NASA AND A DATA COLLECTION PLAN

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,

. . .
ively, the presidential administration, the Congress, or the National Science Foundation should establish the program goals for NASA. Most appropriately, such goals should be established by the National Science Foundation, which should provide along with such goals, statements of the scientific feasibility and desirability of such goals, and prioritizations for such goals. The National Science Foundation and NASA then could jointly develop realistic cost estimates for the attainment of such goals. The presidential administration and the Congress should then determine which goals would be adopted and fully funded for NASA. In turn, NASA would be provided with precise guidance and with the required that would be funding for its mandate. NASA administrators, then, would make operational decisions, not political decisions. Implementing the proposed change in the high-level decision-making process at NASA may be expected to lead to a substantial improvement in the level of objective attainment within the various NASA programs. Additionally, the efficiency of resource use at NASA may be expected to improve substantially (National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2004). The primary value of implementing the proposed change i
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
United Gregory, Improvement Primary, Space Administration, Effectively CCPM, NASA NASA, Office President, United NASA, Elimination Process, United O'Keefe, Science Foundation, decision-making process, national aeronautics space, high-level decision-making, aeronautics space administration, space administration, aeronautics space, high-level decision-making process, national aeronautics, process nasa, decision-making process nasa, health care, program goals, approved operational, washington dc, health care services,
Approximate Word count = 1261
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page)

More Essays on NASA AND A DATA COLLECTION PLAN