Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “decision support framework”

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 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2018

Assessing Alternatives in the Systems Engineering Process: Case Study of an Earth Observing Satellite Concept

Defining design alternatives constitutes one of the critical initial steps of the systems engineering process. Once these design alternatives have been identified, assessing which alternatives best satisfy the project’s objectives can prove to be challenging when dealing with complex decision frameworks. Complex systems often involve the participation of different interest groups, who have different value systems and are focused on distinct aspects of the project. For example, design alternatives might be assessed predominantly for their technical merit by one group of stakeholders, while a different group might be more inclined to assess the design alternatives primarily based on programmatic values. MESCAL (Monitoring the Evolving State of Clouds and Aerosol Layers) is an ongoing NASA / CNES (Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales) joint study for an active remote sensing Earth observing satellite. Several design alternatives have been identified and the assessment of these alternatives requires consideration of a variety of factors. This paper presents the approach that was used to support a global assessment of the MESCAL design alternatives. A mapping of the interactions between mission, instrument, and science requirements was modeled to support the assessment of the trade space. In addition, a set of metrics was developed to structure the assessment that was conducted. Finally, this paper also discusses the general applicability of these metrics to other science mission concepts in the formulation phase.

Ivanco, Marie L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Applications of NASA’s LANCE Earth Observations for Ecosystem Assessments

As one of NASA's open and free data systems, NASA's Land, Atmosphere Near real-time Capability for EOS (LANCE) provides a wide range of near real-time, low latency and expedited data products from NASA and other earth science satellite missions to support users in their understanding of the value and distribution of ecosystem services. LANCE data can support the System of Environmental Economic Accounting-Ecosystem Accounting (SEEA-EA) framework by both facilitating the creation of ecosystem spatial extent and condition accounts, as well as the quantification and mapping of ecosystem services, much more quickly than routine data processing allows. During the past 13 years, LANCE near real-time satellite data products (e.g., surface reflectance, albedo, vegetation height, thermal anomalies, soil moisture, snow cover etc.) have been used to produce ecosystem-related indicators such as vegetation indexes, biomass, land cover maps, fire, and flood products. These ecosystem-related indicators can be integrated into ecosystem services models, tools, and platforms to monitor land cover and land use changes in ecosystem composition in support of land and natural resource management. When using ecosystem services accounts in decision-making, low latency is essential because having up-to-date information can be critical to support decisions being made. With adequate spatial resolution, long time series length, and low latency data products, LANCE would promote the sustainable use of land and natural resources.

Tian Yao↗
NASA NTRS2016

Integrating Spaceflight Human System Risk Research

NASA is working to increase the likelihood of human health and performance success during exploration missions as well as to maintain the subsequent long-term health of the crew. To manage the risks in achieving these goals, a system modelled after a Continuous Risk Management framework is in place. "Human System Risks" (Risks) have been identified, and approximately 30 are being actively addressed by NASA's Human Research Program (HRP). Research plans for each of HRP's Risks have been developed and are being executed. Inter-disciplinary ties between the research efforts supporting each Risk have been identified; however, efforts to identify and benefit from these connections have been mostly ad hoc. There is growing recognition that solutions developed to address the full set of Risks covering medical, physiological, behavioural, vehicle, and organizational aspects of exploration missions must be integrated across Risks and disciplines. This paper discusses how a framework of factors influencing human health and performance in space is being applied as the backbone for bringing together sometimes disparate information relevant to the individual Risks. The resulting interrelated information enables identification and visualization of connections between Risks and research efforts in a systematic and standardized manner. This paper also discusses the applications of the visualizations and insights into research planning, solicitation, and decision-making processes.

Mindock, Jennifer↗
NASA NTRS2000

Ames Research Center FY 2000 Implementation Plan: Leading Technology into the New Millennium

This document presents the implementation plan for Ames Research Center (ARC) within the overall framework of the NASA Strategic Plan. It describes how ARC intends to implement its Center of Excellence responsibilities, Agency assigned missions, Agency and Enterprise lead programs, and other roles in support of NASA's vision and mission. All Federal agencies are required by the 1993 Government Performance and Results Act to implement a long-term strategic planning process that includes measurable outcomes and strict accountability. At NASA, this planning process is shaped by the Space Act of 1958, annual appropriations, and other external mandates, as well as by customer requirements. The resulting Strategic Plan sets the overall architecture for what we do, identifies who our customers are, and directs where we are going and why. The Strategic Plan is the basis upon which decisions regarding program implementation and resource deployment are made. Whereas the strategic planning process examines the long-term direction of the organization and identifies a specific set of goals, the implementation planning process examines the detailed performance of the organization and allocates resources toward meeting these goals. It is the purpose of this implementation document to provide the connection between the NASA Strategic Plan and the specific programs and support functions that ARC employees perform. This connection flows from the NASA Strategic Plan, through the various Strategic Enterprise plans to the ARC Center of Excellence, primary missions, Lead Center programs, program support responsibilities, and ultimately, to the role of the individual ARC employee.

Source record↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Implementing an Objectives-Driven, Risk-Informed, and Case-Assured Approach to Safety and Mission Success at NASA

NASA is developing a “Standard for Assurance of Space Flight Safety and Mission Success” that implements an objectives-driven, risk-informed, and case-assured approach to safety and mission success (S&MS) for NASA space flight programs and projects. The standard aligns with the philosophy of risk leadership that has recently been established in NASA policy to assure acceptable levels of flight crew safety and mission success risk. It is consistent with existing NASA risk management requirements and is compatible with NASA program management and systems engineering requirements. The methodology described in the standard is presented in terms of an S&MS assurance framework that is designed to allow substantial flexibility in the specific means by which programs and projects achieve acceptable mission S&MS risk. Such flexibility is necessary to accommodate the increasingly broad range of acquisition strategies employed by NASA, including commercial transportation services, as well as to accommodate the increasingly rapid evolution of space flight-related technologies and practices. A key feature of the S&MS assurance framework is the specification of S&MS success criteria for each life-cycle review (LCR). The S&MS assurance case is structured around these criteria, the satisfaction of which indicates that the program/project is adhering to the S&MS risk posture. This enables the evolving S&MS assurance case to be used as a fundamental program/project submittal at each LCR, where its inherent structure of argument, supported by evidence, directly supports the evaluation of the program/project with respect to the S&MS success criteria, and by extension, the S&MS risk posture. As such, the S&MS assurance case is integral to program/project systems engineering, risk management, and S&MS oversight activities, and provides the principal basis for S&MS risk acceptance by the Decision Authority throughout the program/project life cycle.

Risk Posture↗
NASA NTRS2021

ATM TestBed 2021 Simulating & Testing for the Future of Flight

TestBed is a NASA facility that not only connects geographically distributed tools without having to worry about obsolescence, but it is also a comprehensive one-stop-access simulation framework that allows researchers to develop and test solutions to current and future challenges more quickly by addressing development pain points, while also facilitating the connection of simulators and new tools to a variety of organizations, allowing for faster testing and development. Specifically, TestBed enables one to better characterize the impact of a new technology under development and to communicate its impact to stakeholders.

Air Traffic Management↗
NASA NTRS2015

NASA System Safety Handbook. Volume 2: System Safety Concepts, Guidelines, and Implementation Examples

This is the second of two volumes that collectively comprise the NASA System Safety Handbook. Volume 1 (NASASP-210-580) was prepared for the purpose of presenting the overall framework for System Safety and for providing the general concepts needed to implement the framework. Volume 2 provides guidance for implementing these concepts as an integral part of systems engineering and risk management. This guidance addresses the following functional areas: 1.The development of objectives that collectively define adequate safety for a system, and the safety requirements derived from these objectives that are levied on the system. 2.The conduct of system safety activities, performed to meet the safety requirements, with specific emphasis on the conduct of integrated safety analysis (ISA) as a fundamental means by which systems engineering and risk management decisions are risk-informed. 3.The development of a risk-informed safety case (RISC) at major milestone reviews to argue that the systems safety objectives are satisfied (and therefore that the system is adequately safe). 4.The evaluation of the RISC (including supporting evidence) using a defined set of evaluation criteria, to assess the veracity of the claims made therein in order to support risk acceptance decisions.

Safety Case↗
NASA NTRS2020

Integrated assessment of climate change impacts on crop productivity and income of commercial maize farms in northeast South Africa

Agriculture in South Africa sustains about 70% of the region’s population for food, income and employment, playing an important role for food security and the local economy. The focus of the study was the commercial maize farms of the Free State Province given their importance in the National economy. The Regional Integrated Assessment (phase I) was implemented to assess climate change and adaptation that links climate, crops, economic data and tools developed by the Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project (AgMIP). In this context, the“system”is defined as a whole of agronomic and socio-economic factors. Within that framework three core questions were being evaluated: (i) Impacts of climate change under current system; (ii) Impacts of climate change under future system; (iii) The role of adaptation under climate change and the future system. Maize production will decrease between 10% to 16% as a result of projected climate impacts. Also, current agricultural production systems are negatively affected by climate change with an increase in poverty rates between 2% to 3%. The projected adoption of the adapted technology would result in positive increased net returns and a decrease in poverty rate of between 12%and 22%. The results of this study show that implementing adaptation measures and other strategies as indicated by the local stakeholders will have positive impacts on the agricultural production systems and can contribute to support and inform climate change policy decision making such as the development of National Adaptation Plans.

Integrated assessment↗
NASA NTRS2022

An ODE-Fitting Approach to Estimate Critical Aircraft Performance Parameters for Trajectory Prediction

Ground-based decision support tools (DST) in air traffic management (ATM) typically perform trajectory prediction based on aircraft performance model (APM) parameters, but some or all of these parameters might not be readily available. In particular, the three critical parameters required for trajectory prediction are the thrust setting, drag coefficients, and takeoff weight of the aircraft. Unfortunately, these parameters are coupled and appear together in physics-based kinetic models. Past approaches utilize data from a specific phase of flight (climb, level flight or descent), where one or more of the parameters are assumed to be known and estimate the remaining unknown parameters. This approach introduces bias/errors and also does not extend to scenarios where all of the above parameters are not known with sufficient accuracy. This paper is the first of its kind to propose a generalized framework for simultaneous estimation of all three critical APM parameters (thrust, drag, and mass). The proposed approach utilizes data from both the climb and descent phases and fits the ordinary differential equation for altitude in each phase using historical trajectory data available from radar tracks or ADS-B. The approach yields a set of optimized APM parameters that are best suited to fit each historical flight record. The methodology is applied on on sample flights from three different aircraft types, and the results demonstrate low fit error and consequently will yield a high level of prediction accuracy.

trajectory prediction, aircraft performance model,↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

An ODE-Fitting Approach to Estimate Critical Aircraft Performance Parameters for Trajectory Prediction

Ground-based decision support tools (DST) in air traffic management (ATM) typically perform trajectory prediction based on aircraft performance model (APM) parameters, but some or all of these parameters might not be readily available. In particular, the three critical parameters required for trajectory prediction are the thrust setting, drag coefficients, and takeoff weight of the aircraft. Unfortunately, these parameters are coupled and appear together in physics-based kinetic models. Past approaches utilize data from a specific phase of flight (climb, level flight or descent), where one or more of the parameters are assumed to be known and estimate the remaining unknown parameters. This approach introduces bias/errors and also does not extend to scenarios where all of the above parameters are not known with sufficient accuracy. This paper is the first of its kind to propose a generalized framework for simultaneous estimation of all three critical APM parameters (thrust, drag, and mass). The proposed approach utilizes data from both the climb and descent phases and fits the ordinary differential equation for altitude in each phase using historical trajectory data available from radar tracks or ADS-B. The approach yields a set of optimized APM parameters that are best suited to fit each historical flight record. The methodology is applied on on sample flights from three different aircraft types, and the results demonstrate low fit error and consequently will yield a high level of prediction accuracy.

trajectory prediction↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Predicting Airport Runway Configurations for Decision-Support Using Supervised Learning

One of the most challenging tasks for air traffic controllers is runway configuration management (RCM). It deals with the optimal selection of runways to operate on (for arrivals and departures) based on traffic, surface wind speed, wind direction, other environmental variables, noise constraints, and several other airport-specific factors. It affects the efficiency of the National Airspace System (NAS) and both surface and airspace operations can benefit from better understanding future runway configurations. In this paper, we present a comprehensive implementation of predictive models for runway configuration estimation from large volumes of historical data. Specifically, operational data from two full years (2018 and 2019) is collected, analyzed, and fused together to build the data product used in this work. The data set differs from prior work in the field in terms of its scope, resolution, and variety of factors collected and considered. Meteorological data is collected from two different sources – current weather conditions from METAR (Meteorological Terminal Aviation Routine Weather Report) and forecast weather conditions from Localized Aviation MOS Program (LAMP). Operational data from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Aviation System Performance Metrics (ASPM) related to scheduled and actual number of arrivals and departures, average taxi times, etc. are collected. NASA’s Sherlock Data Warehouse is used to identify critical information such as go-arounds, and other events that might impact RCM decision-making. All data is collected and aggregated over 15-minute intervals throughout the two years. This provides a resolution like the timescales that might be necessary for runway configuration management decision-making. A variety of supervised learning algorithms are tested including Support Vector Machine, Random Forest, Gradient Boosting, etc. including tuning of the model hyperparameters. The modeling process is applied and presented on two representative U.S. airports – Charlotte Douglas International Airport (KCLT) and Denver International Airport (KDEN). The two airports present different levels of complexity in terms of the total number of configurations used and provide a balanced perspective on the generalizability of the developed approach to other airports in the NAS. Initial results are promising (F1 score of 0.91 at KCLT and 0.83 at KDEN) for data in the test set. The final paper will contain a comprehensive comparison between different models and model building strategies as well as further refined results. Most important predictors for each airport will be identified along with a discussion and recommendations on adapting the framework to other scenarios.

Tejas G Puranik↗
NASA NTRS2024

Testing of Advanced Capabilities to Enable In-time Safety Management and Assurance for Future Flight Operations

In order to refine an initial Concept of Operations, explore Concepts of Use, and expose/validate requirements for future In-Time Aviation Safety Management Systems (IASMS), testing architectures were created, along with a set of capabilities and underlying information exchange protocols. These systems were conceived and developed based on hazards associated with two envisioned urban area flight domains: (1) highly autonomous small uncrewed aerial systems (sUAS) operating at low altitudes, and (2) highly autonomous air taxis. The initial scope of this development is described in [1]; this report provides an update, focusing on the subsequent developments and test activities. As stated in [1], it is important to note that there are many capabilities already in use by the industry (or soon to be in use) that will play critical roles in future IASMS designs. Those reported here were developed to address a gap in the current state-of-the-art regarding specific hazards/risks, and/or to allow for investigation of the interplay between and across hazard types — particularly regarding how overall safety risk can be reduced or managed effectively. Results of testing and development activities are organized by the operational phase wherein a particular capability would be employed (i.e., preflight, in-flight, and post-flight/off-line). Pre-flight: A set of capabilities were developed to help mitigate safety risk prior to flight (e.g., during flight and mission planning). Results of testing summarize (1) validation activities to raise the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and (2) evaluation activities where the capabilities were applied to flight/mission planning procedures and used by operators/pilots. For the latter, flight plans were automatically assessed, and operators/pilots were notified of hazardous flight segments so as to enable adjustment of the flight plan and re-evaluation, and/or to better inform go/no-go decisions. Capabilities addressed hazards associated with power consumption, third-party risk, wind, navigation system performance, radiofrequency interference, and proximity to geo-spatial threats (e.g., buildings, trees, and no-fly zones). In-flight: Flight experiments tested capabilities that detect and respond to hazards encountered during flight. In the first series, safety hazards were monitored and assessed onboard, and system-generated mitigation maneuvers were recorded (but not acted upon by the vehicle). In the second series, mitigation maneuver commands directed the aircraft in response to safety hazards (i.e., auto-mitigation). The sUAS used for testing is described in full, as is the test architecture, which included commercial avionics, research avionics, and onboard software designed to detect, assess, and respond to hazards. The onboard system was designed as a run-time assurance framework, consistent with [2] and supportive of both supervisory and automated modes. The primary functions included: real-time risk assessment (RTRA), auto-pilot monitoring, constraint monitoring, and contingency select/triggering. RTRA performs integrated risk assessment considering data from several hazard-related monitors (e.g., battery, motors, navigation, communications, population density, and loss-of-control). Post-flight/off-line: Data monitored and recorded during flights can enable IASMS capabilities that execute after flights have completed (or “off-line”). These include: (1) the ability to identify anomalies and trends that may only be observable when comparing data spanning a number of similar flights; (2) the ability to update and validate pre-flight and in-flight capabilities and any underlying models to improve their performance; (3) the ability to report anomalies/off-nominals that may indicate design changes or maintenance actions are needed; and (4) the ability for humans involved in operations to report safety-relevant observations to help in understanding the flight data and/or the operational context of a flight. Progress on three such capabilities is summarized; the first investigates anomaly detection given a limited set of flight logs and applies an approach previously used for space operations. The second explores what could be identified using a larger set of flight logs, including from web-based forums where flight logs are posted by sUAS autopilot users. The third creates a new means of collecting information on UAS incidents and accidents via the Aviation Safety Reporting System (ASRS).

sUAS↗
NASA NTRS2013

Human and Robotic Mission to Small Bodies: Mapping, Planning and Exploration

This study investigates the requirements, performs a gap analysis and makes a set of recommendations for mapping products and exploration tools required to support operations and scientific discovery for near- term and future NASA missions to small bodies. The mapping products and their requirements are based on the analysis of current mission scenarios (rendezvous, docking, and sample return) and recommendations made by the NEA Users Team (NUT) in the framework of human exploration. The mapping products that sat- isfy operational, scienti c, and public outreach goals include topography, images, albedo, gravity, mass, density, subsurface radar, mineralogical and thermal maps. The gap analysis points to a need for incremental generation of mapping products from low (flyby) to high-resolution data needed for anchoring and docking, real-time spatial data processing for hazard avoidance and astronaut or robot localization in low gravity, high dynamic environments, and motivates a standard for coordinate reference systems capable of describing irregular body shapes. Another aspect investigated in this study is the set of requirements and the gap analysis for exploration tools that support visualization and simulation of operational conditions including soil interactions, environment dynamics, and communications coverage. Building robust, usable data sets and visualisation/simulation tools is the best way for mission designers and simulators to make correct decisions for future missions. In the near term, it is the most useful way to begin building capabilities for small body exploration without needing to commit to specific mission architectures.

Neffian, Ara V.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Multidisciplinary Design Technology Development: A Comparative Investigation of Integrated Aerospace Vehicle Design Tools

This research effort is a joint program between the Departments of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering and the Computer Science and Engineering Department at the University of Notre Dame. The purpose of the project was to develop a framework and systematic methodology to facilitate the application of Multidisciplinary Design Optimization (MDO) to a diverse class of system design problems. For all practical aerospace systems, the design of a systems is a complex sequence of events which integrates the activities of a variety of discipline "experts" and their associated "tools". The development, archiving and exchange of information between these individual experts is central to the design task and it is this information which provides the basis for these experts to make coordinated design decisions (i.e., compromises and trade-offs) - resulting in the final product design. Grant efforts focused on developing and evaluating frameworks for effective design coordination within a MDO environment. Central to these research efforts was the concept that the individual discipline "expert", using the most appropriate "tools" available and the most complete description of the system should be empowered to have the greatest impact on the design decisions and final design. This means that the overall process must be highly interactive and efficiently conducted if the resulting design is to be developed in a manner consistent with cost and time requirements. The methods developed as part of this research effort include; extensions to a sensitivity based Concurrent Subspace Optimization (CSSO) NMO algorithm; the development of a neural network response surface based CSSO-MDO algorithm; and the integration of distributed computing and process scheduling into the MDO environment. This report overviews research efforts in each of these focus. A complete bibliography of research produced with support of this grant is attached.

Renaud, John E.↗
NASA NTRS2014

MERRA Analytic Services: Meeting the Big Data Challenges of Climate Science Through Cloud-enabled Climate Analytics-as-a-service

Climate science is a Big Data domain that is experiencing unprecedented growth. In our efforts to address the Big Data challenges of climate science, we are moving toward a notion of Climate Analytics-as-a-Service (CAaaS). We focus on analytics, because it is the knowledge gained from our interactions with Big Data that ultimately produce societal benefits. We focus on CAaaS because we believe it provides a useful way of thinking about the problem: a specialization of the concept of business process-as-a-service, which is an evolving extension of IaaS, PaaS, and SaaS enabled by Cloud Computing. Within this framework, Cloud Computing plays an important role; however, we it see it as only one element in a constellation of capabilities that are essential to delivering climate analytics as a service. These elements are essential because in the aggregate they lead to generativity, a capacity for self-assembly that we feel is the key to solving many of the Big Data challenges in this domain. MERRA Analytic Services (MERRAAS) is an example of cloud-enabled CAaaS built on this principle. MERRAAS enables MapReduce analytics over NASAs Modern-Era Retrospective Analysis for Research and Applications (MERRA) data collection. The MERRA reanalysis integrates observational data with numerical models to produce a global temporally and spatially consistent synthesis of 26 key climate variables. It represents a type of data product that is of growing importance to scientists doing climate change research and a wide range of decision support applications. MERRAAS brings together the following generative elements in a full, end-to-end demonstration of CAaaS capabilities: (1) high-performance, data proximal analytics, (2) scalable data management, (3) software appliance virtualization, (4) adaptive analytics, and (5) a domain-harmonized API. The effectiveness of MERRAAS has been demonstrated in several applications. In our experience, Cloud Computing lowers the barriers and risk to organizational change, fosters innovation and experimentation, facilitates technology transfer, and provides the agility required to meet our customers' increasing and changing needs. Cloud Computing is providing a new tier in the data services stack that helps connect earthbound, enterprise-level data and computational resources to new customers and new mobility-driven applications and modes of work. For climate science, Cloud Computing's capacity to engage communities in the construction of new capabilies is perhaps the most important link between Cloud Computing and Big Data.

Data Analytics↗
NASA NTRS2019

An Initial Analysis of Automating Conjunction Assessment and Collision Avoidance Planning in Space Traffic Management

We introduce a framework that automates the process of assessing potential satellite conjunctions in space, and generating collision avoidance maneuvers to support mitigation efforts within a novel space traffic management (STM) architecture. A software implementation of the framework was developed in a MATLAB-STK integrated environment, however, the concept and framework is agnostic to the language or environment. The software pulls from existing catalogs of spaceborne objects and ingests user-defined parameters to produce conjunction data, which could potentially aid collision avoidance planning in the STM architecture. The utility of the software in maneuver planning and exploring a performance-based tradespace of actions is demonstrated using three example cases: one-to-one conjunction, one-versus-four conjunctions, and a near head-on collision. The framework also provides a test-bed for the use of application programming interfaces (APIs) to demonstrate machine-to-machine communication between entities in our proposed STM architecture. Results from this software implementation are expected to aid distributed decision-making among various stakeholders, and inform efficient, autonomous, structured but flexible concept of operations within STM.

Space Systems Engineering↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Integrating Earth Observations and Socioeconomic Data to Address Health, Equity, and Environmental Justice

Access to reliable data about the characteristics of populations is a crucial component of decision making, policy development, and the assessment of progress towards strategic goals. Social determinants of health provide insight into the status of social and economic conditions within populations that have profound effects on public health, equity, and vulnerability. International frameworks such as the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) fundamentally focus on equality, but to efficiently address targets and indicators, socioeconomic data and Earth observations must be integrated to help identify populations most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change, natural disasters, health disparities, and poor policy planning. The ability to identify vulnerable populations with data analysis has the potential to empower community stakeholders with spatial awareness needed to inform decision-making that addresses equity and environmental justice issues within their communities. The EPA defines environmental justice (EJ) as “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the development, implementation and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations and policies.” NASA’s Earth Science Division (ESD) recognizes the benefits that Earth observations with NASA satellites create by equipping individuals with the knowledge to address community challenges. NASA’s Socioeconomic Data and Applications Center (SEDAC) supports the integration of socioeconomic and Earth science data as an “informational gateway.” This integration of data is advancing health, equity, and environmental justice initiatives.

Natasha Johnson-Griffin↗
NASA NTRS2007

Implementing an Applied Science Program

The work implied in the NASA Applied Science Program requires a delicate balancing act for the those doing it. At the implementation level there are multiple tensions intrinsic to the program. For example each application of an existing product to a decision support process requires deep knowledge about the data and deep knowledge about the decision making process. It is highly probable no one person has this range of knowledge. Otherwise the decision making process would already be using the data. Therefore, a team is required. But building a team usually requires time, especially across agencies. Yet the program mandates efforts of relatively short duration. Further, those who know the data are scientists, which makes them essential to the program. But scientists are evaluated on their publication record. Anything which diverts a scientist from the research for his next publication is an anathema to him and potential death to their career. Trying to get another agency to use NASA data does not strike most scientists as material inherently suitable for publication. Also, NASA wishes to rapidly implement often substantial changes to another agency's process. For many reasons, such as budget and program constraints, speed is important. But the owner of a decision making process is tightly constrained, usually by law, regulation, organization and custom. Changes when made are slow, cautious, even hesitant, and always done according a process specific to the situation. To manage this work MSFC must balance these and other tensions. Some things we have relatively little control over, such as budget. These we try to handle by structural techniques. For example by insisting all of our people work on multiple projects simultaneously we inherently have diversification of funding for all of our people. In many cases we explicitly use some elements of tension to be productive. For example the need for the scientists to constantly publish is motivation to keep tasks short and to the immediate point. As another example, the DSS agency and it personnel are treated as integral to the effort at every step. Thus, their ways of doing things, their problems and their assets become part of the solution. MSFC also manages the Applied Science work' within a strategic framework.' First, the scientists are necessarily at the core of all of this work as well as all of the work within the larger' organization. We therefore strive to keep a roughly 50-50 balance between the work done on tasks funded directly by the research side of NASA's Science Mission Directorate and funding from the applied side. Done at both the organization level and the level of the individual, this keeps the scientist both happy and productive over the long term. We also try diligently to remove as much burden from the scientist as practical by employing people such as the authors and others to do tasks not requiring; scientific knowledge. We also have designed our effort to take full use of external partners. We actively seek and support, including fund, people from multiple organizations to join us as committed collaborators. In this we use today's money and today's problem to help us diversify and strengthen for tomorrow. MSFC also considers the Applied Science work holistically. Each element is viewed as a step in a larger process. At a management level we can chose to emphasize or encourage certain areas which service long term goals. Thus, if we think work in a particular area should be developed, we can start with the smaller, less costly elements and grow.

Rickman, Doug↗