This is not a NASA Website. You might learn something. It's YOUR space agency. Get involved. Take it back. Make it work - for YOU.
Aeronautics

NASA OIG Finds Problems With ARMD Grants

By Keith Cowing
NASA Watch
April 30, 2012
Filed under , , ,

OIG: NASA’s Use of Research Announcement Awards for Aeronautics Research
“Based on our sample results, we estimate that ARMD’s 447 NRA awards during this 5-year period contained $25.2 million in unallowable or unsupported costs. Moreover, we project that by addressing the deficiencies we identified NASA could avoid awarding approximately $3.6 million in unallowable and/or unsupported costs annually in ARMD NRA awards.”

NASA Watch founder, Explorers Club Fellow, ex-NASA, Away Teams, Journalist, Space & Astrobiology, Lapsed climber.

One response to “NASA OIG Finds Problems With ARMD Grants”

  1. dogstar29 says:
    0
    0

    The full report can be found here and I would suggest anyone who is interested actually read it. http://oig.nasa.gov/audits/

    Incredibly, the OIG report first notes that the NRAs provided a remarkable series of technical accomplishments in aeronautics, one of the few NASA activities that actually might benefit ordinary Americans. Then they proceed to say the system is seriously flawed because of problems in the paperwork.

    A typical example of a disallowed cost was the inclusion of $26,000 to pay full tuition for two graduate students when only one third of their time was devoted to the project. Wait one doggone minute!!!! That’s 13K for a third of a man-year from a grad student at a competitive university!!  Where do they think they can get such cheap labor? And aren’t they aware this is actually a very standard arrangement in grad student research. How do they expect grad students to pay their tuition when they also need to take classes, teach, and prepare their theses? 

    “Specifically, the procurement file did not contain a Price NegotiationMemorandum or other evidence that procurement officials reviewed specific costelements. Instead, procurement officials relied on a brief cost evaluation performed byNASA technical personnel.”

    Anyone who has really applied for or worked under a NASA grant, particularly an NRA, knows that the application and reporting procedures are so complex that it would take most of the money int he grant to actually meet them, yet they manage to inject this level of cost without providing any assurance at all that the project is worthwhile. The best contracts are decided by NASA managers who know from experience and judgement what a project will cost and have the vision to try new ideas and the insight to pick the best. But most contract managers (not just in NRA awards) just follow the rules and pick the low bidder.

    I personally reported a contract that was obviously not awarded objectively to the OIG. I called their office and told them who I was. I was told that the only way I could report the incident was by calling the anonymous tip line. I protested that i wanted to know what they were going to do and make sure i answered all their questions. The story was the same. I called the anonymous line and left my name and the details. I never heard from them. So far as I know nothing was done. 

    In my opinion the OIG should report itself to itself for lack of common sense and engineering judgement. NASAWatch does a more effective job at keeping NASA honest. Or maybe, if they’re really smart, OIG will start reading NASAWatch.