Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byArabella Annabelle Shields Modified over 9 years ago
1
FY 2008 Proposed Budget ($2.776 Trillion OL) R&D = 13% of discretionary spending Non-Def. 16% Other Mandatory 11.5% Social Security 20.9% Net Interest 8.5% Defense 17.7% Defense R&D 2.8% Medicare 13.3% Medicaid 7.3% Non-Def. R&D 2% Mandatory Spending Discretionary Spending Total R&D = $139B $79B DoD+DHS $60B Non-Security
3
Some Trends for Large Scientific Projects/Facilities More are recommended than could be funded under the most optimistic budget scenarios (by factors of 2-4). Non-traditional fields are also proposing large facilities and are real competition for resources. Chronic tension between new and existing facilities and between facilities and program research budgets. Projects are ever more technically complex and challenging Premium on project management Cost overruns erode credibility of the agency, program, PIs to deliver. Budgets are tight and the budget process is increasingly political Congress does not have a good track record in passing approps bills on time – CRs and Omnibus can have significant impacts. Careful matching between project design/scope and scientific motivations (i.e. will not build a Cadillac when a Chevy will do.) Increasing numbers of interagency, international projects Hard Lessons Learned from GLAST, RSVP Plethora of lessons learned from international projects The path for public-private partnerships is not well defined
4
Strong Agency/Program Support, Strong Project Socialization Influences Change as Projects Evolve
5
Executive Branch White House - OMB will not change at the staff level – PADs and higher - OSTP could be significantly re-directed. Complete change of staff - Vice President and the Domestic Policy Council are also key positions. Agencies - NSF little impact. NASA and DOE certain to be affected - NASA and DOE Agency Leadership for science are crucial - NASA: US Space Policy re-visit? - DOE: ACI, Energy R&D overshadow discovery-oriented science? Engagement strategy for the election: - Follow the campaigns, who is advising on science? - Have an agenda for transition: once the election is over, the facility Directors should band together to provide their input qualities for new leadership at the Agency - Who are potential candidates for leadership positions at the agency? Legislative Branch - ALL politics are local – work with research VPs/community to educate newly elected officials about budget impacts within NASA or DOE on research at institutions in their home district - Hill Staff will play musical chairs 2008 Election Opportunity: How Should You Prepare?
6
Comments: Sets priorities - still too many projects - Is this a good or a bad thing? Provides an estimate of cost – Actual cost is usually higher No technical readiness discussion - Provide a sense of ordering Does not say anything about existing facilities Discussion: Would evaluation of TRL help with needed phasing information? Only cost projects that are ready for a start within the next decade? For each project, provide some recommendation regarding needed investments (tech, PED, start)? Revisit readiness about mid-way? The Decadal Survey
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.