Next: A High Capacity Object Oriented Mission Scheduling System for XTE
Previous: The RPS2 Generic Distributed Computing Framework
Table of Contents --- Search ---
PS reprint
Sethanne Howard
Office of Space Science, NASA Headquarters, Washington, DC
NASA continues its support to the astronomy and astrophysics community. There is a wealth of missions both in operation and in design. The list is extensive. Operating missions:
NASA also has supported and will continue to support several astrophysics grant programs.
The ADP, in particular, is of interest to the ADASS community. This program supports, among other things, the development of astronomical software research tools. At the meeting there were several poster papers discussing results from groups funded by the ADP.
The ADP fares quite well with respect to the Long Term Astrophysics Program (LTSA) and the Astrophysics Theory Program (ATP). For the last cycle of proposals the oversubscription ratio in proposals submitted for LTSA is 4.4; for ADP is 2.9; for Theory is 4.0. For dollars requested the oversubscription ratio for LTSA is 5.3; for ADP is 3.3, for Theory is 5.9.
The last ADP review was March 13--15, 1995. There were 168 proposals submitted with 58 accepted. $2.5M funding was awarded. There was a special effort this year to recruit new researchers in the field as reviewers. In addition the distinction between type 2 and type 3 proposals was dropped for this and subsequent reviews. All proposals, including type 2, were judged in science topical panels. 23% of awarded grants were type 2. The next NRA came out in November 1995 with a due date for proposals in February 1996.
The type 2 winners for the 1995 ADP cycle are:
NASA will concentrate activities along five strategic enterprises: Mission to Planet Earth, Aeronautics, Human Exploration and Development of Space, Space Science, and Space Technology. Each field center will have a primary mission under one strategic enterprise. The Office of Space Science has four sections: Galaxies and the Universe, Astronomical Origins and the Search for planets, Solar System and The Solar-Terrestrial Connection. These four new sections replace the discipline specific OSS divisions. This re-organization takes place in December 1995. Many of the functions performed by Headquarters staff will transfer to Centers as NASA Headquarters staff is reduced by 50%.
The President requested all government agencies to identify savings in their 5 year plans. NASAÕs cut is $5B taken as 3%, 5%, 7%, 9% of the FY96 budget for FY 1997 to 2000. Among the recommendations of the ZBR are that there will be full cost accounting methods applied to every project. In addition only civil servants, JPL and employees of new institutes will perform in-house science, research and engineering. Outsourcing and commercial services will be maximized.
The ZBR recommended that NASA establish Science Institutes to form closer relationships between Center science and area universities and industry. Each institute will be a privatized arrangement in which government-owned assets are managed by an external entity such as a university, an industrial organization or a consortium. Alphonso Diaz of OSS leads the effort to development the plan for these Science Institutes. Two Institutes are to be pathfinders: Biomedical research affiliated with NASA Johnson Space Center and Planetary biology and origins and evolution of life affiliated with NASA Ames Research Center. The Diaz Team completed its report by the end of October 1995.
The National Space Science Data Center (NSSDC) has the mission:
These functions are unique. NSSDC is ideally positioned to take a leading role in the process. However, NSSDC, as currently structured, does not match the Institute concept. The next steps for NSSDC are:
NASA conducted a review of the peer review process itself. The review committee was a cross disciplinary panel spanning space physics, planets to astrophysics. The Committee recommended considering the planetary sciences model that uses standing panels for reviews. Astrophysics uses and will continue to use ad hoc panels. The Moore Committee commended OSS for its handling of the review process.