Questions? Call 800-624-6242
|
|
|
|
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 1
Summary
The Information Technology Laboratory (ITL) of the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) has been assessed by a panel of experts appointed by
the National Research Council (NRC). The panel visited the six divisions of the
laboratory and reviewed their activities. The scope of the assessment included the
following criteria: (1) the technical merit of the current laboratory programs relative to
current state-of-the-art programs worldwide; (2) the adequacy of the laboratory budget,
facilities, equipment, and human resources, as they affect the quality of the laboratory’s
technical programs; and (3) the degree to which the laboratory programs in measurement
science and standards achieve their stated objectives and desired impact. Based on its
assessment using these criteria, the panel formed the following observations and
recommendations, among others discussed in the report.
Observations:
1. The technical merit of the programs is often excellent and is generally high.
Specific examples are highlighted throughout the report.
2. There are large, temporary changes in budget levels overlaying the normal
funding cycles, and at the ITL, budgeting is having more influence than it
should on the progress of technical work. The issues are the benefits and
potential risks of “soft money” (outside funding), the inability to hire critical
staff in some areas, and questions of how best to use incoming, short-term
funds.
3. Facilities and equipment were found to be adequate, with the exception that
the Mathematical and Computational Sciences Division needs additional
space and the Information Access Division has need of a usability laboratory.
4. There has been rapid development of the matrix structure of the laboratory,
with programs cutting across the traditional divisions. There are benefits
already derived from this approach, but also small risks.
5. Soft money continues to be an important aspect of laboratory operations, and
it causes staff to worry about the safety of their jobs and causes other
confusion that should be addressed. The use of soft money has benefits and
potential risks. As long as potential risks are monitored and avoided, a policy
of encouraging a search for solid external support for sound, internally vetted
projects is worthwhile.
Recommendations:
1. ITL staff, perhaps led by the program managers, should look for linkages with
external organizations such as research universities and laboratories. The
recent addition of temporary funding associated with the economic recovery
can help build these connections.
1
OCR for page 2
2. The ITL should make efforts to raise its profile through outreach (connections
with major research universities and laboratories, hosting faculty, postdoctoral
researchers, and other short-term visitors; and staff participation in
professional service) and publication (in highly respected journals and
conferences).
3. Program managers who are capable of providing technical leadership and also
devote effort to promoting the interests of their programs should be regarded
by the staff as positive contributors, even if they are no longer writing code or
doing other technical tasks associated with individual projects.
4. There is a need for additional senior technical leadership.
—The Software and Systems Division (SSD) needs to hire a strong health
informatics leader.
—NIST should appoint a full-time chief for the SSD, which currently has
an acting chief who divides time between leading the division and
working in the Office of the ITL Director.
—The panel found multiple cases of the SSD’s suffering from a lack of
sufficient focused leadership at a time when the SSD is being asked to
be the lead in several important efforts, such as health care.
5. SSD leadership should encourage its staff toward greater innovation and
redirection in keeping with developments in the broader research and
scientific community.
6. Apart from the current chief, there has been no perceptible growth in the
permanent staff of the Statistical Engineering Division for years. The division
is short-staffed, and such growth should be pursued with urgency before the
next review.
7. The ITL needs a process for sunsetting programs and encouraging bottom-up
development of new programs.
2
