Hearing on National Science Foundation Management
of Large Facilities
Testimony of
Dr. Rita R. Colwell, Director
National Science Foundation
Before the House Committee on Science
Subcommittee on Research
September 6, 2001
Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson, members of
the Research Subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity
to be here today to discuss the National Science Foundation's
management and oversight of large facilities. My colleagues,
Dr. Boesz and Dr. Jones, will also provide comments.
INTRODUCTION:
Throughout its 50-year history, NSF has enjoyed an
extraordinarily successful track record in providing
state-of-the-art facilities for science and engineering
research and education. NSF management and oversight
have enabled not only the establishment of unique
national assets, but have also ensured that they serve
the science and engineering communities and the discovery
process as intended.
NSF has enabled construction of unique and scientifically
productive telescopes and managed their operation
by funding non-governmental institutions created for
that purpose. For decades, the University National
Oceanographic Laboratory System of research ships
has made outstanding contributions to multidisciplinary
research and education worldwide and at the most remote
regions of the Earth. The Deep Sea Drilling Project
and its successors have operated with a truly exemplary
record of scientific discovery and contract management.
For more than 40 years NSF has managed the Nation's
research program in Antarctica. Since the 1970s it
has been widely recognized for its impressive management
of the overall U.S. Antarctic Program that now encompasses
planning and budgeting for logistics, facilities,
and research support. More recently, NSF has enabled
major advances in building and managing large-scale
computational infrastructure supporting virtually
all fields of science and engineering. Last month
NSF awarded $53 million to a consortium of universities
and institutes for a distributed terascale computing
system.
NSF's approach to facilities management differs from
most R&D; agencies. NSF does not directly construct
or operate the facilities it supports. Typically,
the Foundation makes awards to external entities,
primarily universities, consortia of universities
or non-profit organizations, to undertake construction,
management and operation of facilities. NSF retains
responsibility for overseeing the development, management
and successful performance of the projects. NSF decision-making
not only involves establishing new facilities but
also reconstituting or phasing out support for facility
projects that have reached the end of their useful
lives.
These partnerships have proven remarkably effective
in terms of overall cost and performance. The reasons
include the talented program officers at NSF, the
great creativity of the Nation's academic enterprise
and the "enlightened self-interest" of a community
wishing to use the facilities for research. An essential
added benefit of NSF's model is the opportunity to
train young scientists and engineers by allowing them
direct involvement in planning, construction and operation
of major facilities and large-scale instrumentation.
Currently, NSF invests over $1 billion annually in
facilities and other infrastructure projects. Over
time, the portfolio of facilities has grown and diversified.
For example, our portfolio now includes distributed
projects that challenge traditional management and
oversight approaches. With emerging multidisciplinary
science and engineering opportunities, large facility
projects are becoming increasingly complex and more
challenging technical and management issues are on
the horizon.
Growth and diversification require that NSF remain
attentive to the ever-changing issues and challenges
inherent in planning, construction, operation, management
and oversight of large facility projects. NSF's current
review, management, and oversight processes are designed
to "build right those facilities that are
the right ones to build." Today I will
describe some additional steps we are taking to improve
coordination, collaboration, and learning among NSF
staff and external partners in order to facilitate
a process of continuous improvement, based upon the
learning of best practices.
PRIORITY SETTING: "Is it the
right facility to build?"
Many of NSF's large facility projects are supported
through the Major Research Equipment, or MRE, account
- an agency-wide capital asset account that funds
the construction or acquisition of projects with costs
ranging from tens to several hundreds of millions
of dollars. Large facility projects are also funded
through the Research & Related Activities (R&RA;),
and/or the Education and Human Resources (EHR) accounts.
Currently, NSF is funding the following MRE projects:
- Atacama Large Millimeter Array R&D; (ALMA)
- High-performance Instrumented Airborne Platform
for Environmental Research (HIAPER)
- Large Hadron Collider (LHC)
- George E. Brown Network for Earthquake Engineering
Simulation (NEES)
- Polar Support Aircraft Upgrades
- South Pole Station Modernization (SPSM)
- Terascale Computing Systems
The following projects have been included in prior
budget requests and remain scientific priorities:
- ALMA Phase II ($9 million for maintenance of the
established infrastructure for ALMA was included
in the Research and Related Activities account
in our FY 02 request, pending a review of overall
facilities management issues.)
- EarthScope I (US Array and San Andreas Fault Observatory
at Depth)
- National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON)
Finally, the following projects have been approved
by the National Science Board and are priorities for
consideration in future budget requests:
- EarthScope II (Plate Boundary Observatory)
- Ice Cube Neutrino Detector
- Ocean Observatories
- Rare Symmetry Violating Processes
I would now like to explain how these and other candidate
MRE projects are reviewed, prioritized and eventually
selected for inclusion in NSF's budget request. (This
process is more fully described in Guidelines for
Planning and Managing the Major Research Equipment
Account, which provide the basis for budgeting
for MRE facilities, and can be found at http://www.nsf.gov/home/about/mre01.html.)
First I would like to describe the criteria NSF uses
to select large facility projects for inclusion in
a budget request and to determine which projects it
will eventually fund. These criteria are listed below.
The first two are the general NSF merit review criteria
used in the merit review process. The next six are
additional criteria that NSF and the NSB use to review
and approve projects for inclusion in a budget request.
The relative importance of these criteria is not fixed
but depends upon the nature of the facility project
and the changing context that envelops it.
- Intellectual Merit
- Broader Impacts
- Importance to science and engineering
- Cost-benefit and risk analysis
- Readiness to implement and manage
- Appropriateness for NSF
- Balance across fields and disciplines
- Synergy with other large facilities supported
by NSF, other agencies, and other nations
The chart below depicts NSF's process for the review
and approval of large facility projects considered
for funding through the MRE account. Several steps
are involved as a project moves from an idea to a
line in the NSF annual budget.
Text version of chart
is here.
The first step in the process is the early identification
of an MRE Pipeline Project as such. These potential
projects are conceived of in the science and engineering
community, often as a result of emerging opportunities,
and are often many years in development following
initial conceptualization. Currently, NSF has about
20 projects in the discussion phase. These projects
span the range from "gleam in the eye" to projects
that are in the conceptual development stage.
At the conceptual development stage, an NSF Program
Manager works with the scientific and engineering
communities to develop a shared understanding of the
project's concept, resource requirements, and schedule
and performance issues. As the project moves toward
a more formal definition, the NSF Program Manager
consults with members of the scientific and engineering
communities to help refine project design and definition
and to formulate scientific/technical and management
plans. It is important to note that, although NSF
may be providing some funding for early planning and
definition, it has not made any commitment to support
the establishment of the facility.
Developed projects are then proposed by an NSF Originating
Organization(s) for consideration by the MRE Panel.
These projects may be based on a proposal already
submitted and evaluated using NSF's merit review process.
When an Assistant Director believes a project is ready
to be considered for inclusion in an NSF budget request,
it may be brought to the MRE Panel for consideration.
The project is considered by NSF's MRE Panel, which
is chaired by the Chief Operating Officer and includes
the Assistant Directors, Program Office Heads and
the Chief Financial Officer. It is during these discussions
that issues such as appropriateness for NSF, balance
across fields and disciplines and readiness to implement
and manage are first addressed.
The MRE Panel considers the projects on the basis of
the review criteria specified earlier and makes recommendations
to the Director. Using the review criteria, the Director
selects candidates for the NSB to consider during
one of its five meetings throughout the year. Once
a project has been approved by the NSB, the Director,
at her discretion, may recommend the project for inclusion
in a future budget request to OMB. The project is
generally considered a viable candidate until it is
funded. However, significant changes to project definition,
scope, and funding must be reviewed and approved by
NSF and the NSB.
Once funded, changes in project cost are governed by
a Delegation of Authority from the NSB. Under this
authority, the Director may subsequently amend the
award to commit an additional 20 percent or $10 million,
whichever is less. Any funding that exceeds this requires
additional NSB review and approval. Our policies also
require that the Director be notified in writing,
by the cognizant Assistant Director, prior to the
expenditure of additional funding. NSB-approved awards
are now coded in our electronic proposal and award
system, and we have implemented an automated alert
-- for program managers and grants officers -- identifying
the awards and the NSB delegation conditions.
OMB gives NSF budgetary guidance that reflects the
Administration's priorities. The Director submits
a proposed budget to OMB within the guidance - a budget
that reflects priorities established in conjunction
with the NSB. OMB and NSF then enter into a negotiation
phase, which results in the priorities outlined in
the final funding request. Following the appropriations
process, the Director allocates funds to the relevant
projects. If necessary, a program solicitation or
RFP is prepared and, following receipt and merit review
of the proposals, one or more awards are made.
This is the overall process by which large facility
projects are selected and funded. It is important
to note that during this process candidate facilities
are not given specific priority ranks. In any given
year, the MRE projects that appear in the President's
budget request will depend on NSF's current assessment
of opportunities and needs and the parameters provided
by OMB. The highest priority projects appear in the
budget request.
This process is very open and involves a great deal
of interaction with the external scientific community
and other stakeholders. This selection process has
served NSF and the nation well in providing the most
competitive state-of-the-art science and engineering
facilities -ones that are certain to contribute significantly
to the nation's research and education endeavors.
FACILITIES MANAGEMENT AND OVERSIGHT:
"Is it built right?"
Given the increasing complexity and scope of its facilities,
NSF has recognized the need to mitigate risks by ensuring
management and oversight benefit from contemporary
best practices. Improving coordination, collaboration
and shared learning among NSF staff and external partners
facilitates identification and incorporation of best
practices. To this end, and to comply with instructions
in A Blueprint for New Beginnings: A Responsible
Budget for America's Priorities (February 2001),
NSF developed the Large Facility Projects Management
& Oversight Plan.
The Plan outlines NSF's goals and strategies for integrating
its current procedures and processes into a next-generation
system for selecting, managing and overseeing large
facility projects. In answering the President's request,
the Plan focuses on the management and oversight of
large infrastructure and facility projects.
In its Plan, NSF addresses improvements in four areas:
- Organizational and staff capabilities enhancement
to improve coordination, collaboration and shared
learning among NSF staff and external partners,
- Comprehensive guidelines and procedures for all
aspects of facilities planning, management and
oversight,
- Review and approval of large facility projects,
and
- Coordinated and proactive oversight of all facility
projects to ensure success.
The draft Plan has been reviewed by OMB, NSF's Assistant
Directors, the Office of Inspector General, and the
NSB. On September 10th, the finalized plan
will be submitted to OMB.
The Plan preserves clear lines of authority, responsibility
and communication from the NSF Director to the NSF
Program Manager to the awardee Project Director. In
every large facility project, the NSF Program Manager
exercises primary responsibility for all aspects of
project management. Working closely with the NSF Program
Manager, the awardee designates one person - with
strong management experience - as the Project Director,
who has overall control and responsibility for the
project in the awardee organization. NSF vests responsibility
for monitoring the business operations of large facility
projects in its Chief Financial Officer (CFO). NSF
personnel reporting to the CFO ensure that all policies,
guidelines and procedures are followed and that the
awardee is in compliance with the business, operations
and financial requirements.
To enable the efficient evolution of NSF's large facility
projects from their pre-formulation through operations,
NSF will establish a new position for a Deputy, Large
Facilities Projects. The LFP Deputy will report directly
to the CFO. Through a nationwide search, NSF will
recruit an individual with extensive experience in
the building, management and oversight of large science
and engineering facilities.
The LFP Deputy will be responsible for:
- Providing expert assistance to NSF's science and
engineering staff on non-scientific aspects of
project planning, budgeting, implementation, and
management;
- Developing, implementing and managing, with NSF-wide
input and concurrence, management and oversight
policies, guidelines and procedures; and,
- Ensuring shared learning of best practices by
fostering coordination and collaboration throughout
NSF to facilitate application of lessons learned
from each project.
The LFP Deputy will be supported by permanent NSF staff
with experience in project management, planning and
budgeting, cost analysis and oversight. The personnel
will be a centralized resource assembled to assist
NSF Program Managers with their management and oversight
responsibilities and to develop and conduct post-award
oversight of business operations, financial and internal
control systems, and cost and schedule performance.
The LFP Deputy and his or her staff will provide a
watchful eye over all of the MRE projects and many
of NSF's other facility projects to ensure that potential
challenges are identified early and handled quickly
and effectively.
I would like to invite members of the committee or
your staff to attend the best practices workshop for
managing large facility projects that we have scheduled
for September 21st. The workshop will focus on the
development of comprehensive guidelines for NSF's
management and oversight of large facility projects.
Representatives from NSF and Federal agencies involved
in the management of large research facilities, including
Department of Energy and NASA, and managers of existing
NSF and Federal facilities will share their experiences
in construction and operation of the facilities for
which they are responsible.
CONCLUSION:
As I have stated, we submit the NSF's Large Facility
Projects Management and Oversight Plan to OMB on September
10. This Plan includes an aggressive schedule for
developing and implementing each of the major components.
We have worked closely with the National Science Board
in the development of the plan, and will continue
that close collaboration in its implementation. We
are pleased with the dialogue we have had with this
Committee, and with the OMB.
Mr. Chairman, in concluding, NSF is keenly focused
on maintaining excellence in selecting, managing and
overseeing large facility projects for science and
engineering. Science and engineering facilities are
fundamental and a much needed resource for our country.
They expand the frontier of knowledge and are highly
sophisticated in construction and operation. We are
confident our current processes and the measures we
have formulated clearly demonstrate NSF's leadership
in planning, executing and overseeing a growing number
of complex, large projects for science and engineering
for our Nation.
Thank you.
|
