Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment develop and implement a plan to guide and coordinate efforts to implement the Wideband AOA recommendations to support timely, informed decisions on its next wideband satellite communications architecture. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Secretary of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with our recommendation, but as of July 2020 is still working to implement its corrective action plan.

Recommendation: The NASA Administrator should ensure that the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations directs the Advanced Exploration Systems division to define and determine a schedule for synchronization reviews, including the role of the proposed Lunar Exploration Control Board, to help ensure that requirements between mission and program levels are reconciled. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation and stated that the Advanced Exploration Systems division will review program life-cycle review plans to ensure enterprise and program requirements are reconciled across the mission. NASA is in the process of determining the organizational structure of the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate. Following this completion, NASA officials stated that the appropriate control board and division structures for review and program direction will become active.

Recommendation: The NASA Administrator should ensure that the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations directs the Gateway program to conduct a joint cost and schedule confidence level at the program level for the Artemis III mission. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation and stated it would conduct a joint cost and schedule confidence level analysis or equivalent. The Gateway program is planning to conduct a series of project- and program-level reviews and assessments aligned with key decision point reviews. This includes conducting a joint cost and schedule confidence level analysis or equivalent of the Gateway initial configuration to support a program key decision point planned for fall 2021. NASA has not yet taken action on this recommendation.

Recommendation: The NASA Administrator should ensure that the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations directs the Gateway program to update its overall schedule for 2024 to add a KDP II to occur before system integration. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation, but has not yet taken action on it. NASA stated that it would provide a schedule for future reviews, including whether there will be a Key Decision Point (KDP) II, at the KDP-I review currently scheduled for fall 2021.

Recommendation: The NASA Administrator should ensure that the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations creates a life-cycle cost estimate for the Artemis III mission. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: NASA agreed with the recommendation and stated that the agency will provide a preliminary cost estimate for the Artemis III mission by the end of 2020. Further, NASA stated that it will provide an updated cost estimate for the Artemis III mission after it establishes cost and schedule commitments for some of the projects that compose the lunar mission, currently planned for the Spring of 2021. To fully implement this recommendation, NASA will need to provide a cost estimate.

Recommendation: The NASA Administrator should ensure that the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations directs the Advanced Exploration Systems division to commit to a completion date and finalize a cohesive document outlining the rationale for selecting its current lunar architecture and lunar programs. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation and stated that it is developing a document that will summarize the trades and architectural studies, but the document is not yet complete.

Recommendation: The NASA Administrator should ensure that the Office of the Chief Engineer determines under what conditions it is appropriate to complete an analysis of alternatives, particularly when there are multiple pathways—including architectures or programs—that NASA could pursue in the future, and document the justification for not completing an analysis. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation, but has not yet taken any action on it. NASA stated that it will provide additional clarifying guidance for conducting analyses of alternatives for new programs in the next update to NASA Procedural Requirements 7120.5E, "NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements." NASA plans to complete the update of the procedural requirement in September 2021.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment should ensure that the Air Force's finalized Space C2 program's acquisition strategy includes, at a minimum, the following elements:

• acquisition and contracting approach;
• program management structure, including authorities and oversight responsibilities;
• plans for platform and infrastructure development;
• requirements management and development approach, and plans for prioritization;
• risk management plans, including how the program will identify and mitigate risks;
• metrics for measuring quality of software, and how those results will be shared with external stakeholders;
• manpower assessment identifying program workforce needs and state of expertise in Agile methods;
• requirements for reporting program progress to decision makers; and
• yearly funding levels. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with the recommendation and stated that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment directed the Air Force (this work has now been moved to the Space Force) to provide an Acquisition Strategy for approval in November 2019. DOD noted that a strategy template provided to the Air Force included the elements identified by GAO. As of July 2020, the Acquisition Strategy had been submitted to the office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment, but officials stated that the strategy is still in review and has not yet been finalized.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment should ensure that the Air Force's Space C2 program conducts periodic independent reviews to assess the program's approach to developing software and provide, as needed, advice to the program and recommendations for improving the program's development and progress. Participants could include, but are not limited to, officials from the Defense Innovation Board, the Defense Digital Service, the office of the Air Force Chief Software Advisor, and the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment's Special Assistant for Software Acquisition. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and stated that the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment will assess the need for future periodic and independent reviews of the program. As of July 2020, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment stated that it had planned to direct an independent review of the program to be conducted by a Federally Funded Research and Development Center and to be completed by September 2020. However, lack of funding and restrictions related to COVID-19 impacted planning. The office still plans to direct this review, but details are pending.

Recommendation: We recommend the NASA Administrator ensure that the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations direct the SLS program to calculate its development cost growth using a baseline that is appropriately adjusted for scope and costs NASA has determined are not associated with the first flight, and determine if the development cost growth has increased by 30 percent or more. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation. As of February 2020, NASA stated that it is conducting a rebaseline of the cost and schedule commitments for the SLS program and will document final decisions in an Agency Baseline Commitment decision memorandum. NASA officials anticipate they will complete this effort in Spring 2020. To fully implement this recommendation, NASA will need to measure cost growth using a baseline that reflects the scope of work currently planned for the first mission.

Recommendation: We recommend the NASA Administrator ensure that the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations direct the Orion program to update its cost estimate to reflect its committed EM-2 baseline date of April 2023. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: NASA partially agreed with this recommendation, stating that providing the estimate to the forecasted launch date rather than to the committed baseline date of April 2023 is the most appropriate approach. In November 2019, program officials told us that they will consider this recommendation as part of updating the joint confidence level analysis for the program's Key Decision Point D review. This review occurs before the program enters the system assembly, integration and test, and launch phase, and is not scheduled to occur until December 2020. To fully implement this recommendation, NASA needs to provide an updated cost estimate through April 2023.

Recommendation: We recommend the NASA Administrator ensure that the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations direct the EGS program to demonstrate design maturity by completing 3D product modeling of the basic and functional design of the second Mobile Launcher prior to construction start. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation and stated that the acquisition strategy for the second mobile launcher requires the use of 3D product modeling and that it will be the source for all engineering activities including integrated design reviews to demonstrate design maturity. It is too soon to assess the design maturity prior to construction start and we will provide updated information on actions NASA has taken at that time.

Recommendation: We recommend the NASA Administrator ensure that the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations direct the SLS and Orion programs to reevaluate their strategies for incentivizing contractors and determine whether they could more effectively incentivize contractors to achieve the outcomes intended as part of ongoing and planned contract negotiations. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA agreed with the intent of this recommendation and stated that the SLS and Orion program offices reevaluate their strategies for incentivizing contract performance as part of normal contracting activities including contract restructures, contract baseline adjustments, and new contract actions. The Orion program has awarded a long term contract for production of the Orion spacecraft that incorporates new strategies intended to reduce contract costs. The SLS program is in the process of negotiating long term production contracts for required hardware.

Recommendation: The Associate Administrator of AST should develop workload metrics that encompass the whole office and that would allow AST to determine an appropriate workforce size and composition. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, AST has developed an initial set of metrics for the office's workload and is working with the Federal Aviation Administration's Office of Labor Analysis to enhance and validate the metrics.

Recommendation: The Associate Administrator of AST should establish a timeline for finalizing workload projections that extend beyond the 2-year budget cycle and that include an approach for addressing uncertainty. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2020, AST said that it has extended the projection period of the staffing model to five years and that it is working with the Federal Aviation Administration's Office of Labor Analysis to validate the extended projections and to include an approach to address uncertainty.

Recommendation: The Associate Administrator of AST should ensure that its skills assessment survey collects information from staff on skills and competencies in those areas that are both currently needed and may be needed in the future. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In May 2020, AST provided documentation showing that in November and December 2019, AST administered surveys to engineering staff and supervisors to assess the skills of engineering staff in specific competency areas that are needed to successfully perform their jobs. The documentation provided also showed that the surveys asked engineering staff and supervisors about the skills they believed AST would need in the future.

Recommendation: The Associate Administrator of AST should develop and document a plan for periodically assessing whether staff possess the necessary skills and competencies to achieve programmatic goals, such as annually administering a skills assessment survey. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In July 2020, AST officials told us they plan to assess employee skills and competencies on a 3-year cycle and that they will establish a process to do so by the end of 2020. We will continue to monitor AST's progress in implementing this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Director, Office of Cost Assessment and Program Evaluation to conduct an independent schedule assessment of the full program schedule for the Global Positioning System's next generation operational control system based on progress made through the end of calendar year 2019. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD did not concur with our recommendation to conduct an independent assessment of the full OCX program schedule based on progress made through the end of calendar year 2019, citing an independent cost and schedule estimate conducted in September 2018 and other ongoing program assessment and monitoring efforts. GAO continues to affirm that the recommendation is necessary given that DOD has not conducted an assessment of the full schedule since June 2018, since which time program risks have evolved. Additionally, ongoing oversight efforts are limited in scope and do not include the developmental test period after product delivery. As of August 2020, the Air Force position remains a non-concur, based on the same rationale previously noted.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure the department's guidance that addresses software development provides specific, required direction on when and how often to involve users so that such involvement is early and continues through the development of the software and related program components. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and issued an interim Software Acquisition Pathway policy in January 2020 that addresses software development, including direction on user involvement. As of August 2020, this interim policy has not yet been finalized. According to DOD officials, a final policy is currently under development and is expected to be issued by the end of December 2020.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should ensure the department's guidance that addresses software development provides specific, required direction on documenting and communicating user feedback to stakeholders during software system development. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2020, DOD has issued an interim Software Acquisition Pathway that addresses software development, including direction on user involvement. According to DOD officials, this interim pathway is planned to be replaced by a final policy that is currently under development and is expected to be issued by the end of December 2020.

Recommendation: The NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations should direct the Commercial Crew Program to include the results of its schedule risk analysis in its mandatory quarterly reports to Congress. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA did not concur with our recommendation that the Commercial Crew Program should include the results of its schedule analysis in its quarterly reports to Congress. In July 2019, NASA reaffirmed that it will be working to ensure that the contractors' schedules and the program's internal assessments sync up as the program gets closer to launch, which is the process it used in March 2019 leading up to SpaceX's uncrewed test flight. GAO continues to believe that the recommendation is valid because the program's schedule risk analysis would provide Congress with valuable insight into potential delays, which are likely.

Recommendation: The NASA Administrator should develop and maintain a contingency plan for ensuring a presence on the ISS until a Commercial Crew Program contractor is certified. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: NASA agreed with this recommendation. NASA stated that it is in discussions with Russia to obtain additional seats on its Soyuz spacecraft for NASA crew as a contingency plan. NASA is also providing Extra-Vehicular Activity and robotics training for a subset of cosmonauts to support U.S. Operating Segment operations, and looking at a possible extension of the duration of the Space X Demonstration 2 crewed test flight. In November 2019, NASA reported that it completed its actions for this recommendation. However, while NASA is working on potential solutions, there is no contingency plan in place. To fully implement this recommendation, NASA needs to provide documentation of its contingency plan.

Recommendation: The NASA Administrator should direct the Chief of Safety and Mission Assurance, the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations, the Commercial Crew Program Manager, and the Commercial Crew Program Contracting Officer to collectively determine and document before the agency certification review how the agency will determine its risk tolerance level with respect to loss of crew. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA partially concurred with our recommendation, stating it documented the agency's risk tolerance level with respect to loss of crew for the program in its May 2011 safety memo. NASA stated that ultimately the Commercial Crew Program is accountable for ensuring that the contractors' systems meet the loss of crew value of 1 in 270. In July 2019, the Commercial Crew Program noted that it will continue to determine its risk tolerance with respect to loss of crew and formally document its decisions at program management meetings. We continue to believe that, before agency certification, the key parties must collectively determine how the agency will determine its risk tolerance with response to loss of crew, as the risk tolerance for the loss of crew requirement depends on which entity is presenting the results of its analysis. We believe this approach will reduce confusion and increase transparency. In late September 2020, GAO received additional information from NASA on actions taken to implement this recommendation. We are currently assessing this information.

Recommendation: After completing the agency certification review, NASA's Chief Engineer and Chief of Safety and Mission Assurance, with support from the NASA Associate Administrator for Human Exploration and Operations and the Commercial Crew Program Manager, should document lessons learned related to loss of crew as a safety threshold for future crewed spaceflight missions, given the complexity of the metric. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA concurred with our recommendation to document lessons learned related to the loss of crew requirement. In June 2020, NASA told us that they expect to take action to close this recommendation by the end of May 2021.

Recommendation: The Administrator should direct the Chief Information Officer to address, in conjunction with the Chief Human Capital Officer, gaps in IT workforce planning by fully implementing the eight key IT workforce planning activities noted in this report. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA did not concur with this recommendation. As of October 2019, the agency reported that the Office of the Chief Information Officer was beginning its involvement with the agency's Mission Support Architecture Program which aims at re-aligning mission support functions from a decentralized model to an enterprise model. The office's participation in the re-alignment effort has an estimated completion date in fiscal year 2023.

Recommendation: The Administrator should direct the Chief Information Officer to address weaknesses in oversight practices and ensure routine oversight of all investments by taking action to document criteria for escalating investments among governance boards and establish procedures for tracking corrective actions for underperforming investments. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. In July 2018, NASA reported that the agency intended to address this recommendation by documenting its approach for governing IT investments. In February 2020, NASA reported that the agency remained committed to taking action to address this recommendation and reported that the Office of the Chief Information Officer had established a process to govern IT investment funds and had planned additional modifications for that framework. The agency now expects to complete actions to address this recommendation by November 2020.

Recommendation: The Administrator should ensure that the Chief Information Officer fully defines policies and procedures for developing the portfolio criteria, creating the portfolio, and evaluating the portfolio. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. In July 2018, NASA reported that it had begun updating policies and procedures for developing the portfolio criteria. In April 2019, NASA provided copies of its updated guidance. Among other things, the guidance described criteria for the portfolio and defined policies and procedures for creating the portfolio. As of April 2020, the agency had not yet provided evidence that it had developed policies and procedures for evaluating the portfolio. We plan to continue following up on the status of efforts to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator should direct the Chief Information Officer to establish an agency-wide approach to managing cybersecurity risk that includes a cybersecurity strategy that, among other things, makes explicit the agency's risk tolerance, accepted risk assessment methodologies, a process for consistently evaluating risk across the organization, response strategies and approaches for monitoring risk over time, and priorities for risk management investments. (Recommendation 8)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. In July 2018, NASA reported that it had hired a Chief Cybersecurity Risk Officer in April 2018 and that it had also approved a charter for an agency-wide Cybersecurity Integration Team. As of September 2020, NASA reported that it intends to deliver a cybersecurity risk management strategy that addresses the elements outlined in this recommendation by 2021.

Recommendation: The Administrator should direct the Chief Information Officer to establish an agency-wide approach to managing cybersecurity risk that includes policies and procedures with well-defined roles and responsibilities that are integrated and reflect NASA's current security practices and operating environment. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open

Comments: NASA concurred with this recommendation. As of September 2020, NASA reported that the Chief Information Officer had initiated a review of the agency's cyber policy management framework and that any related updates were expected to be completed by 2021.

Recommendation: The FAA Administrator should fulfill the CSLCA mandate to include ensuring a balance of risk between the federal government and launch companies as part of FAA's MPL methodology evaluation by reexamining the current probability thresholds. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2020 Department of Transportation (DOT) officials stated that FAA had not yet finished reexamining the current maximum probable loss (MPL) probability thresholds or completed a subsequent rulemaking to address the probability thresholds. The officials also stated that FAA's focus for the prior two years has been on streamlining the launch and reentry license regulations (SLR2) rulemaking in response to the President's Space Policy Directive 2, which contains the National Space Council's recommendations for commercial space regulatory reform. According to the officials, this effort will continue through 2020, and that after it is completed, FAA will evaluate whether to begin a new rulemaking to address MPL analyses.

Recommendation: The FAA Administrator should fulfill the CSLCA mandate to analyze the cost impact of implementing its revised MPL methodology by evaluating the impact on the direct costs of launch companies and the federal government. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2020, Department of Transportation (DOT) officials stated that FAA had not yet finished reexamining the current maximum probable loss (MPL) probability thresholds or completed a subsequent rulemaking to address the probability thresholds. The officials also stated that FAA's focus for the prior two years has been on streamlining the launch and reentry license regulations (SLR2) rulemaking in response to the President's Space Policy Directive 2, which contains the National Space Council's recommendations for commercial space regulatory reform. According to the officials, this effort will continue through 2020, and that after it is completed, FAA will evaluate whether to begin a new rulemaking to address MPL analyses.

Recommendation: The FAA Administrator should fulfill the CSLCA mandate to evaluate its MPL methodology in consultation with the commercial space sector and insurance providers by consulting with those entities on the cost impact of its revised MPL methodology, including an updated cost-of-casualty amount, on the launch industry and the federal government. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2020, Department of Transportation (DOT) officials stated that FAA had not yet finished reexamining the current maximum probable loss (MPL) probability thresholds or completed a subsequent rulemaking to address the probability thresholds. The officials also stated that FAA's focus for the prior two years has been on streamlining the launch and reentry license regulations (SLR2) rulemaking in response to the President's Space Policy Directive 2, which contains the National Space Council's recommendations for commercial space regulatory reform. According to the officials, this effort will continue through 2020, and that after it is completed, FAA will evaluate whether to begin a new rulemaking to address MPL analyses.

Recommendation: The FAA Administrator should establish an estimated completion date for developing and implementing a plan to establish guidance on the most appropriate MPL methodologies and tools to use for each launch. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2020, Department of Transportation (DOT) officials stated that FAA had not yet finished reexamining the current maximum probable loss (MPL) probability thresholds or completed a subsequent rulemaking to address the probability thresholds. The officials also stated that FAA's focus for the prior two years has been on streamlining the launch and reentry license regulations (SLR2) rulemaking in response to the President's Space Policy Directive 2, which contains the National Space Council's recommendations for commercial space regulatory reform. According to the officials, this effort will continue through 2020, and that after it is completed, FAA will evaluate whether to begin a new rulemaking to address MPL analyses.

Recommendation: To help ensure that the government is not exposed to more liability risk than intended, the Secretary of Transportation should ensure that the FAA Administrator prioritizes the development of a plan to address the identified weakness in the cost-of-casualty amount, including setting time frames for action, and update the amount based on current information.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Transportation agreed with the recommendation. In March 2018, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) stated that the agency planned to conduct a rulemaking to address any updates to the cost-of-casualty amount. As part of the rulemaking, FAA planned to engage with the commercial space and insurance industries to obtain views on an appropriate cost-of-casualty amount and implications of any changes. However, in February 2019, FAA stated that it has been unable to conduct the planned rulemaking due to a competing priority that will continue through 2020. FAA has requested input from the industry on prioritizing needed rule revisions and will develop a plan for updating the cost-of-casualty amount based on the industry's prioritization recommendations. We will continue to monitor FAA's actions in response to this recommendation.

Recommendation: To better ensure spaceport operators' understanding of FAA's financial responsibility regulations for commercial space launches, the Secretary of Transportation should ensure that the FAA Administrator provides additional communication to clarify FAA's interpretation of the financial responsibility regulations for commercial space launches. The forms of communication could include, among other things, issuing additional guidance or using other forums to clarify when a spaceport operator is a third party to a launch and when it is not.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: In May 2018, FAA officials said that they were working towards implementing the recommendation, but did not have documented efforts at this time and do not have an estimated completion date.

Recommendation: To provide the Congress and NASA a reliable estimate of program cost and schedule that are useful to support management and stakeholder decisions, the NASA Administrator should direct the Orion program to perform an updated JCL analysis including updating cost and schedule estimates in adherence with cost and schedule estimating best practices.

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: NASA partially agreed with this recommendation, stating that the agency reviewed, in detail, the Orion integrated cost/schedule and risk analysis methodology and determined the rigor to be a sufficient basis for the agency commitments. In November 2019, Orion program officials told us that in response to a recent policy change, the program office will update its joint confidence level analysis when the program has its Key Decision Point D review. This review occurs before the program enters the system assembly integration and test, and launch phase and is not scheduled to occur until December 2020. To fully implement this recommendation, NASA will need to provide evidence that it updated its joint confidence level analysis when the Orion program holds its Key Decision Point D review.

Recommendation: To improve NASA management and oversight of its spaceflight projects, and to improve the reliability of project EVM data, the NASA Administrator should direct the appropriate offices to modify the NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 7120.5 to require projects to implement a formal surveillance program that: (1) Ensures anomalies in contractor-delivered and in-house monthly earned value management reports are identified and explained, and report periodically to the center and mission directorate's leadership on relevant trends in the number of unexplained anomalies. (2) Ensures consistent use of work breakdown structures (WBS) for both the EVM report and the schedule. (3) Ensures that lower level EVM data reconcile to project level EVM data using the same WBS structure. (4) Improves underlying schedules so that they are properly sequenced using predecessor and successor dependencies and are free of constraints to the extent practicable so that the EVM baseline is reliable.

Agency: National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: NASA partially agreed with this recommendation, stating that the reliability and utility of the EVM data needed to be improved but that it did not plan to implement a formal surveillance plan due to resource constraints. Since initially commenting on the report, however, in December 2018, NASA included an initiative in its Corrective Action Plan-a plan put in place in response to recent programmatic performance and NASA's designation on GAO's High-Risk List-to enhance EVM implementation. In June 2019, NASA issued EVM guidance that covered several items, including enhancing in-house and contracted earned value management surveillance and requiring EVM reporting at Baseline Performance Review. NASA officials reported that its near-term plans are well-defined to address the reliability of project EVM data, but they have expressed concerns about funding challenges and cultural resistance. To fully implement this recommendation, NASA will need to take action and provide documentary support for several of its identified planned next steps to enhance EVM surveillance. Without implementing proper surveillance, NASA may be utilizing unreliable EVM data in its analyses to inform its cost and schedule decision making.