Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science
______
Committee on the Foundation for Assessing the
Health and Vitality of the NASA Science Mission
Directorate’s Research Communities
Space Studies Board
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
Consensus Study Report
NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
This activity was supported by Contract NNH17CB02B with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-68885-7
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-68885-X
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/26575
Cover design by Tim Warchocki. Courtesy of NASA/SwRI/MSSS/Sergio Díaz © CC NC SA; from “Cloud Tops at Jupiter North North Temperate Belt,” June 7, 2022, https://www.missionjuno.swri.edu/junocam/processing?id=13248.
Copies of this publication are available free of charge from:
Space Studies Board
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
500 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
This publication is available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu.
Copyright 2022 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and National Academies Press and the graphical logos for each are all trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2022. Foundations of a Healthy and Vital Research Community for NASA Science. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26575.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
Rapid Expert Consultations published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine are authored by subject-matter experts on narrowly focused topics that can be supported by a body of evidence. The discussions contained in rapid expert consultations are considered those of the authors and do not contain policy recommendations. Rapid expert consultations are reviewed by the institution before release.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON THE FOUNDATION FOR ASSESSING THE HEALTH AND VITALITY OF THE NASA SCIENCE MISSION DIRECTORATE’S RESEARCH COMMUNITIES
CHARLES F. BOLDEN, JR. (NAE), The Charles F. Bolden Group, LLC, Co-Chair
WANDA A. SIGUR (NAE), Lockheed Martin Corporation (retired), Co-Chair
GALE J. ALLEN, American Society for Gravitational and Space Research (retired)
ROGER BLANDFORD (NAS), Stanford University
SHERI KLUG BOONSTRA, Lucy Student Pipeline and Competency Enabler (L’SPACE) Program
ANTONIO J. BUSALACCHI (NAE), University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
CHRISTOPHER M. KEANE, American Geosciences Institute
ROSALY M.C. LOPES, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
CORA BAGLEY MARRETT, University of Wisconsin–Madison
MARK B. MOLDWIN, University of Michigan
KENNETH SEMBACH, Space Telescope Science Institute
SUSAN WHITE, American Institute of Physics
Staff
DWAYNE A. DAY, Senior Program Officer, Study Director
GAYBRIELLE HOLBERT, Program Assistant
COLLEEN N. HARTMAN, Director, Space Studies Board
SPACE STUDIES BOARD
MARGARET G. KIVELSON (NAS), University of California, Los Angeles, Chair
JAMES H. CROCKER (NAE), Lockheed Martin (retired), Vice Chair
GREGORY P. ASNER (NAS), Carnegie Institution for Science
JEFF M. BINGHAM, Consultant
ADAM BURROWS (NAS), Princeton University
JEFF DOZIER, University of California, Santa Barbara
VICTORIA E. HAMILTON, Southwest Research Institute
CHRYSSA KOUVELIOTOU (NAS), The George Washington University
DENNIS P. LETTENMAIER (NAE), University of California, Los Angeles
ROSALY M. LOPES, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
STEPHEN J. MACKWELL, American Institute of Physics
DAVID J. McCOMAS, Princeton University
LARRY PAXTON, Applied Physics Laboratory, Johns Hopkins University
ELIOT QUATAERT, University of California, Berkeley
MARK SAUNDERS, NASA (retired)
BARBARA SHERWOOD LOLLAR, University of Toronto
HOWARD SINGER, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
HARLAN E. SPENCE, University of New Hampshire
MARK H. THIEMENS (NAS), University of California, San Diego
ERIKA WAGNER, Blue Origin
PAUL WOOSTER, Space Exploration Technologies
EDWARD L. WRIGHT (NAS), University of California, Los Angeles
Staff
COLLEEN N. HARTMAN, Director
TANJA PILZAK, Manager, Program Operations
CELESTE A. NAYLOR, Information Management Associate
MARGARET A. KNEMEYER, Financial Officer
RADAKA LIGHTFOOT, Financial Associate
Preface
On September 28, 2020, the NASA associate administrator for the Science Mission Directorate asked the chair of the Space Studies Board (SSB) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, to engage the SSB in undertaking a study on the topic of Building a Foundation for Assessing the Health and Vitality of the Science Mission Directorate’s Research Communities. The Committee on the Foundation for Assessing the Health and Vitality of the NASA Science Mission Directorate’s Research Communities was established by the National Academies. The committee membership includes expertise that covers all the NASA space science fields as well as industry and government. Several members had direct involvement in decadal surveys in the past, as well as knowledge of the issues facing their scientific communities.
The committee began this study at a time of significant change in the nation. It held its first meeting in May 2021. This was followed by a series of open and closed-session meetings on a bi-weekly or weekly basis through December. All meetings were held virtually due to ongoing COVID protocols/restrictions at the National Academies and schedules were dynamic due to many events beyond the committee’s control. This hindered the normal deliberative process of National Academies’ panels. In addition, the subject matter under assessment was constantly in flux. For example, NASA implemented new policies and the Executive Office of the President issued executive orders that were applicable to the committee’s task. Three decadal surveys with purviews that overlapped this study’s task were also under way, as was another SSB study. All of these events highlighted that while the work of this committee represents a snapshot in time, it is a snapshot taken while many aspects of this subject are undergoing rapid change. This very change emphasizes the relevance of the subject and the opportunities to influence outcomes. By the fall of 2021 the committee had begun drafting its report which was then submitted to the National Academies’ review process.
This page intentionally left blank.
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
MARC S. ALLEN, NASA (ret.),
ANA P. BARROS (NAE), Duke University,
LENNARD A. FISK (NAS), University of Michigan,
NORMAN J. FORTENBERRY, American Society for Engineering Education,
EFI FOUFOULA-GEORGIOU (NAE), University of California, Irvine,
LISA FREHILL, Department of Energy,
SARAH T. GILLE, Scripps Institution of Oceanography,
RALPH LORENZ, Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory,
DARA J. NORMAN, National Optical-Infrared Astronomy Research Laboratory,
EDGARD G. RIVERA-VALENTÍN, Lunar and Planetary Institute,
JANET VERTESI, Princeton University, and
ERIKA WAGNER, Blue Origin.
Although the reviewers listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by coordinator Susan Helms (NAE), Orbital Visions, LLC, and monitor David Spergel (NAS), Simons Foundation. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
This page intentionally left blank.
Contents
Definition of the Science and Research Community
The Opportunity: Shaping the Future of the Science and Research Community
2IDENTIFYING THE CHARACTERISTICS OF A HEALTHY AND VITAL RESEARCH COMMUNITY
Characteristics of a Healthy and Vital Research Community
Overview: Science and Research Priorities, People, and Programmatics
3ASSURING STRONG, CLEAR SCIENCE PRIORITIES
Focusing on Clear, Relevant Science
4ENSURING A HEALTHY PEOPLE ENTERPRISE
Crossing Boundaries: Influence of the Health of the SMD Workforce on the Overall Community
Nurturing and Sustaining the Existing Talent Base
Career Development: Health Beyond Demographics
Actions: Encouraging Representation
Creating Diverse, Inclusive, and Respectful Environments
Space, Earth, and Biological and Physical Sciences Education and Outreach
Engaging Social and Behavioral Scientists in Strategically Shaping the People Enterprise
Decadal State of the Profession Assessments
5ADDRESSING PROGRAMMATIC ISSUES
Establishing Supportive Funding
Improving the Process for Solicitation and Review of High-Quality Proposals
The Space and Earth Sciences Research Community Hard Funding
Maintaining Continued Support, Advocacy, and Focus Through Change
Resilience to Emerging Challenges
Providing Administrative Oversight of a Healthy and Vital Research Community
Community Standards of Conduct
6IMPLEMENTABLE MEASURES FOR ASSESSING THE HEALTH AND VITALITY OF NASA SMD’S RESEARCH COMMUNITY
Demographics Data on the Space, Earth, and Biological and Physical Sciences Community
Alternative Data Parameters and How They Are Useful
Summary of Metrics and Indicators
7RECOMMENDING AND PRIORITIZING PROMISING PRACTICES
Promising Practices: Clarity of Science for Efficient Research and Public Support
Promising Practices: Representative Workforce
Promising Practices: Establishing Supportive Funding
Promising Practices: Developing Resilience to Emerging Challenges
Promising Practices: Community Standards of Conduct