McCurdy examines NASA's recent efforts to save money while improving mission frequency and performance.".

This book is in full-color - other editions may be in grayscale (non-color). The hardback version is ISBN 9781680920512 and the paperback version is ISBN 9781680920505. The NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Handbook (NASA/SP-2014-3705) is the companion document to NPR 7120.5E and represents the accumulation of knowledge NASA gleaned on managing program and projects coming out of NASA's human, robotic, and scientific missions of the last decade. At the end of the historic Shuttle program, the United States entered a new era that includes commercial missions to low-earth orbit as well as new multi-national exploration missions deeper into space. This handbook is a codification of the "corporate knowledge" for existing and future NASA space flight programs and projects. These practices have evolved as a function of NASA's core values on safety, integrity, team work, and excellence, and may also prove a resource for other agencies, the private sector, and academia. The knowledge gained from the victories and defeats of that era, including the checks and balances and initiatives to better control cost and risk, provides a foundation to launch us into an exciting and healthy space program of the future.

Principal Investigator-Led (PI-led) missions are an important element of NASA's space science enterprise. While several NRC studies have considered aspects of PI-led missions in the course of other studies for NASA, issues facing the PI-led missions in general have not been subject to much analysis in those studies. Nevertheless, these issues are raising increasingly important questions for NASA, and it requested the NRC to explore them as they currently affect PI-led missions. Among the issues NASA asked to have examined were those concerning cost and scheduling, the selection process, relationships among PI-led team members, and opportunities for knowledge transfer to new PIs. This report provides a discussion of the evolution and current status of the PIled mission concept, the ways in which certain practices have affected its performance, and the steps that can carry it successfully into the future. The study was done in collaboration with the National Academy of Public Administration.

Through an examination of case studies, agency briefings, and existing reports, and drawing on personal knowledge and direct experience, the Committee on Assessment of Impediments to Interagency Cooperation on Space and Earth Science Missions found that candidate projects for multiagency collaboration in the development and implementation of Earth-observing or space science missions are often intrinsically complex and, therefore costly, and that a multiagency approach to developing these missions typically results in additional complexity and cost. Advocates of collaboration have sometimes underestimated the difficulties and associated costs and risks of dividing responsibility and accountability between two or more partners; they also discount the possibility that collaboration will increase the risk in meeting performance objectives. This committee's principal recommendation is that agencies should conduct Earth and space science projects independently unless: It is judged that cooperation will result in significant added scientific value to the project over what could be achieved by a single agency alone; or Unique capabilities reside within one agency that are necessary for the mission success of a project managed by another agency; or The project is intended to transfer from research to operations necessitating a change in responsibility from one agency to another during the project; or There are other compelling reasons to pursue collaboration, for example, a desire to build capacity at one of the cooperating agencies. Even when the total project cost may increase, parties may still find collaboration attractive if their share of a mission is more affordable than funding it alone. In these cases, alternatives to interdependent reliance on another government agency should be considered. For example, agencies may find that buying services from another agency or pursuing interagency coordination of spaceflight data collection is preferable to fully interdependent cooperation.