Faster To Science: A Letter To The Science Community

TL;DR

Age 18–24?Offer from Amazon

Prime made for students and young adults

• Fast, free delivery for dorm and study essentials
• Prime Video and Amazon Music included
• Member-only deals

Try Prime for Young Adults →Free trial for eligible 18–24 year olds

As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.Hide

NASA Science has announced Competition Model 2.0, a planned redesign of how it competes and selects science missions. The agency says the changes will reduce selection timelines for several mission classes by up to 40% or 45%, while asking early proposals to focus more on science than detailed engineering and cost plans.

NASA’s Science Mission Directorate has announced Competition Model 2.0 (CM 2.0), a planned overhaul of how it solicits and selects science missions, saying the approach is intended to shorten competitions and let proposals focus first on their scientific case. NASA said it will explain the model and take questions at a virtual town hall on Monday, October 26; the letter provided does not specify the year.

Under CM 2.0, early proposals would require a science case, science implementation plan and proof-of-concept mission design, rather than detailed engineering, cost and implementation work at the outset. NASA says this would reduce the material required in the first stage by about half compared with a current Announcement of Opportunity response, and direct initial reviews toward scientific merit.

For mission classes using a two-step competition, NASA describes a second-stage Mission Implementation Study involving NASA science centers. The agency says that study would assess scientific merit, science implementation and mission implementation, with risks surfaced earlier. A single mission would be selected partway through Phase A; the chosen team would complete that phase, while teams not selected would not have to carry their concepts through the remaining work independently.

NASA estimates the revised process could cut the time from an Announcement of Opportunity to the second-stage selection by up to 45%, from 35 months to about 19.5 months. The letter also gives estimates for other competition formats: a single-step process for some missions could reduce final selection from about 32 months to about 19 months, a reduction of up to 40%. These are NASA projections, not reported results from completed competitions.

Shorter Competitions, Earlier Science Review

If implemented as described, CM 2.0 could reduce the time and proposal-development resources spent before NASA chooses missions. The agency says the current process can take years and place heavy demands on teams, including contract-management challenges, unpredictability and limited funding. Moving detailed implementation work later could change how universities, research teams and potential industry partners decide whether to compete.

NASA also says a science-first initial review could make competitions more accessible to principal investigators without backing from a large university or commercial organization. That is a stated aim, rather than a demonstrated outcome: the proposal still proceeds to technical and implementation scrutiny, and NASA has not provided evidence yet on how the new process will affect the mix of applicants or selected missions.

The stakes are practical as well as procedural. Mission selection determines which scientific projects receive the agency’s support and move toward development. Faster decisions could, if the schedule estimates hold, allow NASA to reach mission choices sooner. The letter does not quantify potential savings or say that every competition will meet the projected timelines.

Different Rules for Mission Classes

NASA says CM 2.0 will not change the process for its largest, flagship missions, which the letter says already follow a reformed approach developed after the James Webb Space Telescope. Under that approach, NASA directs the overall mission to a lead NASA center, which then competes science teams and instruments through targeted solicitations.

For other mission classes, the plan varies. NASA describes a two-step process for some competitions, with a broader range of possible implementing organizations, including universities and industry partners. It says organizations would be assessed on past performance on projects of similar complexity and cost. Principal-investigator-led teams could request a pairing with Goddard Space Flight Center or the Jet Propulsion Laboratory at the first selection stage; NASA says center support may also help with procurement, contract management or technical challenges.

The letter says some smaller missions would move to a single-step competition with a smaller review team and virtual site visits. It links that change to the growth of the commercial space sector, but the supplied text ends during its discussion of commercial practices. It does not provide the full set of rules or a detailed schedule for rolling out each part of CM 2.0.

Implementation Details Still Pending

NASA says the changes will be introduced in stages and refined with community input, but the letter does not give a rollout calendar or identify when the first competitions will use each feature. The October 26 town hall is presented as a forum for explaining the model and answering questions; the supplied material does not state its year.

The timelines are estimates, and the letter does not explain the assumptions behind them or guarantee that individual competitions will finish on schedule. It also does not provide detailed eligibility criteria, review procedures or the complete rules for every mission class. Because the source text cuts off during its description of commercial-sector practices, those details cannot be confirmed from the material provided.

NASA Town Hall and Staged Rollout

NASA Science says it will use the virtual town hall on Monday, October 26, to present CM 2.0 and respond to questions from the science community. The agency says it plans to introduce the changes in stages, taking feedback into account as it refines the process.

The next concrete test will be how NASA translates the model into solicitations and competition rules for individual mission classes. Those documents should clarify timelines, proposal requirements, review criteria and the role of NASA centers and outside partners. Until they are available, the projected reductions remain agency estimates, and the effects on participation, cost and mission delivery are not yet established.

Key Questions

What is NASA Competition Model 2.0?

CM 2.0 is NASA Science’s proposed redesign of mission competitions. It aims to put scientific merit earlier in the selection process and defer detailed engineering and cost work until those details are needed.

How much faster does NASA expect selections to be?

NASA estimates reductions of up to 45% for some two-step competitions and up to 40% for a described single-step process. The figures are projections; the letter does not report results from competitions already run under CM 2.0.

Will the model change how NASA selects flagship missions?

NASA says the process for its largest missions will not change under CM 2.0 because it has already been reformed. The letter says those missions will continue under the approach developed after the James Webb Space Telescope.

When will the new process take effect?

NASA says it will roll out changes in stages, but the letter does not provide a schedule for when specific competitions will adopt them. It announces a virtual town hall for Monday, October 26, without specifying the year in the supplied text.

Source: primary