National Academies Press: OpenBook

Controlling Cost Growth of NASA Earth and Space Science Missions (2010)

Chapter: Appendix C Findings and Recommendations from Primary References

« Previous: Appendix B Biographies of Committee Members and Staff
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C Findings and Recommendations from Primary References." National Research Council. 2010. Controlling Cost Growth of NASA Earth and Space Science Missions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12946.
×

C
Findings and Recommendations from Primary References

In addition to identifying the causes of cost growth, the primary references (see the References chapter) have made dozens of specific findings and recommendations. This appendix summarizes the findings and recommendations contained in these historic studies. In some cases the findings and recommendations listed are quoted from other prior studies.

TABLE C.1 Cost Growth Findings from the Primary References

Finding

Page Number Primary Reference

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

9

10

Cost growth and schedule slips are nearly universal among the projects studied.

 

2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The highest percentage schedule growth tends to occur after the start of spacecraft integration and test.

 

 

 

 

 

71

 

 

 

There is no discernable correlation between actual cost performance and planned cost reserve level.

 

33

 

10

 

67

 

 

 

There is no discernable correlation between actual cost performance and percent of funds spent during Phase B formulation.

 

34

 

10

 

63

 

 

 

For the projects in this study, there is no discernable correlation between actual cost performance and percent of funds spent up to CDR.

 

35

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There is a possible correlation between completing substantial activity prior to CDR and lower cost growth for the total development effort.

 

43

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There appears to be little-to-no correlation between total flight system dry mass growth and Phase BCD cost growth or between instrument mass growth and instrument Phase BCD cost growth for the 30 SMD missions and 100+ individual instruments included in this study.

 

 

 

 

 

110

 

 

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C Findings and Recommendations from Primary References." National Research Council. 2010. Controlling Cost Growth of NASA Earth and Space Science Missions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12946.
×

Finding

Page Number Primary Reference

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

9

10

Earth Science missions do not show a systemic difference in cost or cost growth as compared to other SMD missions. Missions from each SMD division experience cost growth; total growth in dollars is greater for missions that have greater baseline costs.

 

 

 

 

 

5

37

 

 

 

There is no correlation between mission cost growth and SMD division, acquisition mode, contractor type, Phase B investment or cost reserve.

 

 

 

 

 

5

 

 

 

Directed missions cost more than AO-acquired missions do and are, in general, more complex and more massive.

 

 

 

 

 

47

 

 

 

AO-acquired and directed missions have comparable schedule growth in months.

 

 

 

 

 

47

 

 

 

In general, cost growth is of a similar percentage for AO-acquired and directed missions, although it may be a larger dollar increase for directed missions since it is against a larger base cost.

 

 

 

 

 

47

 

 

 

Mission cost growth correlates strongly with payload cost growth. Payloads from all four SMD divisions experience significant cost growth.

 

 

 

 

 

5

79

 

 

 

Instrument cost shows good correlation to a multivariable instrument Level-of-Difficulty measure.

 

 

 

 

 

5

 

 

 

Earth science instruments cost less per unit mass but are more massive, have more stringent requirements and higher levels of difficulty, and therefore are more costly overall than are instruments in the other SMD divisions.

 

 

 

 

 

5

 

 

 

There is no systemic difference in spacecraft cost regimes between Earth and space science missions.

 

 

 

 

 

5

 

 

 

Department of Defense capabilities to lead and manage the acquisition process have seriously eroded. The government should address acquisition staffing, reporting integrity, systems engineering capabilities, and program manager authority.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

iii

While the space industrial base is adequate to support current programs, long-term concerns exist. A continuous flow of new programs—cautiously selected—is required to maintain a robust space industry. Without such a flow, the workforce, as well as critical national capabilities in the payload and sensor areas, are at risk.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

iv

4

NOTE: The numbers in each cell of the table indicate the page number(s) in the respective report where the item is discussed. Primary Reference 8 is focused on reducing the absolute costs of NASA space science missions; it does not directly address cost growth, and so its results are not included in this table. Primary References 9 and 10 focus on Department of Defense systems. AO, announcement of opportunity; CDR, critical design review; SMD, Science Mission Directorate.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C Findings and Recommendations from Primary References." National Research Council. 2010. Controlling Cost Growth of NASA Earth and Space Science Missions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12946.
×

TABLE C.2 Cost Growth Recommendations from Prior Studies

 

Page Number in Primary Reference

Recommendation

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

9

10

NASA should be realistic with itself, Congress, and the public in terms of the goals, capabilities, costs, schedule, and technical risks of a new project.

 

 

 

 

 

 

12

 

 

Improve technical and programmatic definition at the beginning of a project (increase time and funding for Phase A and Phase B and extend them as necessary for complex projects) to allow more time for development of technology, baseline costs, funding profiles, and the overall implementation plan before making significant investments in other mission elements.

15

38

7

11

12

 

11

 

 

SMD should work with projects beginning at the start of Phase B, or earlier if possible, to establish a credible baseline plan that fits within the available funding with sufficient margin instead of waiting for projects to present a plan at the end of Phase B.

 

20

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Require more robust initial cost and schedule estimates, including project-level management costs.

17

38

7

11

12

 

 

 

 

Do a better job of independently validating costs and schedule (this includes improving cost and schedule estimating tools).

 

 

7

 

12

 

 

 

5

SMD should perform independent cost estimates on all decadal planning and similar exercises.

 

 

 

 

 

12

 

 

 

Independently validate instrument resources and resulting spacecraft resources needed to meet mission requirements (cost estimators cannot be expected to validate system designs).

 

 

 

 

12

 

 

 

 

Give more attention to risk identification and mitigation prior to CDR.

 

 

12

 

 

 

 

 

 

Select AO missions with lower risk.

 

 

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Remove funding constraints from AOs for more credible funding profiles for initial planning.

 

39

7

12

 

 

 

 

 

For AO missions, consider funding profiles, mission-specific launch date constraints, and program funding availability when making selections.

 

39

 

12

 

 

 

 

 

For AO missions, consider alternates to down-selecting to two finalists, delay setting the cost cap until PDR, and require proposes to address cost and schedule feasibility.

 

 

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Direct that source selections evaluate contractor cost credibility and use the estimate as a measure of their technical understanding.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5

Hold basis-of-estimate discussions at the start of Phase A.

 

 

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Spend more money on research and development programs to mature technology readiness levels.

 

 

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Support early instrument development to reduce risk (phased development approach).

15

 

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Carefully evaluate design heritage credits.

 

 

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Improve tools for early estimation of science instrument costs.

 

41

 

13

 

12

 

 

 

Increase cost reserves.

15

 

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Minimize or eliminate blanket requirements on the level of cost reserves. Instead, match reserves to implementation risk.

 

 

 

12

14

 

 

 

 

 

Hold a budget reserve at the program level at headquarters, in part to address impacts from changes external to the projects (such as changes in launch costs).

 

43

20

12

 

 

 

 

 

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C Findings and Recommendations from Primary References." National Research Council. 2010. Controlling Cost Growth of NASA Earth and Space Science Missions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12946.
×

 

Page Number in Primary Reference

Recommendation

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

9

10

Ensure adequate funds (and reserves) to cover cost of spacecraft integration and test.

 

42

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Increase cost reserves for missions relying on foreign hardware and identify backup options.

 

43

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Increase funded schedule reserves.

16

 

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Establish and maintain appropriate funding profiles and stable funding.

 

 

7

 

 

12

 

 

 

Ensure mission are properly scoped.

13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Calculate and report estimates to complete monthly.

17

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Manage to schedule.

17

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Make more effective use of Earned Value Management, beginning as early in the development cycle as possible.

17

40

 

12

 

 

 

 

 

Identify and disseminate project management best practices.

 

41

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Establish a handbook or memorandum of understanding that details the relationship between PIs and project managers.

 

 

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Program managers should establish early warning metrics and report problems up the management chain for timely corrective action.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6

Avoid changes and redirection, especially after PDR.

 

39

7

12

 

 

 

 

 

Use four-party agreements (among project manager, principal investigator, NASA headquarters, and prime contractor) or some other process to control requirements.

 

 

7

 

 

 

 

 

33

Include cost and schedule status details at CDR, Assembly Readiness Review, Pre-Environmental Review, and Mission Readiness Review.

 

 

 

11

 

 

 

 

 

Assess launch site capabilities before start of Phase B.

 

39

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Select the expandable launch vehicle as early as possible and minimize changes.

 

39

7

20

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maintain a cost reserve at headquarters to cover unforeseen issues affecting launch vehicle price and launch site costs.

 

39

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Develop estimates of cost and schedule savings from descopes earlier and with more rigor.

 

42

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Establish a single source of cost data, with routine data collection from missions.

 

44

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Improve NASA’s Cost Analysis Data Requirement (CADRe) system by including new missions and expanding the instrument subsystem to identify which instrument types have had the highest historical resource growth.

 

 

 

 

13

12

 

 

 

Cancel missions for poor performance.

 

 

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conduct mission postmortem reviews.

 

 

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

NOTE: The numbers in each cell of the table indicate the page number(s) in the respective report where the item is discussed. Primary Reference 8 is focused on reducing the absolute costs of NASA space science missions; it does not directly address cost growth, and so its results are not included in this table. Primary References 9 and 10 focus on Department of Defense systems. AO, announcement of opportunity; CDR, critical design review; PDR, preliminary design review; SMD, Science Mission Directorate.

Suggested Citation:"Appendix C Findings and Recommendations from Primary References." National Research Council. 2010. Controlling Cost Growth of NASA Earth and Space Science Missions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12946.
×
Page 58
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C Findings and Recommendations from Primary References." National Research Council. 2010. Controlling Cost Growth of NASA Earth and Space Science Missions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12946.
×
Page 59
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C Findings and Recommendations from Primary References." National Research Council. 2010. Controlling Cost Growth of NASA Earth and Space Science Missions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12946.
×
Page 60
Suggested Citation:"Appendix C Findings and Recommendations from Primary References." National Research Council. 2010. Controlling Cost Growth of NASA Earth and Space Science Missions. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12946.
×
Page 61
Next: Appendix D Acronyms and Abbreviations »
Controlling Cost Growth of NASA Earth and Space Science Missions Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $29.00 Buy Ebook | $23.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Cost and schedule growth is a problem experienced by many types of projects in many fields of endeavor. Based on prior studies of cost growth in NASA and Department of Defense projects, this book identifies specific causes of cost growth associated with NASA Earth and space science missions and provides guidance on how NASA can overcome these specific problems.

The recommendations in this book focus on changes in NASA policies that would directly reduce or eliminate the cost growth of Earth and space science missions. Large cost growth is a concern for Earth and space science missions, and it can be a concern for other missions as well. If the cost growth is large enough, it can create liquidity problems for NASA's Science Mission Directorate that in turn cause cost profile changes and development delays that amplify the overall cost growth for other concurrent and/or pending missions. Addressing cost growth through the allocation of artificially high reserves is an inefficient use of resources because it unnecessarily diminishes the portfolio of planned flights. The most efficient use of resources is to establish realistic budgets and reserves and effective management processes that maximize the likelihood that mission costs will not exceed reserves. NASA is already taking action to reduce cost growth; additional steps, as recommended herein, will help improve NASA's mission planning process and achieve the goal of ensuring frequent mission opportunities for NASA Earth and space science.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!