A NASA IMPROVED PROCESS AND DATA COLLECTION PLAN: HIGH-LEVEL DECISION-MAKING PROCESS (PROGRAM GOAL SETTING-PRIORITIZING PROGRAM GOALS-FUNDING-OPERATIONAL DECISION-MAKING)
Description of the Post-Improvement Process
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is more than just another agency of the federal government in the United States. NASA conducts important research that either or both expands humanity's store of knowledge or creates practical applications that provide direct benefits to humanity. NASA, however, also has another important role - a social and a psychological role for the American public, as well as for people outside of the United States (O'Keefe, 2004). To effectively fill these diverse roles, NASA must be a stable organization. NASA's long-term program goals must be stable, and the funding plan for approved programs must be in place on a long-term basis (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2005).
Stability in program goals and stability in long-term funding for NASA imply comparable stability and responsibility on the part of the national political leadership in the United States (Gregory, 2005). It simply is not acceptable for NASA to be treated as a political stepchild in non-general election years, only to be trotted out as a Cinderella agency once every four year when a sitting president and a nervous Congress need a feel good photo-op to divert the attentions of voters from their collective failings. After the party, it is back in the dole for NASA, while tax cuts and pork-barrel funding take center state for three more years.
The unfortunate cycle described above impinges on NASA's performance in relation timely goal attainment, and it also causes the performance efficiency of NASA to be compromised. NASA's funding and planning situation within the federal government structure in the United States is analogous to the under-funding of health care services for the ind...