Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “management”

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 NTRS2013

Sustaining a Mature Risk Management Process: Ensuring the International Space Station for a Vibrant Future

The International Space Station (ISS) risk management methodology is an example of a mature and sustainable process. Risk management is a systematic approach used to proactively identify, analyze, plan, track, control, communicate, and document risks to help management make risk-informed decisions that increase the likelihood of achieving program objectives. The ISS has been operating in space for over 14 years and permanently crewed for over 12 years. It is the longest surviving habitable vehicle in low Earth orbit history. Without a mature and proven risk management plan, it would be increasingly difficult to achieve mission success throughout the life of the ISS Program. A successful risk management process must be able to adapt to a dynamic program. As ISS program-level decision processes have evolved, so too has the ISS risk management process continued to innovate, improve, and adapt. Constant adaptation of risk management tools and an ever-improving process is essential to the continued success of the ISS Program. Above all, sustained support from program management is vital to risk management continued effectiveness. Risk management is valued and stressed as an important process by the ISS Program.

Raftery, Michael↗
NASA NTRS2015

System-Oriented Runway Management Concept of Operations

This document describes a concept for runway management that maximizes the overall efficiency of arrival and departure operations at an airport or group of airports. Specifically, by planning airport runway configurations/usage, it focuses on the efficiency with which arrival flights reach their parking gates from their arrival fixes and departure flights exit the terminal airspace from their parking gates. In the future, the concept could be expanded to include the management of other limited airport resources. While most easily described in the context of a single airport, the concept applies equally well to a group of airports that comprise a metroplex (i.e., airports in close proximity that share resources such that operations at the airports are at least partially dependent) by including the coordination of runway usage decisions between the airports. In fact, the potential benefit of the concept is expected to be larger in future metroplex environments due to the increasing need to coordinate the operations at proximate airports to more efficiently share limited airspace resources. This concept, called System-Oriented Runway Management (SORM), is further broken down into a set of airport traffic management functions that share the principle that operational performance must be measured over the complete surface and airborne trajectories of the airport's arrivals and departures. The "system-oriented" term derives from the belief that the traffic management objective must consider the efficiency of operations over a wide range of aircraft movements and National Airspace System (NAS) dynamics. The SORM concept is comprised of three primary elements: strategic airport capacity planning, airport configuration management, and combined arrival/departure runway planning. Some aspects of the SORM concept, such as using airport configuration management1 as a mechanism for improving aircraft efficiency, are novel. Other elements (e.g., runway scheduling, which is a part of combined arrival/departure runway scheduling) have been well studied, but are included in the concept for completeness and to allow the concept to define the necessary relationship among the elements. The goal of this document is to describe the overall SORM concept and how it would apply both within the NAS and potential future Next Generation Air Traffic System (NextGen) environments, including research conducted to date. Note that the concept is based on the belief that runways are the primary constraint and the decision point for controlling efficiency, but the efficiency of runway management must be measured over a wide range of space and time. Implementation of the SORM concept is envisioned through a collection of complementary, necessary capabilities collectively focused on ensuring efficient arrival and departure traffic management, where that efficiency is measured not only in terms of runway efficiency but in terms of the overall trajectories between parking gates and transition fixes. For the more original elements of the concept-airport configuration management-this document proposes specific air traffic management (ATM) decision-support automation for realizing the concept.

Lohr, Gary W.↗
NASA NTRS2016

Unmanned Aircraft Systems Traffic Management (UTM) Safely Enabling UAS Operations in Low-Altitude Airspace

Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) Traffic Management (UTM) Enabling Civilian Low-Altitude Airspace and Unmanned Aircraft System Operations What is the problem? Many beneficial civilian applications of UAS have been proposed, from goods delivery and infrastructure surveillance, to search and rescue, and agricultural monitoring. Currently, there is no established infrastructure to enable and safely manage the widespread use of low-altitude airspace and UAS operations, regardless of the type of UAS. A UAS traffic management (UTM) system for low-altitude airspace may be needed, perhaps leveraging concepts from the system of roads, lanes, stop signs, rules and lights that govern vehicles on the ground today, whether the vehicles are driven by humans or are automated. What system technologies is NASA exploring? Building on its legacy of work in air traffic management for crewed aircraft, NASA is researching prototype technologies for a UAS Traffic Management (UTM) system that could develop airspace integration requirements for enabling safe, efficient low-altitude operations. While incorporating lessons learned from the today's well-established air traffic management system, which was a response that grew out of a mid-air collision over the Grand Canyon in the early days of commercial aviation, the UTM system would enable safe and efficient low-altitude airspace operations by providing services such as airspace design, corridors, dynamic geofencing, severe weather and wind avoidance, congestion management, terrain avoidance, route planning and re-routing, separation management, sequencing and spacing, and contingency management. One of the attributes of the UTM system is that it would not require human operators to monitor every vehicle continuously. The system could provide to human managers the data to make strategic decisions related to initiation, continuation, and termination of airspace operations. This approach would ensure that only authenticated UAS could operate in the airspace. In its most mature form, the UTM system could be developed using autonomicity characteristics that include self-configuration, self-optimization and self-protection. The self-configuration aspect could determine whether the operations should continue given the current andor predicted windweather conditions. NASA envisions concepts for two types of possible UTM systems. The first type would be a Portable UTM system, which would move from between geographical areas and support operations such as precision agriculture and disaster relief. The second type of system would be a Persistent UTM system, which would support low-altitude operations and provide continuous coverage for a geographical area. Either system would require persistent communication, navigation, and surveillance (CNS) coverage to track, ensure, and monitor conformance. What is NASA doing to test the technologies? NASA's near-term goal is the development and demonstration of a possible future UTM system that could safely enable low-altitude airspace and UAS operations. Working alongside many committed government, industry and academic partners, NASA is leading the research, development and testing that is taking place in a series of activities called Technology Capability Levels (TCL), each increasing in complexity. UTM TCL1 concluded field testing in August 2015 and is undergoing additional testing at an FAA site.

UTM Low-altitude↗
NASA NTRS2017

Applications of Satellite Data to Support Improvements in Irrigation and Groundwater Management in California

In agricultural regions around the world, threats to water supplies from drought and groundwater depletion are driving increased demand for tools to advance agricultural water use efficiency and support sustainable groundwater management. Satellite mapping of evapotranspiration (ET) from irrigated agricultural lands can provide agricultural producers and water resource managers with information that can be used to both optimize ag water use and improve estimates of groundwater withdrawals for irrigation. We describe the development of two remote sensing-based tools for ET mapping in California, including important lessons in terms of system design, partnership development, and transition to operations. For irrigation management, the integration of satellite data and surface sensor networks to provide timely delivery of information on crop water requirements can make irrigation scheduling more practical, convenient, and accurate.Developed through a partnership between NASA and the CA Department of Water Resources, the Satellite Irrigation Management Support (SIMS) framework integrates satellite data with information from agricultural weather networks to map crop canopy development and crop water requirements at the scale of individual fields. Information is distributed to agricultural producers and water managers via a web-based interface and web data services. SIMS also provides an API that facilitates integration with other irrigation decision support tools, such as CropManage and IrriQuest. Field trials using these integrated tools have shown that they can be used to sustain yields while improving water use efficiency and nutrient management. For sustainable groundwater management, the combination of satellite-derived estimates of ET and data on surface water deliveries for irrigation can increase the accuracy of estimates of groundwater pumping. We are developing an OpenET platform to facilitate access to ET data from multiple models and accelerate operational use of ET data in support of a range of water management applications, including implementation of the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act in CA. By providing a shared basis for decision making, we anticipate that the OpenET platform will accelerate implementation of solutions for sustainable groundwater management.

Satellite↗
NASA NTRS2018

Air Traffic Management-eXploration Testbed for Urban Air Mobility Research and Development

The presentation will describe the architecture, current capabilities and some future enhancements of the testbed that is being developed at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to enable benefit, impact, safety and cost assessments for accelerating the deployment of air traffic management concept and technologies in the national airspace system. The testbed will support analysis of operational feasibility of urban air mobility operations, a part of NASA's Air Traffic Management eXploration project, and provide the data needed by regulatory agencies charged with public safety. Introduction of concepts and technologies, especially new concepts and technologies, is difficult and often takes decades because of the inability to assess the operational impact of the interaction between the proposed concept and technology and operationally deployed systems in terms of system-wide safety, traffic flow efficiency, roles and workload of controllers and traffic managers, and impact on airlines and other operators. To overcome these limitations, the testbed is developing infrastructure to enable mathematical modeling, human-in-the-loop evaluations and testing with operational systems in a simulated environment. In addition to the difficulty of establishing communications between geographically distributed systems, downloading/installing software, and management of startup, error-handling and shutdown, a major impediment for conducting simulations and human-in-the-loop testing with operational systems is the tedious manual scenario generation process. Several of these difficulties have been addressed in the current state of the testbed. The testbed can be described in terms of the following elements (1) web-based frontend and backend, (2) Testbed Builder, (3) Data Distribution Service, (4) Component Library, (5) Simulation Management, and (6) Scenario Generation. The web-based frontend and backend enable the user to interact with the testbed for tasks such as composing a simulation, running a simulation and retrieving output data. The Testbed Builder application launched from the web frontend is a graphical user interface for the user to drag-and-drop and connect predefined blocks for composing a simulation/scenario generation task. The Builder writes a set of instructions for Simulation Management based on the links between the blocks and the block properties such as the component (executable) associated with a particular block. Management of the distributed simulation is accomplished by Execution and Component Managers. Execution Manager interprets the instructions provided by the Builder to instruct the Component Managers to download components from the Component Library to specified computers and to start them up. Once started, the components communicate with each other by publishing messages and subscribing to messages that are delivered by the Data Distribution Service. The Scenario Generation capability can be used for creating traffic scenarios for Multi-Aircraft Control System, which has been used extensively at NASA for human-in-the-loop-based concept evaluations. The presentation will provide a testbed enabled example scenario of Multi-Aircraft Control System based simulation in which the urban air mobility pilot using the conflict detection and resolution system would interact with the air traffic controllers for resolving conflicts with other aircraft during terminal area operations.

Testbed↗
NASA NTRS2014

Integrating Land Cover Modeling and Adaptive Management to Conserve Endangered Species and Reduce Catastrophic Fire Risk

Land cover modeling is used to inform land management, but most often via a two-step process where science informs how management alternatives can influence resources and then decision makers can use this to make decisions. A more efficient process is to directly integrate science and decision making, where science allows us to learn to better accomplish management objectives and is developed to address specific decisions. Co-development of management and science is especially productive when decisions are complicated by multiple objectives and impeded by uncertainty. Multiple objectives can be met by specification of tradeoffs, and relevant uncertainty can be addressed through targeted science (i.e., models and monitoring). We describe how to integrate habitat and fuels monitoring with decision making focused on dual objectives of managing for endangered species and minimizing catastrophic fire risk. Under certain conditions, both objectives might be achieved by a similar management policy, but habitat trajectories suggest tradeoffs. Knowledge about system responses to actions can be informed by applying competing management actions to different land units in the same system state and by ideas about fire behavior. Monitoring and management integration is important to optimize state-specific management decisions and increase knowledge about system responses. We believe this approach has broad utility for and cover modeling programs intended to inform decision making.

adaptive management↗
NASA NTRS2017

Adaptive Management Using Remote Sensing and Ecosystem Modeling in Response to Climate Variability and Invasive Aquatic Plants for the California Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta Water Resource

The California Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta is the hub for California's water supply and supports important ecosystem services, agriculture, and communities in Northern to Southern California. Expansion of invasive aquatic plants in the Delta coupled with impacts of changing climate and long-term drought is detrimental to the San Francisco Bay/California Delta complex. NASA Ames Research Center and the USDA-ARS partnered with the State of California to develop science-based, adaptive-management strategies for invasive aquatic plant in the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Specific mapping tools developed utilizing satellite and airborne platforms provide regular assessments of population dynamics on a landscape scale and support both strategic planning and operational decision making for resource managers. San Joaquin and Sacramento River watersheds water quality input to the Delta is modeled using the Soil-Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) and a modified SWAT tool has been customized to account for unique landscape and management of agricultural water supply and drainage within the Delta. Environmental response models for growth of invasive aquatic weeds are being parameterized and coupled with spatial distribution/biomass density mapping and water quality to study ecosystem response to climate and aquatic plant management practices. On the water validation and operational utilization of these tools by management agencies and how they are improving decision making, management effectiveness and efficiency will be discussed. The project combines science, operations, and economics related to integrated management scenarios for aquatic weeds to help land and water resource managers make science-informed decisions regarding management and outcomes.

Adaptive↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lessons Learned With Risk Management: A Systems Engineer's Perspective

Risk management is a communications device that, when executed as an essential task, enables systems engineering to effectively balance risk across the project. Developing and baselining risks is an essential continuous task to ensure top project concerns both from bottom up and top down are being mitigated. Risk management provides the opportunity to avoid the consequence of the risk when mitigation steps start early enough. Just discussing risk with all the project flight elements during development, even if no risks are open, provides an excellent communication opportunity between systems engineering and those elements, ensuring concerns and worries have a platform for discussion. A well-managed risk identification process will identify concerns that are serious but not being clearly communicated, and it will enable mitigation of those potential problems before they cause a failure. Effective risk management requires considerable time and effort, but that effort will save time and money across the development. Risk management must be frequent enough to be useful and in depth enough to bring out emerging issues. It also requires a trusting relationship between the lead systems engineer and element and/or subsystem leads. The discussions need to be with the right number of individuals (typically a handful) and the right duration in time (typically an hour a month). Outside of these risk working groups, there is a formal management process to input, status, and disposition risks, and a monthly Risk Management Board meeting where key project stakeholders are informed. This paper provides good guidance on effective risk management from a systems engineering perspective and provides project lessons learned from the NASA spaceflight missions NICER, Landsat 9, LRO, and OSIRIS-REx to demonstrate the effectiveness of risk management.

Lessons Learned↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Lessons Learned With Risk Management: A Systems Engineer’s Perspective

Risk management is a communications device that, when executed as an essential task, enables systems engineering to effectively balance risk across the project. Developing and baselining risks is an essential continuous task to ensure top project concerns both from bottom up and top down are being mitigated. Risk management provides the opportunity to avoid the consequence of the risk when mitigation steps start early enough. Just discussing risk with all the project flight elements during development, even if no risks are open, provides an excellent communication opportunity between systems engineering and those elements, ensuring concerns and worries have a platform for discussion. A well-managed risk identification process will identify concerns that are serious but not being clearly communicated, and it will enable mitigation of those potential problems before they cause a failure. Effective risk management requires considerable time and effort, but that effort will save time and money across the development. Risk management must be frequent enough to be useful and in depth enough to bring out emerging issues. It also requires a trusting relationship between the lead systems engineer and element and/or subsystem leads. The discussions need to be with the right number of individuals (typically a handful) and the right duration in time (typically an hour a month). Outside of these risk working groups, there is a formal management process to input, status, and disposition risks, and a monthly Risk Management Board meeting where key project stakeholders are informed. This paper provides good guidance on effective risk management from a systems engineering perspective and provides project lessons learned from the NASA spaceflight missions NICER, Landsat 9, LRO, and OSIRIS-REx to demonstrate the effectiveness of risk management.

Lessons Learned↗
NASA NTRS1993

Repository-Based Software Engineering Program: Working Program Management Plan

Repository-Based Software Engineering Program (RBSE) is a National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) sponsored program dedicated to introducing and supporting common, effective approaches to software engineering practices. The process of conceiving, designing, building, and maintaining software systems by using existing software assets that are stored in a specialized operational reuse library or repository, accessible to system designers, is the foundation of the program. In addition to operating a software repository, RBSE promotes (1) software engineering technology transfer, (2) academic and instructional support of reuse programs, (3) the use of common software engineering standards and practices, (4) software reuse technology research, and (5) interoperability between reuse libraries. This Program Management Plan (PMP) is intended to communicate program goals and objectives, describe major work areas, and define a management report and control process. This process will assist the Program Manager, University of Houston at Clear Lake (UHCL) in tracking work progress and describing major program activities to NASA management. The goal of this PMP is to make managing the RBSE program a relatively easy process that improves the work of all team members. The PMP describes work areas addressed and work efforts being accomplished by the program; however, it is not intended as a complete description of the program. Its focus is on providing management tools and management processes for monitoring, evaluating, and administering the program; and it includes schedules for charting milestones and deliveries of program products. The PMP was developed by soliciting and obtaining guidance from appropriate program participants, analyzing program management guidance, and reviewing related program management documents.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1993

Resource Management for Distributed Parallel Systems

Multiprocessor systems should exist in the the larger context of distributed systems, allowing multiprocessor resources to be shared by those that need them. Unfortunately, typical multiprocessor resource management techniques do not scale to large networks. The Prospero Resource Manager (PRM) is a scalable resource allocation system that supports the allocation of processing resources in large networks and multiprocessor systems. To manage resources in such distributed parallel systems, PRM employs three types of managers: system managers, job managers, and node managers. There exist multiple independent instances of each type of manager, reducing bottlenecks. The complexity of each manager is further reduced because each is designed to utilize information at an appropriate level of abstraction.

Neuman, B. Clifford↗
NASA NTRS2001

Guidelines for Project Management

Project management is an important part of the professional activities at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). Project management is the means by which many of the operations at KSC take shape. Moreover, projects at KSC are implemented in a variety of ways in different organizations. The official guidelines for project management are provided by NASA headquarters and are quite general. The project reported herein deals with developing practical and detailed project management guidelines in support of the project managers. This report summarizes the current project management effort in the Process Management Division and presents a new modeling approach of project management developed by the author. The report also presents the Project Management Guidelines developed during the summer.

Ben-Arieh, David↗
NASA NTRS1990

Chemical restrictions of roots in Ultisol subsoils lessened by long-term management

Exchangeable Al in subsoils of Ultisols in the southeastern USA can restrict rooting depth. Downward movement of basic cations (Ca, Mg, and K), applied as lime and fertilizer, may diminish that restriction over time. Materials from the argillic horizon were collected from three paired sites, having managed (long-term cropping) and nonmanaged topsoils (Typic Paleudults and Hapludults). One managed site was cropped continuously for 15 yr while the others were cultivated for more than 30 yr. Concentrations of extractable cations and other nutrients from the paired sites were compared to determine the magnitude of change due to management. The ability of the subsoils to support plant growth was evaluated in a missing-nutrient greenhouse experiment with sorghum [Sorghum bicolor (L.) Moench]. Subsoils of managed sites had greater effective cation-exchange capacity (CEC) and base saturation than those of non-managed sites. While availabilities of Ca, Mg, and K in subsoils of nonmanaged sites were inadequate to support maximal plant growth, they were adequate in subsoils of managed sites. Compared with nonmanaged sites, KCl-exchangeable Al in subsoils of managed sites was 23% lower at the 15-yr location and 65 and 100% lower at the two other locations. In the absence of lime, sorghum growth was almost totally inhibited on nonmanaged subsoils amended with optimum nutrients. On the managed subsoils, where 100, 65, and 23% of the nonmanaged exchangeable Al had been neutralized by topsoil fertilization and liming, growth reductions under the same conditions were 0, 50, and 100%, respectively. Thus, relatively long-term management had improved these Ultisol subsoils for root growth and development.

NASA Discipline Life Support Systems↗
NASA NTRS2010

NASA Spacecraft Fault Management Workshop Results

Fault Management is a critical aspect of deep-space missions. For the purposes of this paper, fault management is defined as the ability of a system to detect, isolate, and mitigate events that impact, or have the potential to impact, nominal mission operations. The fault management capabilities are commonly distributed across flight and ground subsystems, impacting hardware, software, and mission operations designs. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Discovery & New Frontiers (D&NF) Program Office at Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) recently studied cost overruns and schedule delays for 5 missions. The goal was to identify the underlying causes for the overruns and delays, and to develop practical mitigations to assist the D&NF projects in identifying potential risks and controlling the associated impacts to proposed mission costs and schedules. The study found that 4 out of the 5 missions studied had significant overruns due to underestimating the complexity and support requirements for fault management. As a result of this and other recent experiences, the NASA Science Mission Directorate (SMD) Planetary Science Division (PSD) commissioned a workshop to bring together invited participants across government, industry, academia to assess the state of the art in fault management practice and research, identify current and potential issues, and make recommendations for addressing these issues. The workshop was held in New Orleans in April of 2008. The workshop concluded that fault management is not being limited by technology, but rather by a lack of emphasis and discipline in both the engineering and programmatic dimensions. Some of the areas cited in the findings include different, conflicting, and changing institutional goals and risk postures; unclear ownership of end-to-end fault management engineering; inadequate understanding of the impact of mission-level requirements on fault management complexity; and practices, processes, and tools that have not kept pace with the increasing complexity of mission requirements and spacecraft systems. This paper summarizes the findings and recommendations from that workshop, as well as opportunities identified for future investment in tools, processes, and products to facilitate the development of space flight fault management capabilities.

Newhouse, Marilyn↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA Schedule Management Handbook

The purpose of schedule management is to provide the framework for time-phasing, resource planning, coordination, and communicating the necessary tasks within a work effort. The intent is to improve schedule management by providing recommended concepts, processes, and techniques used within the Agency and private industry. The intended function of this handbook is two-fold: first, to provide guidance for meeting the scheduling requirements contained in NPR 7120.5, NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements, NPR 7120.7, NASA Information Technology and Institutional Infrastructure Program and Project Requirements, NPR 7120.8, NASA Research and Technology Program and Project Management Requirements, and NPD 1000.5, Policy for NASA Acquisition. The second function is to describe the schedule management approach and the recommended best practices for carrying out this project control function. With regards to the above project management requirements documents, it should be noted that those space flight projects previously established and approved under the guidance of prior versions of NPR 7120.5 will continue to comply with those requirements until project completion has been achieved. This handbook will be updated as needed, to enhance efficient and effective schedule management across the Agency. It is acknowledged that most, if not all, external organizations participating in NASA programs/projects will have their own internal schedule management documents. Issues that arise from conflicting schedule guidance will be resolved on a case by case basis as contracts and partnering relationships are established. It is also acknowledged and understood that all projects are not the same and may require different levels of schedule visibility, scrutiny and control. Project type, value, and complexity are factors that typically dictate which schedule management practices should be employed.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2012

Managing Small Spacecraft Projects: Less is Not Easier

Managing small, low cost missions (class C or D) is not necessarily easier than managing a full flagship mission. Yet, small missions are typically considered easier to manage and used as a training ground for developing the next generation of project managers. While limited resources can be a problem for small missions, in reality most of the issues inherent in managing small projects are not the direct result of limited resources. Instead, problems encountered by managers of small spacecraft missions often derive from 1) the perception that managing small projects is easier if something is easier it needs less rigor and formality in execution, 2) the perception that limited resources necessitate or validate omitting standard management practices, 3) less stringent or unclear guidelines or policies for small projects, and 4) stakeholder expectations that are not consistent with the size and nature of the project. For example, the size of a project is sometimes used to justify not building a full, detailed integrated master schedule. However, while a small schedule slip may not be a problem for a large mission, it can indicate a serious problem for a small mission with a short development phase, highlighting the importance of the schedule for early identification of potential issues. Likewise, stakeholders may accept a higher risk posture early in the definition of a low-cost mission, but as launch approaches this acceptance may change. This presentation discusses these common misconceptions about managing small, low cost missions, the problems that can result, and possible solutions.

Barley, Bryan↗
NASA NTRS2013

NASA's Risk Management System

Phased‐approach for implementation of risk management is necessary. Risk management system will be simple, accessible and promote communication of information to all relevant stakeholders for optimal resource allocation and risk mitigation. Risk management should be used by all team members to manage risks - not just risk office personnel. Each group/department is assigned Risk Integrators who are facilitators for effective risk management. Risks will be managed at the lowest‐level feasible, elevate only those risks that require coordination or management from above. Risk informed decision making should be introduced to all levels of management.  Provide necessary checks and balances to insure that risks are caught/identified and dealt with in a timely manner. Many supporting tools, processes & training must be deployed for effective risk management implementation. Process improvement must be included in the risk processes.

Perera, Jeevan S.↗
NASA NTRS2013

Management Approach for NASA's Earth Venture-1 (EV-1) Airborne Science Investigations

The Earth System Science Pathfinder (ESSP) Program Office (PO) is responsible for programmatic management of National Aeronautics and Space Administration's (NASA) Science Mission Directorate's (SMD) Earth Venture (EV) missions. EV is composed of both orbital and suborbital Earth science missions. The first of the Earth Venture missions is EV-1, which are Principal Investigator-led, temporally-sustained, suborbital (airborne) science investigations costcapped at $30M each over five years. Traditional orbital procedures, processes and standards used to manage previous ESSP missions, while effective, are disproportionally comprehensive for suborbital missions. Conversely, existing airborne practices are primarily intended for smaller, temporally shorter investigations, and traditionally managed directly by a program scientist as opposed to a program office such as ESSP. In 2010, ESSP crafted a management approach for the successful implementation of the EV-1 missions within the constructs of current governance models. NASA Research and Technology Program and Project Management Requirements form the foundation of the approach for EV-1. Additionally, requirements from other existing NASA Procedural Requirements (NPRs), systems engineering guidance and management handbooks were adapted to manage programmatic, technical, schedule, cost elements and risk. As the EV-1 missions are nearly at the end of their successful execution and project lifecycle and the submission deadline of the next mission proposals near, the ESSP PO is taking the lessons learned and updated the programmatic management approach for all future Earth Venture Suborbital (EVS) missions for an even more flexible and streamlined management approach.

Guillory, Anthony R.↗