Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “community of practice development”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Development and Outcomes of Returning Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon Exposure Results in the Washington Heights, NYC Community

Report-back of research results (RBRR) is becoming standard practice for environmental health research studies. RBRR is thought to increase environmental health literacy (EHL), although standardized measurements are limited. For this study, we developed a report back document on exposure to air pollutants, Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons, during pregnancy through community engaged research and evaluated whether the report increased EHL. We used focus groups and surveys to gather feedback on the report document from an initial group of study participants (Group 1, n = 22) and then sent the revised report to a larger number of participants (Group 2, n = 168). We conducted focus groups among participants in Group 1 and discussed their suggested changes to the report and how those changes could be implemented. Participants in focus groups demonstrated multiple levels of EHL. While participant engagement critically informed report development, a survey comparing feedback from Group 1 (initial report) and Group 2 (revised report) did not show a significant difference in the ease of reading the report or knowledge gained about air pollutants. We acknowledge that our approach was limited by a lack of EHL tools that assess knowledge and behavior change, and a reliance on quantitative methodologies. Future approaches that merge qualitative and quantitative methodologies to evaluate RBRR and methodologies for assessing RBRR materials and subsequent changes in knowledge, attitudes, and behavior, may be necessary.

Children’s Environmental Health↗
DOE OSTI2024

Providing a Flexible and Comprehensive Software Stack Via Spack, an Extreme-Scale Scientific Software Stack, and Software Development Kits

To manage the complex demands of modern high-performance computing (HPC), software applications increasingly depend on software developed by other teams, often at other institutions. An HPC software ecosystem approach is required to support dependencies on third-party scientific software. An ecosystem approach provides layers of activity above the individual software product level that promote interoperability, quality improvement, porting, testing, and deployment. The U.S. Exascale Computing Project (ECP) developed its HPC software ecosystem using a three-pronged approach. First, the ECP adopted and invested in Spack, a package manager designed to handle complex HPC package dependencies. Second, the ECP created the Extreme Scale Scientific Software Stack, an effort that supports developing, deploying, and running scientific applications on HPC platforms. Third, the ECP supported software product communities, or software development kits, to develop and promote best practices, improve software interoperability, and other collaborative efforts. This article describes ECP contributions to HPC software ecosystem challenges.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2026

E2C Cohorts: Implementation Funding Projects - Impact Summary [Slides]

From August 2024 to October 2025, 11 Clean Cities and Communities coalitions supported projects to advance transportation goals by gathering input from local stakeholders, and using the resulting insights to develop new plans and programs for local partners. This effort leveraged information and best practices shared during the 2024 E2C Cohort on Integrating Community Priorities into Electric Vehicle Plans and Projects. These coalitions supported partners across the country to develop plans for electric vehicle integration through one-on-one technical assistance and tailored local engagement. This deck summarizes the individual projects completed by coalitions, and the overall reach and impact of all of this program.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Resources, Training, and Education Under the Heliostat Consortium: Industry Gap Analysis and Building a Resource Database

Concentrating solar power is not a widely deployed or known technology area, and the heliostat workforce community in the United States is currently small, with knowledge and expertise not widely available. The resource, training, and education (RTE) topic within the Heliostat Consortium (HelioCon) was established to address this. RTE encompasses resources, practices, and programs to ensure that (1) newcomers to the heliostat development community have an adequate knowledge base and training to conduct R&D efforts, (2) outsiders to the field are provided with resources and opportunities to join the workforce, and (3) the workforce community is a productive, healthy, and fulfilling environment for all workers. In the first year of the project, a roadmap study was conducted, in which the major gaps in RTE were identified by consulting experts in the industry, with the top gap being the lack of public accessibility to concentrating solar-thermal power (CSP) knowledge. Here, to address this, the HelioCon team has been developing a centralized web-based resource database, containing a reference library, educational videos, lists of components suppliers and software/metrology tools, a power tower plant database, and information on existing standards/guidelines.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Barriers and Opportunities for Energy Technology Adoption in Juneau, Alaska

This report presents findings from a qualitative study examining barriers and opportunities for air source heat pump (ASHP) and electric vehicle (EV) adoption in Juneau, Alaska, with a particular focus on manufactured and multifamily housing. The analysis draws on community insights from end users and middle actors to better understand how technology adoption unfolds in contexts with distinct logistical, infrastructural, and housing constraints. The report is organized according to key barriers and opportunities identified through stakeholder input, providing a structured understanding of adoption dynamics across technologies and housing types. These insights are intended to inform program design and support more effective electrification strategies tailored to local conditions. The study team employed qualitative methods to capture both in-depth and high-level perspectives on technology adoption. Data collection included: 1) two 2-hour focus groups with a total of five end users and seven middle actors, enabling detailed and structured discussion and 2) ten semistructured interviews with manufactured home owners, multifamily landlords, and one tenant, providing complementary insights across housing contexts. Focus groups captured accounts of shared challenges and opportunities while interviews offered more concise reflections on individual experiences. Together, these methods enabled a more comprehensive understanding of both systemic barriers and lived experiences with ASHPs and EVs. The findings reveal that adoption of electrification technologies is shaped by a combination of economic, logistical, and informational factors that vary across housing types, technology characteristics, user groups, and other demographic factors. Addressing these factors requires tailored strategies that reflect local conditions and user experiences. The insights in this report can provide a foundation for organizations such as AEL&P to refine program design, support more effective outreach, and anticipate shifts in energy demand associated with increased electrification. More broadly, the study highlights the importance of incorporating community perspectives when developing electrification initiatives to ensure they are both practical and responsive to real-world constraints.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Genesis Mission Data cards

As data-intensive research and artificial intelligence become central to DOE mission science, the need for machine-actionable dataset documentation has grown accordingly. However, many DOE-aligned communities, including the Office of Science, NNSA, and cross-laboratory collaborations, have developed independent metadata practices. This fragmentation creates friction for discovery, federation, and reuse across programs. To address these challenges, this talk introduces the Genesis Data Card: a shared metadata artifact developed in collaboration with a broad DOE community (Jefferson Lab and the National Lab of the Rockies, Oak Ridge, Sandia, Idaho, Berkeley, and Los Alamos). The Genesis Data Card aims to standardize dataset documentation across DOE-aligned initiatives while remaining extensible to discipline-specific needs. This talk will describe the data card template and the supporting code to validate completed data cards, using a companion LinkML schema. I'll walk through the design decisions behind the template, its alignment with existing standards, its treatment of sensitivity and governance metadata, and the phased roadmap toward lifecycle-integrated "xCards" that support autonomous discovery and reuse. The talk closes with current gaps, ongoing work, and how others can contribute datasets and feedback to the shared repository.

McSpadden, Helen [Thomas Jefferson National Accele↗
DOE OSTI2025

DOE Repository Metadata Profile (DRMP): A Metadata Framework for Advancing Interoperability and AI Readiness Across Scientific Repositories

The Department of Energy (DOE) funds a diverse and distributed ecosystem of repositories that steward scientific data, publications, and software across its research programs, user facilities, and national laboratories. While significant progress has been made in standardizing dataset-level metadata, the metadata describing repositories themselves (their identity, governance, access interfaces, policies, and technical capabilities) remains inconsistent and fragmented across DOE-funded systems. This variability limits discoverability, interoperability, automated validation, and AI-driven analysis, all of which are increasingly essential for modern scientific workflows. To address this gap, the DOE Data Curation Working Group (DCWG) developed the DOE Repository Metadata Profile (DRMP). The DRMP is a practical, community-driven framework that defines how repositories can describe themselves in a consistent, machine-actionable, and scalable manner. The DRMP is not a new metadata schema. Instead, it is a mapping profile and structured element set capturing the essential characteristics of DOE repositories. It harmonizes repository-level metadata across six widely adopted community schemas: RE3Data; DCAT-US v3; Schema.org; Dublin Core; DataCite 4.6; and PREMIS 3.0. This harmonization eliminates reinvention and enables interoperability within DOE and across the broader scientific ecosystem. A core objective of the DRMP is to reduce burden on repositories by allowing them to reuse their existing metadata through a Rosetta-style crosswalk rather than redesigning local implementations. The profile introduces a three-level conformance model that supports incremental adoption: • Level 1 – Minimum Viable Record (MVR): foundational identification elements required for workflows, project registration, and basic repository presence. • Level 2 – Interoperable: structured metadata enabling alignment with national and international discovery systems. • Level 3 – AI-Ready: enhanced provenance, policy transparency, fixity, semantic context, and capabilities that support automated reasoning, model training governance, and machine-assisted curation. To support implementation, the DRMP includes JSON Schema definitions, OpenAPI patterns, and MCP templates that allow repositories to publish machine-readable metadata directly within existing platforms. These resources are modular and lightweight, enabling adoption without major architectural change. Adopting the DRMP enables repositories to: • Enhance discoverability and interoperability by aligning identifiers, classifications, and descriptive elements across widely used schema standards. • Support federated discovery and cross-registration across DOE systems, Data.gov, and international catalogs. • Enable AI agents and workflow orchestration systems to interpret repository-level metadata within the American Science Cloud (AmSC) through Model Context Protocol (MCP)-based context publication. • Demonstrate alignment with DOE’s open science, stewardship, and FAIR data priorities. This guidance represents a community-driven step forward. Through voluntary adoption and continued feedback, the DRMP advances a cohesive, machine-actionable description of DOE repositories that supports FAIR data practices, preparing the infrastructure for AI-enabled research, and strengthening the discoverability and reuse of DOE’s scientific outputs.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2025

The LIFT Community of Practice: Lessons Learned in 2024

This report is part of a series of annual papers from the LIFT Community of Practice which convenes cross-sector stakeholders and organizations to expand public participation in renewable energy development.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Roadmap on perovskite light-emitting diodes

Abstract In recent years, the field of metal-halide perovskite emitters has rapidly emerged as a new community in solid-state lighting. Their exceptional optoelectronic properties have contributed to the rapid rise in external quantum efficiencies (EQEs) in perovskite light-emitting diodes (PeLEDs) from <1% (in 2014) to over 30% (in 2023) across a wide range of wavelengths. However, several challenges still hinder their commercialization, including the relatively low EQEs of blue/white devices, limited EQEs in large-area devices, poor device stability, as well as the toxicity of the easily accessible lead components and the solvents used in the synthesis and processing of PeLEDs. This roadmap addresses the current and future challenges in PeLEDs across fundamental and applied research areas, by sharing the community’s perspectives. This work will provide the field with practical guidelines to advance PeLED development and facilitate more rapid commercialization.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Understanding Decision-Relevant Regional Data Products: Workshop Report

A broad community of climate adaptation practitioners, stakeholders and policymakers rely on historical reconstructions and future projections of local to regional climate. To be of value to these users, climate data must be credible, salient, and authoritative (Cash et al. 2002). Namely, data must be consistent with our physical understanding of the global Earth system, must be relevant for informing the decision-making process, and must be backed by expert judgment. As more and more data products have become available, multiple challenges have emerged around the production, evaluation, selection, and use of these data products. Consequently, to ensure crucial decisions leverage the best possible historical and future physical climate data, there is a pressing need to develop a coordinated national climate data strategy that is inclusive of all relevant communities of practice.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Developing a Process for Collaboration-Based Siting of a Federal Consolidated Interim Storage Facility in the United States: Learning from Communities Living with Legacy Waste

In June of 2023, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) announced the selection of its Collaboration-Based Siting (CBS) Consortia, a group of 12 awardees, including the Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation (CRESP) (led by Vanderbilt University) to assist DOE-NE with the development of its process for siting a federal consolidated interim storage facility (FCISF) for spent nuclear fuel (SNF) storage. At this time, DOE NE is not soliciting interested host communities, rather the CBS Consortia are tasked with in-depth engagement, mutual learning, and capacity building to provide DOE NE with feedback on the CBS process. CRESP’s objective is to engage communities in two regions (the Pacific Northwest and the Southeast) with sites currently storing defense- and research-related SNF to foster learning concerning the best and worst practices in community participation in risk-informed decision making. This includes learning from existing structures for public input in radioactive waste management decision making [e.g. citizen advisory boards (CABs)] and other local parties about how to build and sustain trust among the parties. CRESP has been working to engage stakeholders and Tribes surrounding two DOE sites historically differing in receptiveness to engaging with DOE and trusting in DOE to accomplish its missions. CRESP’s approach to date has consisted of (1) engaging voluntarily members and former members of the DOE Office of Environmental Management’s CABs to develop a mutual understanding of their perspectives, values, and experiences related to risk and participatory decision making; (2) engaging members of those communities that would likely be part of any radioactive waste management discussions and who may provide valuable feedback for the development of the CBS process; and in the longer term, (3) engaging communities to foster knowledge sharing on understanding and definitions of risk and how risk is factored into community decision making. Our emphasis is to identify opportunities for improving risk communication frameworks, strategies, and decision making. The selection of a future FCISF site is likely to result in the creation of a structure similar to a CAB composed of members of the local community. We anticipate that these insights can help DOE NE learn from existing participatory risk communication structures in place at sites storing defenseor research-related SNF to understand best practices for fostering enduring and participatory relationships with future CABs. Within this paper, we (1) describe CRESP’s overall approach to assisting DOE NE with maturing the CBS process; (2) present a summary of preliminary phase 1 project results, including the development of a body of knowledge (describing available resources to support community engagement, risk communica tion, and participatory decision making) and community ecosystem information (leveraging demographic, social, economic, and environmental attribute mapping and advanced sentiment analysis of social media data); and (3) based on these results, provide observations for future research opportunities to support the development of CBS processes for radioactive waste management facilities, generally.

collaboration-based siting↗
DOE OSTI2024

WETO Software Stack Best Practices

Wind energy researchers typically share one key characteristic: a passion for increasing wind energy in the global energy mix. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) supports this mission in a number of ways including allocating funding directly to various aspects of wind energy research through the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) via the Wind Energy Technologies Office (WETO). While the traditional output of research is academic publication, software development efforts are increasingly a major focus. Software tools in the research environment allow researchers to describe an idea and quickly increase the scope and scale as they study it further. As a product of research, these tools represent a direct pipeline from researcher to industry practitioners since they are the implementation of ideas described in academic publications. Given this vital role in wind energy research and commercial development, the broad research software portfolio supported by WETO must maintain a minimum level of quality to support the wind energy field in the growing transition to renewable energy. This report outlines a series o f best practices to be adopted by all WETO-supported software projects, as well as expectations that the communities interacting with these projects should have of the developers and tools themselves. Wind energy research software has a unique standing in the field of scientific software. The stakeholders are varied with a subset being: (1) DOE EERE leadership, (2) DOE WETO leadership and program managers, (3) National lab leadership, (4) Associated project principle investigators, (5) Research software engineers, (6) Wind energy researchers in academia (including graduate students, post docs, and national lab staff), (7) Industry researchers and practitioners, (8) Commercial software developers, and (9) The general public interested in wind energy. These software are typically the end-user of other generic software libraries, so the funding cycles are often tied to applied research rather than the development of the software itself. Since the developers are also wind energy researchers, these tools are typically designed in a way that closely resembles the application in which they're used. Additionally, the expertise and incentives for the developers have a high variability, and often neither are aligned with software engineering or computer science. Given the unique environment in which wind energy research software is produced and consumed, it is critical for model owners to understand the context of their software. A framework for developing this understanding is to answer the following questions of a given software project: What is it's purpose? What is its role in the field of wind energy? What is the profile of the expected users? For how long will it be relevant? What is the expected impact? These questions allow model owners to identify the appropriate methods for the design, development, and long term maintenance of their software. Additionally, the answer provide context for future planners to understand why particular decisions were made and discern the consequences of changing course. The information is aggregated from experience within WETO-supported software development groups as well as external organizations and efforts to define the craft of research software engineering. These best practices aim to make the collaborative development process efficient and effective while improving the model understanding across stakeholders. Additionally, the general adoption of a common framework for software quality ensures that the end users of WETO software can trust these tools and accurately understand the risks to workflow integration.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Opening doors to physical sample tracking and attribution in Earth and environmental sciences

Physical samples and their associated data and metadata underpin scientific discoveries across disciplines and can enable new science when appropriately archived. However, there are significant gaps in current practices and infrastructure that prevent accurate provenance tracking, reproducibility, and attribution. For most samples, descriptive metadata are often sparse, inaccessible, or absent. Samples and associated data and metadata may also be scattered across numerous physical collections, data repositories, laboratories, data files, and papers with no clear linkage or provenance tracking as new information is generated over time. The Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP) Physical Samples Curation Cluster has therefore developed guidance for scientific authors on ‘Publishing Open Research Using Physical Samples.’ This involved synthesizing existing practices, gathering community feedback, and assessing real-world examples. We identified improvements needed to enable authors to efficiently cite and link Earth science samples and related data, and track their use. Our goal is to help improve discoverability, interoperability, and reuse of physical samples, and associated data and metadata. Though primarily focused on the needs of Earth and environmental sciences, these guidelines are broadly applicable.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

A Shared Understanding and Paths Forward for Community Benefit Mechanisms: Workshop Summary Report

On October 7-8, 2024, the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory hosted an in-person workshop focused on research needs and strategies for community benefit mechanisms (CBMs) used in the deployment of renewable energy infrastructure. Community benefit mechanisms (such as community benefit agreements, funds, and donations) are used to provide increased benefits and/or mitigate negative impacts of energy development for the communities that are impacted. The workshop aimed to assess the current state of knowledge, tools, practices, and lessons learned, as well as to identify research and other work needed to improve the impact and effective implementation of CBMs. This report describes the purpose and structure of the workshop and summarizes key themes, questions, issues, and ideas that arose from the workshop.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Overview of Community Solar Project Development [Slides]

The Energy to Communities (E2C) peer-learning cohort program provides technical assistance to groups of 15 community entities around a common energy topic over the course of 6 months. Every month, participants join a virtual meeting where they hear from experts and exchange strategies and best practices with their peers. This cohort, "Successful Energy Project Implementation" will explore common challenges in implementing energy projects and learn strategies to turn project plans into reality. Each participant will focus on a local energy project or priority as a cornerstone for their learning throughout the series. This presentation overviews the basics of developing community solar projects with emphasis on technical scope and ownership structures.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Preliminary Workforce Development and Environmental and Co-use Management Plans for a Floating Offshore Wind Platform - CRADA 609 (Final Report)

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) provided technical assistance to Glosten, Inc. and its affiliate, PelaStar, LLC to advance the development of their floating offshore wind (FOSW) platform. PNNL provided guidance and assessment in two areas that are important to address in the development of FOSW platforms: (1) workforce development and (2) environmental impacts and ocean co-use considerations. This work was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Wind Energy Technologies Office (WETO) through Phase 2 of the FLoating Offshore Wind ReadINess (FLOWIN) Prize. It should be noted that the Plans presented in this report are specific to the PelaStar tension-leg platform (TLP) and may not be applicable to all FOSW platforms. Workforce development and environmental/co-use impacts are highly dependent on the geographical region in which activities take place. At the request of PelaStar, PNNL focused on two regions where development may take place: the Gulf of Maine and Northern California. PNNL generated a preliminary Workforce Development Plan for PelaStar, which includes estimated job numbers and skillsets required to establish a workforce to manufacture, install, and operate their platform as part of FOSW projects. The Plan offers methods to increase diversity, equity, and inclusion practices when developing a new workforce and includes colleges and training centers for potential recruitment. Both positive and negative impacts to communities are evaluated, with potential mitigation strategies for reducing negative impacts. The structure of Community Benefit Agreements and Project Labor Agreements are discussed, noting the limitations of the role of a platform manufacturer versus the offshore wind developer. PNNL also drafted a preliminary Environmental and Co-Use Management Plan that serves as a guide to preparing an environmental assessment related to the installation and operation of PelaStar’s unique TLP design, including its potential ecological, socioeconomic, and emissions impacts. The Plan summarizes information on relevant regulatory requirements, potential impact producing factors, monitoring and mitigation measures, and physical and biological resources in the Gulf of Maine and Northern California. One of the primary perceived benefits of the PelaStar TLP is its reduced footprint due to its tensioned tendons versus catenary or taut moorings, but more research must be done as there are no studies on PelaStar’s TLP system to-date. The section also highlights ocean co-use considerations for PelaStar’s TLP system, specifically for fisheries, including existing perspectives, methods, examples, and limitations. The PNNL team established through this preliminary work and review of available literature and resources that there is not yet much research or planning around FOSW. With FOSW being a new industry, many of the findings and planning are adapted from fixed bottom offshore wind, which itself is only just taking off in the United States. More research is needed to establish best practices for workforce development and to assess environmental and ocean co-use impacts and mitigation approaches.

17 WIND ENERGY↗