Smd mission Support Activities Rev9

– Microwave Background (LAMBDA @ GSFC) [HEASARC and LAMBDA have merged beginning in April 2008], WMAP, COBE, IRAS, SWAS,

– Ultraviolet & Optical (MAST @ STScI): GALEX, Hubble, FUSE, EUVE, IUE, UIT, HUT, ORFEUS, WUPPE, DSS, Kepler, JWST,

– Infrared & Submillimeter (IRSA @ JPL): IRAS, 2MASS, MSX, SWAS,ISO, Spitzer, WISE, Planck, (Herschel);

• The organization of the data centers by wavelength is a natural way to curate different data sets using the shared expertise at the respective data centers, enabling successful archival research.

[Slide 144]:

Heading 1: Astrophysics Data Centers:

Heading 2: Astrophysics Databases:

– Astrophysics Data System (ADS @ SAO): Digital library with about 7.4M records indexed (astronomy: 1.6M; physics: 4.8M; arXiv preprints: 0.5M), provides abstracts, full papers, and literature citations.

– Simbad (Strasbourg, SAO): Basic data, cross-identifications, and bibliography for over 4.3M objects outside the Solar system.

– NASA Extragalactic Database (NED @ JPL): Basic data across all wavelengths, cross-identifications, bibliography, and redshifts (1.4M) for over 10M objects outside the Milky Way (plus 150M objects from SDSS DR6 added in late 2008).

– NASA Star and Exoplanet Database (NStED@ JPL): Data from space-based (MOST, Corot, Kepler) and ground-based telescopes related to the identification and characterization of exoplanets.

Heading 2: Virtual Astronomical Observatory (VAO):

– National facility supported by NSF and NASA to find, enable access and use astronomy data from around the world. NASA archive centers provide the core of archived data to the VAO.
[Slide 145]:

Heading 1: ADCAR Budget (Astrophysics Data Curation and Archives):

Row 1: Column headings (left to right): Data Centers & Activities, Fiscal Year 08, Fiscal Year 09, Fiscal Year 10, Fiscal Year 11, Fiscal Year 12;

For each of the following rows, values are provided in order for Data Centers & Activities, and for Fiscal Year 08, Fiscal Year 09, Fiscal Year 10, Fiscal Year 11, and Fiscal Year 12:

Row 2 ADS/Simbad; $1,330.0; $1,801.4; $1,878.4; $1,959.6; $2,045.1,

Row 3: HEASARC/Lambda; $3,205.0; $3,108.5; $3,292.2; $3,472.1; $4,361.0,

Row 4: MAST; $1,550.0; $2,295.0; $2,339.0; $2,349.4; $2,333.6,

Row 5: IRSA; $1,378.0; $1,378.0; $1,378.0; $2,215.5; $3,350.0,

Row 6: NED; $1,925.0; $2,025.0; $2,175.0; $2,424.0; $2,671.0,

Row 7: NStED; (no entry for Fiscal Year 08); $1,000.0; $1,000.0; (no entries for Fiscal Year 11 and Fiscal Year 12),

Row 8: E/PO; (in Fiscal Year 08, E/PO was included in the Centers budget); $210.0; $220.0; $250.0; $280.0,

Row 9: ADCAR/VAO; $917.0; $108.1; $2,076.4; $896.4; negative $32.7,

Row 10: Total; $10,305.0; $11,926.0; $14,359.0; $13,567.0; $15,008.0,

Bar graph displays values in preceding table for the Fiscal Years 09 through 12 for ADS/SIMBAD, HEARSARC/LAMBDA, MAST, IRSA, NED, and NSTED.

[Slide 146]:

Heading 1: Back to SMD:

[Slide 147]:

Heading 1: SARA Web Page:

• Lots more data at http://nasascience.nasa.gov/researchers/sara.

Bar graph for ROSES 04, 05, 06, and 07 displays number of program elements corresponding to ranges of days elapsed from due date to announcement. For further assistance with this graph, contact [e-mail].

[Slide 148]::

Heading 1: Division Diversity in Research Practices:

• Standing discipline solicitations or targeted solicitations

• Division roll-ups or individual discipline calls

• Community data analysis in the mission budget or in the research budget

• Selection and recompetition of mission science teams

• Role of mission science teams

• Establishment and management of data archives

• Management of suborbital programs including scheduling flights and funding payloads

• Role of interdisciplinary investigations

• Role and management of large scale modeling efforts

• Existence of other funding agencies.

[Slide 149]:

Heading 1: SMD’s Research Management:

• Research management is driven by several natural cycles: budget development, development of ROSES, selections:

– Requirements set in NPR 7120.8 and SMD Management Handbook;

• Annual budget cycle:

– Review portfolio status, accomplishments, and needs,

– Strategic decisions on balance between missions and research,

– Determine overall research budget,

– See research portfolio target budgets;

• ROSES development:

– Review portfolio stats and needs,

– Determine solicitation strategy,

– Assign budgets for new awards;

• Proposal selections:

– Consider science merit (from peer review),

– Consider programmatic needs (future missions, unique opportunities, portfolio balance, high risk research).

[Slide 150]:

Heading 1: Previous NRC Recommendations:

• NRC has provided diverse recommendations on mission enabling activities in numerous recent reports, e.g.:

– Grading NASA’s Solar System Exploration Program (2008),

– Assessment of the NASA Astrobiology Institute (2008),

– The Scientific Context for the Exploration of the Moon (2007),

– Performance Assessment of NASA’s Astrophysics Program (2007),

– Life in the Universe: An Assessment of U.S. and International Programs in Astrobiology (2003),

– All four of the decadal surveys (2001 to 2007),

– Supporting Research and Data Analysis in NASA’s Science Programs: Engines for Innovation and Synthesis (1998);

• The current study should reconsider these and highlight high priority topics that remain areas of concern.
[Slide 151]:

Heading 51: Some Observations:

• NASA is a mission agency:

– Drives need for targeted individual investigations rather than core support,

– “NASA funds projects not people”;

• Missions are necessary:

– A decreasing flight rate is not a stable long term strategy;

• There are too many proposal opportunities:

– Resulting in too many proposals requiring too many reviewers,

– Resulting in more proposal writing and lower selection rates without changing the total funding to the community;

• In a flat budget environment, a growing community cannot be supported:

– The appropriate amount of community funding leads to an appropriately sized community.

[Slide 152]:

Heading 1: Final Statements:

• The SMD program is opportunity rich:

– Supports investigations from less than $20K to large missions;

• Up to half of the budget is (mission enabling):

– Approximately 50% of budget is mission development and mission operations,

– Mission enabling activities are embedded in every program,

– At least 25% of non-mission budget is technology development;

• The program has evolved over 50 years to a balance between mission and mission enabling:

– The overall balance has been fairly stable over time;

• The NASA science program is the only space science program in the world with an integral and substantial R&A program:

– It is arguably the best structured program for scientific exploration in space, of space, and from space.

End file.