1. AST Portfolio Review Tom Statler, NSF/AST AAAC Meeting 13 Oct 2011

2. AST Portfolio Review 13 Oct 2011 2 NWNH advised: “If …budget is truly flat…there is no possibility of implementing …the recommended program…without…enacting the recommendations of the first 2006 senior review and/or …a second more drastic…review before mid-decade.” (p. 240) AST portfolio review will not be a repeat of Senior Review, which was confined to facilities. Examine balance across entire portfolio of activities AST supports. Enable progress on central science questions (Ch. 2 of NWNH), balancing recommendations for new facilities & instrumentation with capabilities of existing facilities & programs. AAAC

3. Review Philosophy 13 Oct 2011 3 Goal: Define the astronomical landscape for the coming decade. 2 “mapping” steps: 1.Let key science questions from NWNH determine set of critical capabilities needed in 2015, 2020, 2025. 2.Determine how to achieve these capabilities through combination of i.New facilities & instrumentation (following NWNH) ii.Evolution of existing facilities & programs AAAC

4. Review Philosophy 13 Oct 2011 4 Note that review is explicitly forward-looking Key question re: existing facilities is Can the facility be evolved so as to provide a critical future capability? - not - Has the facility earned the right to survive by virtue of past performance? Avoid overburdening facilities with demand for statistics or overburdening committee with need to invent metrics of productivity. AAAC

5. Other Boundary Conditions 13 Oct 2011 5 Multiple budget scenarios through 2025 to be provided by AST. Consider costs of delivering/evolving existing capabilities and costs of new facilities. No revisiting/rehashing Astro2010 process or recommendations. Include context of NASA, DOE, & joint programs, private observatories, & international activities Consider consequences for domestic, international partnerships and on state of the profession. AAAC

6. Charge to Committee 13 Oct 2011 6 Recommend balance of investment in new & existing facilities, grant programs, and workforce required in 2015, 2020, 2025 to enable progress on science questions identified by Astro2010. Prioritize with sufficient granularity to permit adjustments in response to variations in Federal funding. Recommendations should be viable and lead to vigorous and sustainable future for US astronomy. Report early enough in 2012 to inform FY2014 budget request. AAAC

7. Current Status 13 Oct 2011 7 Public announcements at May 2011 AAS and via mid-June Email to AAS and APS/APD distribution lists. Nominations for committee membership accepted until July 15 17-member PR Committee now complete, diverse with regard to science expertise, geography, career stage, and other important demographic dimensions Opportunity for Community input will be announced (by AAS/APS Email) week of Oct 17; Committee membership to be made public via PR webpage. Committee has met by telecon; first face-to-face Oct 21-23 AAAC