Skip to main content

Assessment of the National Science Foundation's 2015 Geospace Portfolio Review (2017) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

Summary
Pages 1-6

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 1...
... NSF asked the Space Studies Board of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine3 to provide an independent assessment of the ICCGS report. The Committee on the Assessment of the National Science Foundation's 2015 Geospace Portfolio Review (hereafter, "the assessment committee" or "the committee")
Read the entire page →
From page 2...
... and the Geospace Section hinders the ability of the Geospace Section to act fully upon the recom mendations given in Investments in Critical Capabilities for Geospace Science 2016 to 2025. AGS should develop a strategic vision and a strategic plan that recognizes all components within its portfolio relevant to geospace and interfaces with other programs across other National Science Foundation (NSF)
Read the entire page →
From page 3...
... Both the PRC and the assessment committee recognize that to address decadal survey priorities under a flatbudget scenario, GS funding of facilities or activities must be reduced or, in some cases, eliminated. However, a combination of unknown factors led the assessment committee to two broad concerns regarding the recommended cuts to Arecibo Observatory and Sondrestrom: Conclusion: Details concerning the actual costs of supporting geospace sciences at Arecibo Observatory and Sondrestrom, including the ISRs and ancillary instrumentation, are not provided in the ICCGS.
Read the entire page →
From page 4...
... Development and implementation will require coordination between the AGS division, the Directorate for Geosciences, and NSF. Recommendation: The Division of Atmospheric and Geospace Sciences should work with the Directorate for Geosciences and the National Science Foundation to implement the 2013 solar and space physics decadal survey recommendation for a Midscale Projects Program to address midscale priorities.
Read the entire page →
From page 5...
... Recommendation: The assessment committee endorses the Investments in Critical Capabilities for Geospace Science 2016 to 2025 recommendation to seek partnerships for CubeSats outside of the National Science Foundation (NSF) Geospace Section.
Read the entire page →
From page 6...
... To guide the future evolution of the GS portfolio, the ICCGS recommends periodic senior reviews for both the Core and Strategic Grants Programs and for all of the GS facilities. The assessment committee endorses the use of senior reviews as a recognized means of prioritizing existing investments to allow new opportunities and to rebalance and renew the portfolio.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • geospace science
  • grants programs
  • decadal survey
  • critical capabilities
  • geospace sciences

  • iccgs recommends
  • space physics
  • strategic grants
  • space weather
  • committee endorses

  • projects program
  • portfolio review
  • geospace portfolio
  • geospace section
  • midscale projects

  • survey priorities
  • national space
  • iccgs recommendations
  • targeted grants
  • physics decadal

  • survey recommendation
  • senior reviews
  • nsf geospace
  • wider geospace
  • iccgs recommended

  • iccgs report
  • iccgs recs
  • grants program
  • committee agrees
  • competed grants


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.