Astrophysics E/PO Monthly Tag-Up Notes: July 2014
Tags: General Public | Tag-up (WebEx / Telecon)
Astrophysics E/PO Community Tag-Up
July 15, 2014
Next Tag-Up
The date for the next Astro E/PO Community Tag-Up will be announced after the ASP E/PO meeting.
About this Tag-Up:
Community members attending the June AAS meeting in Boston and the June Astrophysics E/PO Community Call raised several questions and concerns about FY15 SMD E/PO funding, the future of SMD E/PO, and whether or not E/PO community members would have an opportunity to provide input to SMD. The Forum shared a summary of these questions and concerns with Astrophysics Division leadership (see http://smdepo.org/post/7057). Paul Hertz (SMD Astrophysics Division Director) and Hashima Hasan (SMD Astrophysics Lead, Education and Public Outreach and Public Engagement) were very receptive to the community input and requested an opportunity to speak with the community on the July Tag-Up call.
The July Tag-Up call was therefore designed to provide an opportunity for Astrophysics E/PO community members to discuss their questions and perspectives about FY15 E/PO funding, the future of SMD E/PO, and a possible transition period with Astrophysics Division E/PO leadership (Paul Hertz and Hashima Hasan). To make the most effective use of the one-hour discussion period and enable those not able to attend the call to provide input, community members were invited to share thoughts and questions ahead of time via a SurveyMonkey form or by email. A synthesis of questions and comments for Astrophysics Division leadership received from community members was posted on the workspace at http://smdepo.org/post/7057, along with a PPT overview of questions/comments referenced on the July 15 Astrophysics E/PO Community Tag-Up call. These documents were also shared with Paul, Hashima, and Stephanie Stockman in advance of the call.
The week of the call, Kristen Erickson was also appointed Director of Science Engagement and Partnerships within NASA’s Science Mission Directorate. Paul led off the call with the Astrophysics perspective; Kristen followed up on Paul’s remarks with a perspective on coordinating across all of SMD.
This document provides a summary of the Tag-Up discussion. For specific policy guidance, Astrophysics E/PO community members should contact the appropriate SMD Astrophysics Division representative.
Remarks from Paul Hertz:
Paul Hertz (Astrophysics Division Director) offered a NASA SMD Astrophysics perspective on the current status of E/PO, indicating that SMD is still in the process of reformulating what the “go forward program” will be at the SMD level and what policies will be applicable to all four divisions.
Concerning FY14. FY14 plans are in place. Contact Paul or Hashima Hasan with any questions regarding FY14 Astrophysics Division E/PO.
Concerning FY15 – Forums. A decision has been made to extend the Forums with “no-cost extensions” for another year—which means that the Forums will be in place for FY15. FY15 will be a transition year from what is being done now to whatever will be done in the future.
Concerning FY15 – Astrophysics Mission E/PO. At this time, Paul’s direction to the Astrophysics community is to plan on continuing into FY15 what is now being done in FY14. This includes planning similar levels of funding in FY15 as in FY14. Plan for the same interim Astrophysics organization as in FY14 (Cosmic Origins, Physics of the Cosmos, and Exoplanet Exploration). The FY15 funding situation is not certain. The Administration’s budget request for NASA includes no funding for education within the SMD Astrophysics Division or any of its projects or programs; however, it does include $15M for education requested at the SMD level. Whatever funding astrophysics spends on education will come out of the SMD level funding. Both houses of Congress have proposed additional funding (above the $15M requested at the SMD level) for education activities that are executed within SMD.
Education & Communication. SMD is clarifying nomenclature for E/PO. What used to be called “Education and Public Outreach”—E/PO—will now be called “Education and Communications.” Within NASA, there are different policies for Education and Communications. Communications is not being reorganized, and includes web sites and social media and similar efforts conducted by projects and programs. Communications funding will continue to be embedded in the projects and programs going from FY14 to FY15. It is the Education component that is being discussed and reorganized, and that will be funded at the SMD level. How education will be managed is evolving.
Remarks from Kristen Erickson:
Kristen Erickson (Director of Science Engagement and Partnerships) offered a perspective on the SMD-level organization of Education and Communications and SMD planning for FY15.
Background. NASA brings to the table exciting content, the subject matter experts, and the E/PO professionals to enable the content and the experts. NASA science enjoys an unparalleled level of acceptance compared to other organizations.
Reorganization of Leadership. Going forward, John Grunsfeld (SMD Associate Administrator) wants to clearly demonstrate the leadership that SMD has had for so long and to address concerns that have been raised regarding coordination, transparency, reporting, and integration. Kristen has therefore been appointed to the position of Director of Science Engagement and Partnerships, reporting to Marc Allen (SMD Deputy Associate Administrator for Research). Stephanie Stockman (SMD E/PO Lead) and Ruth Netting (SMD Communications and Public Engagement Lead) report directly to Kristen. The group reports directly to John Grunsfeld, making Education and Communications a “front office” function. Restructuring of Education and Communications is a high priority for Dr. Grunsfeld.
Events Calendar. Kristen has asked the Forums to start putting together an integrated calendar of events, including high-profile conferences and programmatic activities, where NASA can showcase its science better. Examples are the upcoming 25th anniversary of the Hubble Space Telescope’s deployment and the International Year of Light (IYL). The intent is to identify events that can bring efforts together across SMD, and across missions and programs, to better showcase SMD science.
Rationale for Forum Extension. SMD leadership intends to reach out for input to a variety of stakeholders, including the Office of Education, all of our disciplines, and the community, in restructuring SMD Education per the direction NASA is receiving from its stakeholders. To that end, they need the Forum infrastructure and the entire community to help with feedback and input. Kristen indicated that SMD has to meet stakeholder needs, partner needs, and science community needs in restructuring education.
Definitions of Education and Communication. The distinction between education, public outreach, and communications has not been well understood. Unfortunately, the $42M that was removed from SMD included both education and public outreach. Kristen indicated the importance of having a common understanding of what Education and Communication will mean going forward, and presented written definitions (see Tag-Up slides). SMD will be very clear regarding what is meant by Education and Communication to avoid past confusion, both internally and externally.
Role of Communication. Communication is very much entwined with science. The scientific process isn’t finished until it is published and shared. How we do it and with whom is part of the conversation, but we will always see support for science communication in SMD. Communications is integrated into everything that NASA does.
Critical Documents – CoSTEM. NASA Science absolutely recognizes the unique contribution NASA content and experts make toward meeting the nation’s education goals. Dr. Grunsfeld supports the goals of the May 2013 CoSTEM report; many in the SMD E/PO community are already engaged in supporting the five CoSTEM goals. Another key aspect of the CoSTEM report is the partnering aspect; partnering is how we can further broaden our reach to enable NASA science.
Critical Documents – Decadal Surveys. The other critical documents, in addition to the CoSTEM report, that will guide NASA are the decadal reports. Each of the decadal reports that has come out of the four divisions has an E/PO section; included in those sections are U.S. science literacy ideals and emphasis on strengthening education. The “science first” approach will be maintained as SMD leadership goes through the restructuring process, and the fact that all four decadal reports are so much on the same page makes the job easier.
FY15 Guidance. Missions will be asked for recommended plans for FY15 on a bi-monthly basis via the project scientist. The recommended plans won’t necessarily be the same as what is decided, but they will help inform the FY15 transition effort by identifying the resource needs. The FY14 E/PO funding came out of the missions, and we have to operate under the assumption that this may also be the case in FY15, without an enacted budget. Kristen advised that a conservative approach be taken in articulating needs in FY15.
Transition Group. SMD has a small internal group working through the best path forward in restructuring education (transitioning from SMD’s current approach to the direction outlined by OMB and Congress). The group includes the four SMD Division Directors, the Division E/PO leads, and SMD resource and policy staff—methodically thinking through what is the best path forward.
The goal is to make sure the small group and leadership agree before going external. The small group has made a tremendous amount of progress in preliminary discussions. SMD will have the Forums help them structure community meetings in which they can share these ideas and ask for input. SMD is going to take an incremental, thoughtful approach to address the needs of SMD’s stakeholders. Kristen expressed that it is critical to get this right.
Comment from Paul Hertz:
There are different ways to go about the restructuring. Different SMD Divisions have different ideas about how to go about it. Our existing SMD E/PO program started off as a top-down effort. Once it had been established, it was driven at the grass roots level. It appears that the go-forward plan will start top-down as well. Paul indicated to SMD leadership that the Astrophysics E/PO community would like to hear SMD’s thoughts on gathering outside feedback about their tentative plans and the reorganization. The community would like to know how SMD plans to gather input, e.g. when the community might get an opportunity to see what SMD is thinking and to provide some feedback to SMD.
Methodical Approach. Kristen knows the situation is frustrating for many, especially those who feel they are heading for a “fiscal end-of-year cliff” and those who are concerned about jobs. SMD has been informed about not breaking things that aren’t broken, and is taking a different approach now than they would have in March. This reflects the benefits of taking an incremental, methodical, thoughtful approach, even at the risk of not having an immediate answer. SMD has met with OMB, and OMB knows SMD is moving forward in a way that is consistent with their goals.
Feedback Avenues. The transition team has three ideas for seeking community engagement and feedback: 1) engaging the NAC Science Subcommittee, 2) using an NRC public workshop being set up in a November time frame, and 3) seeking input through Forum-organized meetings to continue the “natural” community engagement already occurring, seeing where these can be augmented to get as much community input as possible. SMD will also be posting things on science.nasa.gov to the extent that information is available.
Metrics and Reporting. SMD has heard clearly that the great metrics that have been collected and are expected by stakeholders are not getting through—that information on all the great things we do was not getting out. One of the major requirements and criteria going forward is that reporting of those metrics has transparency so that situation does not reoccur.
Discussion
A dialogue followed among the community, Paul Hertz, and Kristen Erickson, with the following points raised and briefly discussed.
Education Definitions. Formal versus informal education needs clarification and definition: informal education often includes elements of both education and public outreach; and NASA definitions can be confusing. Kristen commented on the value of informal education and welcomed the notion of clarifying terminology. Community members offered that the Forums’ Informal Education Working Group has developed some definitions in this area and could contribute to such clarification.
Forums’ “No-Cost Extension.” In response to a query about whether the Forums’ “no-cost extension” meant that they could only operate in FY15 with carry-over funding, Kristen clarified that the no-cost extension is the first step. The Forums have been asked about funding needs through October and the remainder of FY15. Once NASA gets FY15 funding, SMD expects to fund the Forums through the fiscal year. Kristen and Paul clarified that the Forums are good through the end of October; they do not anticipate issues if there is a Continuing Resolution in place at that time.
Communications Funding. In response to a question about whether the communications / public outreach funding lost at the mission level in FY14 as part of the $42M reduction would be restored, Paul answered no. Astrophysics is not getting back any of the funding that was taken away. The direction being given to projects is that SMD does require the projects to meet their communications obligations. Projects need to readjust their overall spending plans accordingly. If projects feel that there are significant negative impacts, these will need to be brought up in the annual formulation process (PPB – Planning, Programming, & Budgeting; POP – Program Operating Plan). There is no restoration of communication funds to each individual part of the SMD program.
Reorganization by Astrophysics Theme. It was asked if SMD had gotten feedback on how the coordination of funding by the three Astrophysics themes (Physics of the Cosmos, Cosmic Origins, Exoplanet Exploration) in FY14 played out “on the ground,” e.g. how some coordination goals may have been detrimentally affected and if it would still be helpful to get input from the projects on this. Paul answered he received feedback on this primarily through the survey material provided by the Astrophysics Forum in preparation for the teleconference. The Astrophysics Division does not want to set this in concrete for the long-term plan, and possible issues with implementation should be discussed.
SOFIA. In the FY14 funding coordination, the SOFIA Airborne Astronomy Ambassadors program was a fourth avenue through which funds were coordinated, in addition to the three Astrophysics themes. It was asked if there would be three or four such avenues in FY15. Paul responded that the money to support the Ambassadors program that was removed from the SOFIA budget is not being put back. The SOFIA budget for FY15 is not known at this point in time. Funding for the Airborne Astronomy Ambassador program will need to be worked out with the SOFIA project.
“Getting it Right.” Kristen was asked to expand on what she meant by “getting it right” in earlier remarks. Kristen indicated that it’s clear that the policy of a 1% set-aside of mission and project funds for E/PO (with some variations) has been sustained since 1993 for several reasons. SMD wants to make sure they fully understand those reasons and not lose that benefit as they move forward. Likewise, they are hearing from stakeholders and long-standing partners who say NASA is in every school in the country and not to make drastic changes that could ruin that. However, there are aspects that can be improved upon. This is the essence of “getting it right.”
A community member suggested “getting it right” refers to building consensus between stakeholders about the value and purpose of NASA having an education effort. Kristen indicated that stakeholder expectations for NASA education are also part of the conversation. While education is not NASA’s main line of business, NASA has the content and the people that inspire kids and lifelong learners. The fact that the conversation is happening indicates those aspects are recognized.
Carry-over Funds, Project Funds, Education Funds. It was asked if the community can also carry over unspent FY14 funds into FY15 (as well as the Forums). Paul answered yes. It was further asked if missions would be allowed to send funds to programs in FY15, as in FY14. Paul responded—talking only about communications—that if an organization is performing communication functions for some missions, then yes, projects can send communication funds.
In response to a follow-up question about education funding, Paul indicated that for now, in the Astrophysics Division, education funds would flow through the interim arrangement used in FY14, i.e. through the three Astrophysics programs (Cosmic Origins at STScI, Physics of the Cosmos at Chandra, and Exoplanet Exploration at JPL).
EPOESS. It was asked if the EPOESS program would be funded for the current call due April 2015. Paul indicated there is no announcement at this time. SMD was leaving the door open when the call was issued earlier this year; the status has not changed.
Competition. It was brought up that the Administration’s proposed budget allocation for SMD education calls for it to be competitively allocated, and that there are several concerns about what “competitive” means in terms of having a balanced program and coordinated program. It was thought that this is one area in which the community would like to have further dialogue and input on what a competitive program might look like so that it is coherent, coordinated and balanced. Kristen indicated that the rules for competition are consistent with what SMD has always done. SMD has heard clear concerns about the expense of going through a new competition, especially when a program has recently been competed or been peer reviewed, which SMD does as a matter of course. SMD is also very mindful of going through their next step in a competitive way. While the past is not going to be the way of the future, SMD’s hope is that the future will be even better than what we’ve had. That’s why community input is needed going forward.
Conclusion
The teleconference concluded with thanks all around.
Additional materials related to this call are posted at http://smdepo.org/post/7057.