Lessons Learned in the Implementation of NASA's Earth Venture Class (2022) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
4 Meeting the EV-I and EV-M Broader Objectives
4 Meeting the EV-I and EV-M Broader Objectives
Pages 36-41
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 36... ...
Reflecting on the EV program shortly after its initiation, a former head of NASA's Earth Science Division (ESD) noted that creation of the new flight element was also driven by the perception that NASA's base of new ideas and technologies was increasingly dependent on just a few NASA centers and contractors.1 According to this official, there was concern that fewer universities were able to engage with NASA, increasing the potential that innovative approaches to technology would not be incorporated into the mission portfolio.
|
From page 37... ...
Feedback received by the committee suggests that debriefings provided by NASA to non-selected EV proposals provided important insight to help improve proposals for more competitive future bids. RECOMMENDATION 4.1: NASA should maintain a cadence of approximately one Earth Venture solicitation every 18 months to allow institutions to maintain proposal teams and ensure broad com munity engagement.
|
From page 38... ...
, to tailor management and review requirements to the particulars of the Earth Venture project and thereby reduce cost and management burden. FINDING 4.1: Classifying all EV missions as Class "D" and tailoring the project management regime to be consistent with the results from the proposal's technical, management, and cost review can identify more specific risks to be addressed during a risk-based safety and mission assurance process.
|
From page 39... ...
While only 30 percent of the PIs are working at a NASA center, all EV missions/instruments science or instrument teams have participation at one of the NASA centers (with highest involvement coming from NASA GSFC and Jet Propulsion Laboratory) or have NASA centers in the management teams.
|
From page 40... ...
In interviews with the committee, mission PIs have noted that these requirements led them to include less in their EV proposals than they thought their missions, if fully successful, could accomplish. Although one of the goals of the EV program is to drive innovation, having only threshold and baseline science objectives, without allowing for more speculative discussions, may disadvantage truly new observations.
|
From page 41... ...
All Earth science missions that are still functional at the end of their primary operational phase may undergo a senior review process at NASA Headquarters to assess whether an extended operational phase should be implemented to make additional progress in advancing applications or to achieve additional science objectives. FINDING 4.4: Although science-driven missions may focus on both foundational science questions as well as more applied questions, it appears impossible to evaluate applications quantitatively when all proposals are not required to answer both sets of questions.
|
Key Terms
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.