2. Discussion
Topics:
•
Center
Core
Competencies
•
Updated
ARC
proposal
development
&
review
process
•
NIAC
proposal
call!
3. Discussion
Topics:
•
Center
Core
Competencies
•
Updated
ARC
proposal
development
&
review
process
•
NIAC
proposal
call!
4. ARC
CORE
COMPETENCIES
Advanced
CompuFng
and
IT
Systems
Intelligent/AdapFve
Entry,
Descent
and
Human
&
RoboFc
Landing
Systems
Systems
Air
Traffic
Management
ARC
Aerosciences
Astrobiology
End-‐to-‐End
Low
Cost
Aerospace
Missions
Space,
Earth
and
Life
Sciences
5.
NASA
“Alternate
Futures”
*
idenFfied
by
HQ
EC
as
possible
scenarios
to
guide
Agency
mission
*
each
“future”
emphasizes
different
elements
of
NASA’s
porWolio
•
Status
Quo
•
Human
and
RoboIc
Space
ExploraIon
(other
mission
areas
to
decline)
•
Space-‐faring
CivilizaIon
(limited
earth
science
re:
climate
change)
•
Tangible
Relevance
(greater
import
to
aero
and
earth
sciences)
•
Research
and
Technology
Emphasis
(greater
import
to
core
scienIfic
discovery
and
high-‐risk/high
pay-‐off
research)
•
Primacy
of
Mars
Stay
tuned
……
6. Discussion
Topics:
•
Center
Core
Competencies
•
Updated
ARC
proposal
development
&
review
process
•
NIAC
proposal
call!
7.
Proposal
development
and
review
process
Goals:
•
Recent
track
record
for
winning
new
proposals
disappoinIng
•
Add
value,
rigor
and
support
•
Make
process
transparent,
objecIve
and
fair
•
Improve
ARC’s
success
rate
8. ARC’S
New
OpportuniIes
Center
(NOC)
•
Goal
is
to
help
proposers
develop
winning
proposals
•
NOC
will
provide:
-‐
proposal
templates,
schedule
templates,
best
pracIces,
story
boards,
evaluaIon
criteria,
science
traceability
matrix,
cosIng
tools
•
Coming
soon:
Flash
based
secure
system
to
support
archive
of
past
proposals
POCs:
Tony
Strawa,
Bev
Girten
9. Proposal
Milestones
and
Decision
Criteria
S-‐12-‐18
months
S-‐6-‐8
months
S-‐4
months
S-‐6
wks
Submit
Opportunity
Proposal
Proposal
Post
Capture
Assessment
Planning
PreparaFon
SubmiXal
Lessons
Learned;
Archive
White
Team
Black
Team
Blue
Team
Red
Team
Review
Review
Review
Review
10. Proposal
Milestones
and
Decision
Criteria
Opportunity
Proposal
Proposal
Post
Capture
Assessment
Planning
PreparaFon
SubmiXal
Lessons
Learned
• Does
concept
fill
a
GAP
• Bid
/
No
Bid
decision
in
customer
needs?
• Assess
feasibility
of
• Thoroughly
understand
• Does
it
match
the
approach
and
win
• Was
market
intel
needs,
AO,
win
strategy.
opportunity
and
center
strategy.
• Have
previous
team
accurate?
Discriminators
• Is
proposal
compliant?
goals?
• How
does
concept
comments
been
• Did
we
get
high-‐level
• Is
a
compelling
case
• What
are
compeFtor’s
stack
up
against
addressed?
mgmt
support
early?
made
of
criFcalility
to
likely
strategies?
compeFFon?
• Is
a
compelling
case
• Was
strategy
correct?
agency
needs?
• How
can
we
shape
the
• What
is
customer
made
that
this
• How
well
did
team
• Are
science
objecFves
game?
preference?
concept
is
criFcal
to
members
work
clear
and
flow
to
• IdenFfy
partners.
• Assess
need
for
agency
needs?
together?
instrument
reqm’ts?
• IdenFfy
capture
leads
supplemental
• Is
this
a
winning
• Where
reviews
useful?
• Is
technical,
mgmt,
and
and
validate
capture
funding.
proposal?
• Is
this
proposal
worth
risk
sound?
strategy.
resubmicng?
• Have
an
ICE.
11. Proposal
Milestones
and
Value
To
Team
Opportunity
Proposal
Proposal
Post
Capture
Assessment
Planning
PreparaFon
SubmiXal
Lessons
Learned
&
Archive
• Visibility
with
Senior
Mgt
• Bid
/
NoBid
Decision
• Document
lessons
(SM)
and
advocacy.
• SM
assessment
of
• CriFcal
review
of
win
learned
to
benefit
• Benefit
from
SM
feasibility
of
strategy,
science
• CriFcal
review
of
future
efforts.
Value
Added
knowledge
of
Agency
approach
and
win
objecFves,
disposiFon
of
Blue
• Archive
the
proposal
needs
and
compeFtor
strategy.
implementaFon,
Review
comments.
and
internal
review
strategies.
• ConFnued
help
from
instrument
reqm’ts,
• SM
assistance
with
comments
• Help
from
SM
in
shaping
SM
in
shaping
AOs,
compliance,
and
cost.
remaining
• Archive
the
debrief
AOs,
building
support
for
building
support,
and
• Review
of
proposal
partnering
or
from
the
HQ
review
concept,
and
idenFfying
idenFfying
partners.
alignment
with
agency
cosFng
issues
• Do
analyses
to
partners.
• Supplemental
needs.
• Final
chance
to
determine
what
the
• IdenFfy
capture
leads.
funding
if
required.
• ConFnued
supplemental
“polish”
proposal.
major
problems
and
• Seed
funding
if
needed.
funding.
strengths
.
WHITE
TEAM
MISSION
CONCEPT
BLUE
TEAM
RED
TEAM
LL
&
ARCHIVE
Astrawa
-‐1/17/12
12. Discussion
Topics:
•
Center
Core
Competencies
•
Updated
ARC
proposal
development
&
review
process
•
NIAC
proposal
call!
13.
NASA
InnovaIve
Advanced
Concepts
(NIAC)
NRA
•
Released
1/9
with
2
page
Step
A
proposals
due
2/9
and
Step
B
proposals
(if
selected)
due
4/16
•
Last
year
30
ARC
proposals
submifed,
none
selected
(“wg
!@#$%#!@”
-‐
PW’s
reacIon)
•
How
can
we
be
believed
by
others
to
be
NASA’s
“InnovaIon
Center”
if
we
can’t
win
a
NIAC
??
14.
What
are
they
looking
for?
“…..
this
call
invites
innova0ve,
technically
credible
advanced
concepts
that
could
one
day
change
the
possible
in
aeronau0cs
and
space.”
Proposals
must
be:
-‐
ExciIng
(breakthrough
leap,
out
of
the
box)
-‐
Unexplored
(based
on
new
technology
or
idea)
-‐
Far-‐Term
(TRL
1
or
2
with
maturity
in
10+
years)
-‐
Technically
credible
(sound
technical
&
engineering
basis)
Step
A:
Develop
the
concept
(technology
or
mission
architecture)
and
assess
in
a
mission
context
(2
page
white
paper)
Step
B:
If
selected
in
Step
A,
these
proposals
must
“Wow
us,
and
give
your
concept
a
chance
to
wow
the
world!”
15.
What’s
in
it
for
you?
•
geong
recognized
as
an
innovator
•
up
to
$100K
AND
equal
matching
from
Pete’s
investment
fund
in
FY13!!
•
the
opportunity
to
do
something
really
new
and
creaIve
