FY 2008 Proposed Budget ($2.776 Trillion OL) R&D = 13% of discretionary spending Non-Def. 16% Other Mandatory 11.5% Social Security 20.9% Net Interest 8.5% Defense 17.7% Defense R&D 2.8% Medicare 13.3% Medicaid 7.3% Non-Def. R&D 2% Mandatory Spending Discretionary Spending Total R&D = $139B $79B DoD+DHS $60B Non-Security

Some Trends for Large Scientific Projects/Facilities  More are recommended than could be funded under the most optimistic budget scenarios (by factors of 2-4).  Non-traditional fields are also proposing large facilities and are real competition for resources.  Chronic tension between new and existing facilities and between facilities and program research budgets.  Projects are ever more technically complex and challenging Premium on project management Cost overruns erode credibility of the agency, program, PIs to deliver.  Budgets are tight and the budget process is increasingly political Congress does not have a good track record in passing approps bills on time – CRs and Omnibus can have significant impacts. Careful matching between project design/scope and scientific motivations (i.e. will not build a Cadillac when a Chevy will do.)  Increasing numbers of interagency, international projects Hard Lessons Learned from GLAST, RSVP Plethora of lessons learned from international projects  The path for public-private partnerships is not well defined

Strong Agency/Program Support, Strong Project Socialization Influences Change as Projects Evolve

Executive Branch White House - OMB will not change at the staff level – PADs and higher - OSTP could be significantly re-directed. Complete change of staff - Vice President and the Domestic Policy Council are also key positions. Agencies - NSF little impact. NASA and DOE certain to be affected - NASA and DOE Agency Leadership for science are crucial - NASA: US Space Policy re-visit? - DOE: ACI, Energy R&D overshadow discovery-oriented science? Engagement strategy for the election: - Follow the campaigns, who is advising on science? - Have an agenda for transition: once the election is over, the facility Directors should band together to provide their input qualities for new leadership at the Agency - Who are potential candidates for leadership positions at the agency? Legislative Branch - ALL politics are local – work with research VPs/community to educate newly elected officials about budget impacts within NASA or DOE on research at institutions in their home district - Hill Staff will play musical chairs 2008 Election Opportunity: How Should You Prepare?

Comments: Sets priorities - still too many projects - Is this a good or a bad thing? Provides an estimate of cost – Actual cost is usually higher No technical readiness discussion - Provide a sense of ordering Does not say anything about existing facilities Discussion: Would evaluation of TRL help with needed phasing information? Only cost projects that are ready for a start within the next decade? For each project, provide some recommendation regarding needed investments (tech, PED, start)? Revisit readiness about mid-way? The Decadal Survey