Exhibit 4

PRESENTATION BY:

DR. MARK EMMERT PRESIDENT NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION

Dr. Mark A. Emmert became the fifth president of the NCAA in October 2010. As president he has championed greater support for student-athlete wellness and academic success. His commitment to the academic success of athletes is also reflected in newly heightened academic standards for initial eligibility. Additionally, he ushered the Association into a new Division I governance structure.

Prior to assuming his current role, Emmert served as president of his alma mater, the University of , beginning in 2004 and has been named president emeritus. During his tenure, the university rose to its standing as second among all public and private institutions in research funding with $1.3 billion in annual grants and contracts. Under his leadership, the university concluded a $2.6 billion fundraising campaign.

Prior to returning to his alma mater, Emmert was chancellor of Louisiana State University from 1999 to 2004. He served as provost and chancellor of the University of Connecticut (1995-1999), provost and vice president for academic affairs at Montana State University (1992-1995), and associate vice chancellor for academic affairs at the University of Colorado (1985-1992).

A Washington native, Dr. Emmert earned his bachelor’s degree in political science from the and has both a master’s degree and a Ph.D. in public administration from . Emmert holds an honorary doctorate of humanities degree from Monmouth University and an honorary doctorate of laws degree from Molloy College.

Emmert and his wife, DeLaine, have two adult children and two grandchildren.

Exhibit 5

Discussion of CICP Strategic Priorities 2015

As a result of several member conversations, CICP has examined how and where its resources can be best utilized to advance opportunities and tackle challenges important to our regional economy that are not specific to a sector. In these pre- reads you will find information for four specific issues of regional concern. Three of the pre-reads are short issue descriptions and a fourth pre-read, specific to the “Image” breakout, is a set of statistics illustrating the RFRA fallout of the last few weeks. Each of these provides background for break-out discussions of each issue and potential impact of and role for CICP. It is our belief that each of these issues will serve to improve the perception of our region for talent and companies in the short and long term. In some cases we have highlighted where our current sector- based initiatives are playing a successful role; this Board-level discussion should focus on the role of CICP from a cross-sector, Partnership-level perspective. Each member will be assigned to one issue in order to provide enough time for a substantive discussion.

At the end of the discussions, we hope to make a determination as to whether CICP has a role to play on the issue that would be widely supported by its membership and what that role might be, from a convening and educational role to an active program development and execution role.

Issues for discussion on a cross-sector basis: · Talent & Workforce Development · Innovation Ecosystem · Regional Image · Civic Leadership Succession Planning

15-C16 March 2015 Innovation Risk-taking, entrepreneurship, and support of a start-up culture and innovation are increasingly viewed as essential components for a thriving regional economy and a key element of a talent attraction and retention strategy. In the New Geography of Jobs, Moretti describes the connection between innovation and economic success by comparing Menlo Park and Visalia—two similar cities prior to the advent of the Silicon Valley. He concludes that innovative places have these significant effects on economic growth in a region: • Jobs are plentiful and there is low unemployment. o Moretti suggests that each innovation jobs creates 5 indirect or spin-off jobs. • There are high average wages, even in the service sector—Moretti suggests that: o College graduates in innovative places earn $13k more than those in non-innovative regions, and o High school graduates in innovative regions make $33k more than their peers in non-innovative regions. • Crime rates are lower. • School districts are high performing. • Educational attainment is very high. • Small, medium, and large businesses thrive. Perhaps most importantly, these innovation hubs keep attracting and growing more talent and more companies, and as a result the economic performance gap between innovative regions and others continues to grow. Underlying the successful innovation ecosystem is a culture that has a significant degree of risk tolerance and understands that to successfully capitalize on innovation, there must be capital flowing through the system. This capital must be willing to take risks and sponsor innovation across various industry sectors and creative models, and convert this energy into start-ups and eventually midsized companies. The Challenge for Central Indiana is not viewed as particularly attractive to innovators and entrepreneurs. Regions compete intensely for innovative talent. While the local innovative community is optimistic about central Can central Indiana overcome the perception that it lacks an Indiana’s progress and potential in building attractive lifestyle innovative culture and successfully develop a nationally and amenities and support for an innovative culture, it should globally recognized innovation ecosystem? How might this come as little surprise that the image of Indiana as a whole be accomplished? Innovation Ecosystems and Districts Key elements to a thriving innovation ecosystem include: • People who have developed innovation and people that have failed while trying to innovate; • Strong research and development sector, both at the academic and private sector level, with a focus on the commercialization of innovation; • Supportive and involved companies; • Talented human capital; • Supportive social and physical networks, places attractive to innovators; and • An environment encouraging of newly formed businesses.

1 Since Richard Florida’s Creative Cities notion, cities have In 2013, the Brookings Institute published a more detailed been investing in place-making as a strategy to attract report on Patenting and Innovation in Metropolitan and retain creative and innovative talent. Innovation America (www.brookings.edu/research/interactives/2013/ districts attempt to directly link place-making, creativity, metropatenting) showing the following: and innovation in a specific area. The Brookings Institute • 42 out of 358 – Indianapolis rank on # of patents, 5-year definesinnovation districts as “geographic areas where average (2007-11), Rank of metro areas leading-edge anchor institutions [research universities and • 108 out of 358 – Indianapolis rank on Patents/1,000 jobs, research-oriented medical hospitals with extensive R&D] 5-year average (2007-11), Rank of metro areas and companies cluster and connect with startups, business • 116 out of 358 – Indianapolis rank on % of workers with a incubators and accelerators. They are also physically STEM BA, 2011, Rank of metro areas compact, transit-accessible, technically-wired and offer • 122 out of 358 – Indianapolis rank on GDP/worker, 2011, mixed-use housing, office, and retail” (www.brookings.edu/ Rank of metro areas about/programs/metro/innovation-districts). For innovation • 29 out of 100 – Indianapolis rank on # of jobs in advanced districts to function, economic, physical, and networking industries, 2013, Rank of largest metro areas (www. assets must all be present. brookings.edu/research/reports2/2015/02/03-advanced- While not all innovation districts thrive, their success is industries#/M26900) a function of intentional design, organic evolution, and The figures below show how the Indianapolis metro area the support of the region’s innovation ecosystem. When compares with some other metro areas that include state innovation districts, thrive the benefits are significant. capitals using the Brookings data. • Boston’s innovation district has transformed a vacant section of the city’s waterfront into a district with 200 companies and 4,000 jobs. • Based on that success, the city is working to transform 1,000 acres in South Boston into a live-work-play innovation district with over 30 million square feet of development. A recent draft of the Greater Indy Chamber’s Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy noted that central Indiana’s innovation ecosystem is highly fragmented. An innovation district or a series of linked innovation districts provides a significant opportunity to physically link and create a more connected innovation ecosystem, while potentially transforming a neglected neighborhood into a talent attraction and retention destination. How Innovation is Measured/How Does Central Indiana Compare? While the local innovation community is optimistic about our potential, and certain companies are leading innovators in their industries, in most instances central Indiana is not a leading region in innovation. Measures of innovation in a region can include the number of new start-ups, the number of patents applications/approvals, and dollars spent on R&D. Using its innovation index, in 2010, the Indiana Business Research Center reported that Marion County scored slightly higher than the national average for innovation (www.incontext.indiana.edu/2010/jan-feb/ article1.asp).

2 According to the National Science Foundation, in 2011, • General Motors Corporation, 37 the state of Indiana ranked 16th in the nation with $7,579 • Delphi Technologies Inc., 37 million in public and private funding of research and • Roche Diagnostics Operations Inc., 33 development (www.nsf.gov/statistics/states/). In 2012, the Not included in this list of patent leaders is the motorsports same source reports that Indiana ranked 17th in R&D industry. Central Indiana is home to one of the three most spending by universities ($1,150 million). The Center for competitively advantage motorsports clusters in the world, Measuring University Performance rankings of research and the pace of innovation in this field outstrips the patent universities included: process, thus rendering patents a useless measures for this • Purdue 35th, sector (IU Public Policy Institute, 2004). • IU 63rd, and According to one of central Indiana’s leading sponsors • IUPUI 84th. of innovation and entrepreneurship, the region’s most Central Indiana also makes several lists for attractive places important asset is the interaction of access and opportunity. to visit: Other communities may have a lot of talent but not access • Livability.com named Indianapolis #3 on its list of best to established community leaders and entrepreneurs or downtowns in 2015 established entrepreneurs and leaders who are supportive of • Locality.com named Indianapolis #1 on their Yuppie innovation, but lack innovative talent themselves. Central Price Index in 2014 Indiana has both. The innovative ecosystem in central • A USA TODAY reader’s choice poll in 2014 name Indiana includes groups such as Tech Point, The Speak Easy, Indianapolis the best convention city DeveloperTown, Verge, Centric, Allos Ventures, Gravity Ventures, Launch Fishers, and Vision Tech. However, • Indianapolis is # 6 on Lonely Planet’s 2015 Best Places to while much of the focus has been on innovative technology, Visit list specific to the software or tech-enabled services spaces, But, central Indiana is not always thought of first as a place fashion, fitness, food, and art are among the other areas of for creativity and innovation: interest to those involved in the local innovation culture. • Forbes did not include Indianapolis in its most recent list There is opportunity to integrate technology uses and of the 20 most creative cities (Nashville and Austin were research from these sectors, other advanced industries, and among those included) newly imagined opportunities to create a more integrated • Inc. did not include Indianapolis on its list of the 20 most and, presumably, more successful ecosystem. innovative cities (Minneapolis and Austin made the list) Perhaps because of the involvement of established leaders • CNNMoney’s list of the top 10 innovative cities did not and entrepreneurs, access to early stage capital investment include Indianapolis (Detroit and Cleveland made the is a major challenge as we remain attached to traditional list) business plans, while many types of innovative businesses Interestingly, this runs counter to the notion that (like technology startups) do not follow that trajectory. Indianapolis’s region has a relatively high concentration of To fully capitalize on the intersection of access and advanced industries and employment in advanced industries, opportunity, new sources of pre-business plan capital also a term coined and researched by Brookings. In other investment, more strategic established leaders/entrepreneurs words, our region has the advanced industry foundation but relationships, and an approach to support services more seemingly hasn’t fully capitalized on its innovation potential. appropriate for technology innovation-driven businesses Who is Driving Innovation in Central should all be developed to growth these types of businesses Finally, there is some concern over the perceived shortage Indiana? of midsized companies (more than 50 employees and less The list of patent leaders closely mirrors the critical than 200). These midsized firms are important because they economic sectors in central Indiana, including biosciences, represent the evolution of a startup company into a firm ripe agro sciences, and tech marketing. In 2011, these were for growth and potentially an IPO. One method to address the companies with the most patent applications in the the midsize business issue is to develop an infrastructure Indianapolis metro area: that seeks to retain successful entrepreneurs (who sell their • Eli Lilly and Company, 79 startups) and supports their reinvestment in new companies. • Dow Agrosciences LLC, 68 Perhaps the lack of incentive packages and support for • Thomson Licensing SA, 47 midsized businesses is part of the challenge.

3 Potential Actions • Central Indiana’s naturally occurring innovation districts To support the full development of the local innovation provide great potential, however IBRI’s and the City’s ecosystem and innovation districts, CICP should consider: investment in 16 Tech provides a unique opportunity • Providing greater support for the naturally occurring in Indianapolis to create a mega-space dedicated to innovation districts in central Indiana, including the convergence of innovators, industry leaders, and the innovation district in Broad Ripple around the academia focused on innovation in Life Sciences, and Speak Easy and DeveloperTown, and Launch Fishers. potentially additional industries and creative endeavors. Traditionally, CICP’s efforts focus on branded elements To realize 16 Tech’s full potential, CICP should dedicate including: seed capital, scale-up support, and networking resources to the development of a purposeful and events. In the future CICP members might encourage regionally authentic advancement of the innovation successful innovators within their organization to more district that would be recognized as the most forward fully integrate into the existing innovation culture at thinking standard for innovation districts in the country the Speak Easy or Launch Fishers, as well as encourage and the world. With CICP’s leadership across industries, the more intentional redevelopment of the surrounding 16 Tech can become the catalytic hub that ties together neighborhoods. the region’s innovation ecosystem and naturally occurring innovation districts, without taking away the creative spirit and autonomy that lead to their creation.

ABOUT THE IU Public Policy iNSTITUTE The IU Public Policy Institute delivers unbiased research and data-driven, objective, expert analysis to help public, private, and nonprofit sectors make important decisions that impact quality of life in Indiana and throughout the nation. A multidisciplinary institute within the IU School of Public and Environmental Affairs, we also support the Indiana Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (IACIR). www. http://policyinstitute.iu.edu/ Twitter @IUPublicPolicy

4