In transferring open hardware between sites, we found that "champions" of the technology-transfer process are integral at both the "push" and "pull" sites. These key figures facilitate the knowledge transfer, and actively communicate to modify the technology for the pull site's successful adoption. Even with thorough documentation, motivated contact persons at each site greatly facilitate implementing new use cases. At the "push" site, the champion acts to disseminate information on the build process, direct adopters to the relevant source material, and answer any remaining questions. At the "pull" site, the champion leads the effort in sourcing, building, and modifying the hardware for the specific application. While there is significant upfront cost involved at the pull site with transferring and adopting technology, user development has been recognized by other proponents of free open source hardware as a key advantage over traditional hardware by ensuring proper functionality for specific use cases . Generally, we found that funded collaborations are more successful at technology transfer than unfunded collaborations.