ostp update

Rob Dimeo & Jon Morse February 8, 2007OSTP

OSTP Update

Rob Dimeo & Jon MorsePhysical Sciences and Engineering

Office of Science and Technology PolicyExecutive Office of the President


1. OSTP & OMB issue guidance

memorandum on R&D priorities

2. Agencies prepare and

submit proposed budgets

to OMB

3. Passback, negotiations, &

appeals between agencies and

EOP

4. President makes final decisions and

sends Budget Request to Congress

5. Congress reviews,

considers, & approves overall Budget Request

6. Appropriations hearings with agencies

& EOP on individual programs

7. Congress marks up &

passes agency appropriations

bills

8. President signs or vetoes appropriations

bills

9. Agencies make decisions on allocation

of resources consistent with

enacted appropriations and

program plans

The Budget Cycle


American Competitiveness Initiative Research: FY 2007 and FY 2008

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016

Fiscal Year

Bill

ion

s o

f d

olla

rs

Total

NIST Core

DOE SC

NSF

ACI Research

$9.75 billion

$19.49 billion

$10.66 billion

$11.42 billion

The FY2008 President’s Budget continues to prioritize the American

Competitiveness Initiative


President Bush’s ACI Research Commitment(in millions of dollars)

ACI Basic Research Agencies

FY 2006 Funding

President’s FY 2007 Request

House FY 2007

Continuing Resolution

House Cuts to FY 2007 Request

President’s FY 2008 Budget

FY 2008 Budget Above

House CR

NSF 5,582 6,020 5,916 -104 6,429 +513

DoE Office of Science 3,596 4,102 3,796 -306 4,398 +602

NIST Core 568 535 491 -44 594 +103

ACI Total 9,747 10,657 10,203 -454 11,421 +1,218


NASA Science(in millions of dollars)

AgencyFY 2006 Funding

President’s FY 2007 Request

House FY 2007

Continuing Resolution

House Cuts to FY 2007 Request

President’s FY 2008 Budget

FY 2008 Budget Above

House CR

NASA Science Mission

Directorate

5,245 5,330 5,251 -79 5,516 +265


National Science & Technology CouncilNSTC StructureNovember 2005

Biotechnology

Infrastructure

WH: Sharon HaysDOD: Ken KriegDHS: Charles McQueary

WH: Richard RussellDOC: Ben Wu

WH: Sharon HaysDOC: Conrad LautenbacherEPA: George Gray

NSTCDirector, OSTP

WH: Sharon HaysNSF: Arden BementNIH: Elias Zerhouni

Aquaculture

Human Subjects Research

Dom. Animal Genomics

Plant Genome

Physics of the Universe

Education & Workforce Dev.

Research Business Models

Global Change Research

US Group onEarth Observations

Disaster Reduction

Ecosystems

Toxics & Risks

Water Availability & Quality

Air Quality Research

Committee on Environment &

Natural Resources

Committee on Environment &

Natural Resources

Committee on Science

Committee on Technology

Committee on Homeland and

National Security

WMD Medical Countermeasures

National Security R&D

Aeronautics S& T

Prion Science

Trans-Border Research Materials

Multinational Orgs*

Oceans S & T

IWG on Dioxin

Networking & Information Technology

Nanoscale Science, Engineering &

Technology

Advanced Technologies For Education & Training

Manufacturing Research &

Development

International*

R&D Investment Criteria**

*in development

**InformalExport Controls for S&T

Standards

Biometrics

Decontamination Standards

and Technologies

Foreign Animal Disease Threats

Social, Behavioral & Econ.

Scientific Collections

Regional Stability and Nation Building


Interagency Working Group on the Physics of the Universe

• Originally established to formulate an implementation plan for the opportunities identified in the 2002 NRC report Connecting Quarks with the Cosmos: Eleven Science Questions for the New Century

• Report released in February 2004


Interagency Working Group on the Physics of the Universe

• Co-chairs: Robin Staffin (DoE-SC), Joe Dehmer (NSF-PHY), Michael Salamon (NASA-SMD)

• Will report on progress made towards interagency coordination on items discussed in the PoU report.

• Interagency Task Force on High Energy Density Physics under the auspices of the PoU IWG; report imminent

• Interagency Lessons-Learned Task Force: an ad-hoc task force under the auspices of the PoU IWG; draft report in progress


OSTP Endorses Process of NSF Astronomy Senior ReviewDecember 22, 2007


Beneficial aspects of NRC Decadal Surveys

Community-based documents that provide consensus views of frontier science opportunities for maintaining the Nation’s scientific leadership

Provides for each field a single, well-respected source for community priorities and the scientific motivations to the agencies, OMB, OSTP, and the Congress

Limits the range of activities to consider for funding Cost estimates, technical risk assessments, and technology roadmaps aid in budget planning

The Role of NRC Decadal Surveys in Prioritizing Federal Funding for Science & Technology


Issues and concerns with NRC Decadal Surveys Prioritizing specific projects can become static and

inflexible, with little ability to account for project setbacks, new discoveries, changing budgetary circumstances, etc.

Technical risks are often not well known or stated clearly

Cost estimates have often been inaccurate Project cost estimates too low and do not reflect total lifecycle costs

Recommended project portfolios cannot fit in any realistic budget scenario (unrealistic expectations) Small, medium, and large projects are not compared to each other Surveys often do not address how projects should be phased, individually or relative to each other

Surveys usually assume only growth in the number and scale of facilities and missions, and do not identify offsets in the existing portfolios to enable new initiatives




What is most useful for making decisions? Frame the discussion by identifying the key science

questions Focus on what you want to do, not on what you want to build Discuss the breadth and depth of the science (e.g., impact on our understanding of fundamental processes, impact on related fields and interdisciplinary research, etc.)

Then explain what measurements and capabilities are needed to answer each question

Discuss the complementary nature of initiatives, relative phasing (domestic and international context) How do various past, present, and future measurements and facilities work together to answer the questions? What roles do/could private, interagency, and international partnerships play?

Reporting by capabilities (e.g., wavelength range, in situ vs. remote sensing, etc.) is not useful for policy and budget planning



Establish science and project priorities in the broad context of past, present, and future projects and changing conditions New initiatives, upgrades and/or recapitalizations

Establish relative priority amongst new initiatives, projects currently under development (e.g., from previous Surveys), operating projects, R&A, PI-led projects, and technology/R&D investment needs

Prioritize across all initiatives vs. grouping into small, medium, large (i.e., remove ambiguities about what is meant by “a balanced program”)

Explain the associated risks (technical, dependencies on other projects) Assume that large projects (> $1B) will need international support

Provide tables that summarize key information about science & projects Provide timeline/phasing charts and diagrams for project portfolios

under various budget scenarios Consider adding non-specialists or even non-scientists to committees

to aid in communicating societal benefits (e.g., interdisciplinary aspects, education, workforce training, public outreach)

Suggested Improvements



Managing Expectations Acknowledge stewardship role in taxpayer investment Identify highest priority activities but within a framework that

allows flexibility to react to new scientific opportunities Use order-of-magnitude lifecycle cost estimates instead of

specific (often under-estimated) construction costs or costs by decade

Explain how circumstances (e.g., project overruns, changing budget forecasts, phasing with other projects, new discoveries) would change priorities

Consider multiple, realistic budget profiles and what science various profiles would buy Work with agencies, OMB, Congress to define constraints Macro-budgetary pressures are expected to increase during the next decade, so flat budget projections may actually be optimistic Also need to consider project terminations that allow new initiatives to move forward (part of Decadal Survey or subsequent Senior Review process)


Backup slides


White House Office(Homeland Security Council, Office of Faith-Based Initiatives, Freedom Corps)

Office of Management & Budget

(OMB)

Office of the Vice President

National Security Council

(NSC)

President’s Foreign Intelligence

Advisory Board

Council ofEconomic Advisors

(CEA)

Council ofEnvironmental Quality

(CEQ)

US Trade Representative

(USTR)

Office of Administration

Office of National Drug Control Policy

Office of Science & Technology Policy

(OSTP)Mix of detailees, career, political

Primarily political staff

Primarily career staff

Domestic Policy CouncilNat’l Economic Council

Nat’l AIDS Policy

Executive Office of the President (EOP)


OSTP-What We Do• Advise the President and others within the Executive Office of

the President on the impacts of science and technology on domestic and international affairs;

• Lead interagency efforts to develop and implement sound science and technology policies and budgets;

• Work with the private sector to ensure Federal investments in science and technology contribute to economic prosperity, environmental quality, and national security;

• Build strong partnerships among Federal, State, and local governments, other countries, and the scientific community;

• Evaluate the scale, quality, and effectiveness of the Federal effort in science and technology.


OSTP-Who We AreDirector

Assistant DirectorSpace

& Aeronautics

Assistant DirectorTechnology

R&D

Assistant DirectorLife Sciences

Assistant DirectorPhysical Sciences

& Engineering

Assistant DirectorSocial, Behavioral &Education Science

Assistant DirectorTelecom

& Information Tech

Assistant DirectorEnvironment

ADMINISTRATIVESTAFF

AdministrationBudgetSecurityOffice SupportComputing

FUNCTIONALSTAFF

Legal affairsLegislative affairsBudget analysisCommunicationsInternationalNSTCPCAST

Assistant DirectorHomeland Security

Assistant DirectorNational Security

Assistant DirectorNatl. Security/

EmergencyPreparedness Com.

Associate Director and Deputy Director for Technology

Deputy to the Associate Director Technology

Associate Director and Deputy Director for

Science

Deputy to the Associate Director Science

Senior DirectorHomeland and

National Security

Deputy Director forHomeland and

National SecurityChief of Staff

Deputy Chief of Staff

PCASTNSTC

ostp update

Documents

progressaaac meeting

presidentaaac meeting

budget planningaaac

nrc report

program plansaaac meeting

pou report

engineeringoffice of

science technologyissues