we?l identify a need. We will build it after we do all the planning I mentioned earlier. Then we?l demonstrate that it? feasible in a clinic. Then, we?l kick it out of here to a for-profit company. It could be a for-profit company we have an involvement in creating, or it could be a third party like Medtronic. We?e open to anything that gets us to our goal of getting repaid for our investment and getting the product to the patients whose lives will be improved. We?e not in business to make money; we?e in business to continue to bring life-changing solutions into the world. As long as we can just be made whole after developing a new device, we can continue to do the work that traditional medical device makers wouldn? find economically feasible. Q: Can you explain in a little more detail how that process works, say with an example of something you?e working on now? A: Okay, for instance we are working on something right now called a muscle stimulator. It holds the promise of reanimating paralyzed limbs. It? Steve Austin stuff. (Holds up a tiny capsule-shaped electronic device) This is the ceramic case. These are nickel-and-titanium end-caps. And the titanium is affixed to the ceramic casing?ot an insignificant task. Inside is a very small battery, a two-chip custom-integrated technology that we developed here, with a wound-up coil for wireless communication. It can give people who could not move their hands (the ability) to open their hands. So since we started with this device we?e been making significant investments paying engineers, universities, suppliers and all of the vendors and other costs that go into developing a revolutionary technology. When I sell this to a for-profit company, I want to a return on investment that will replenish the foundation? endowment?ot an ROI that a for-profit device maker would want, just enough to keep us sound and able to continue our work. Q: What? the biggest challenge for you in your job? A: It? not the technical side. Coming up with and developing new ideas and working with my engineers is the fun part. But I also have to manage the money, and work with businesses to make sure the organization stays financially healthy. Of course that? about budgets and contracts and negotiating the best deal I can without compromising our core values. Another challenge is competing with St. Jude and Boston Scientific for talent. But what I can offer is a sense of meaning and purpose that might not be as readily available elsewhere, especially considering who our end users are. Q: Exactly who are your end users? What kinds of patients benefit from your products? A: We?e looking at people who have suffered spinal cord injuries, stroke. We?e looking at people with multiple sclerosis, traumatic brain injury -which is, of course, the signature injury from the wars, and cerebral palsy. Those are our target groups. Q: Speaking of the wars, do you have any special relationships with the military? A: We have a clinical trial at Walter Reed Army Hospital right now with a soldier with a spinal cord injury. It has been very important for our organization because we have many people here who are really supportive of trying to help support the soldier in the field, some for very personal reasons. We?e planning other things with other groups with the Navy and at Walter Reed. Q: Do you regret that Christopher Reeve won? be able to benefit from your work? A: Al did have some contact with Christopher Reeve. But you?e right; unfortunately the timing didn? work out for him.

Featured Articles

Related Articles