Citizen Portal
Sign In

Panel approves bill easing VIPC matching-fund requirement for small grants

House Committee on Commerce, Agriculture and Natural Resources (subcommittee) · January 22, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The subcommittee unanimously reported HB 363 (Del. Doherty), which removes the matching-fund requirement for Virginia Innovation Partnership Corporation grant requests under $100,000 to help more university researchers and startups access state funds.

The subcommittee voted unanimously to report HB 363, a bill sponsored by Delegate Doherty that would remove the matching-fund requirement for grant requests under $100,000 to the Virginia Innovation Partnership Corporation (VIPC).

Delegate Doherty told the panel the bill "has no fiscal impact on the state budget" and is intended to give the Virginia Innovation Partnership flexibility to use already-appropriated funds to respond more quickly to research and commercialization needs. The original VIPC language requires matching funds for projects seeking state support; HB 363 removes that requirement for amounts requested under $100,000.

Brent Fagg, assistant director for innovation at VCU’s tech transfer office, testified that the matching-fund requirement has been the "number one delay" in getting projects before VIPC. Fagg described administrative and internal budget constraints at universities that have prevented some projects from advancing and gave an example of a promising liver cancer therapy that was delayed about a year because of matching-fund issues.

Joe Benevento, president of the Virginia Innovation Partnership, also voiced support and said VIPC looks forward to working with universities statewide if the change passes. Committee members asked whether the relief applies to all research universities; witnesses confirmed it covers R1 and R2 institutions across the Commonwealth.

A motion to report HB 363 was made and seconded; the subcommittee recorded a 7–0 vote to report the bill. Members indicated the bill did not require a full committee hearing and would be presented for the next steps in the legislative process.