1

USGEO Strategic Assessment Group Process

Kathy Fontaine, US/NASA ST-09-01 Kick-off Meeting

Brussels, BelgiumJuly 29- 30, 2009

22

Agenda

• Background on Why, How, and What• Assessment Methodology• General Conclusions• Highlights of Recommendations• Applicability to ST-09-01

3

Strategic Assessment Group Background

• September 2007: Strategic Assessment Group (SAG) formed• Charge:

– To deliver a strategic portfolio • of high priority national Earth observation investment

recommendations – for existing and future capabilities – affecting Societal Benefit Areas

• to inform decision-makers, • to improve decisions regarding national investments in

Earth observations• February 2008: Established SBA Teams• March 2008: Conducted 2-day workshop to review

observational requirements for all 9 SBAs3

SBA Teams

• Disaster• Weather • Oceans • Climate • Agriculture • Human Health • Ecology • Water • Energy

5

Strategic Assessment Group Background (cont.)

• June 2008: SAG writing team assembled• Initial framework - SAG document should:

– Provide an integrated picture of national Earth observation priorities

– Serve to focus near-term decision-making at the highest levels of our government

– Consider measurements from all types of platforms: space-based, land and sea-based, airborne, subsurface, observations collected by humans, etc.

– Address continuity of current measurements as well as the need for new measurements

– Extend across all Agencies and scientific disciplines– Highlight investments that will maximize total societal benefit– Be of readable length (<20 pages)

6

Assessment Methodology

Identification and assessment of key observations Drawn from national and international experts and documents

Measurements having benefits across multiple SBAsOR

Deemed critical to an individual SBA

Measurement particularly at risk--current or looming gap

ORMeasurement not yet being made but great promise

for dramatic gainsor a scientificbreakthrough

Recommendations

Step 1:Gather

Step 2: Filter

Step 3: Filter Some More

Near-Term Threats and Potential Breakthroughs

Observational Needs / Critical Measurements

A few

Hundreds

Interagency Review and Feedback

General Conclusions

• The process adds a crosscutting perspective that compliments the individual agency processes– Roughly equal numbers of measurements facing gaps and

presenting potential major breakthroughs– Substantial fractions of both space-based and in situ

measurements were identified• Methodology chosen was tractable, enabling a focus from 100s

of critical observations down to 10s of issues• Must be an ongoing periodic assessment because societal

issues, measurement threats, and breakthrough opportunities evolve

• Process can be a source for development of US positions on future GEO work plans7

Highlights

• Recommended measurements span the nine USGEO Societal Benefit Areas

• Of the recommendations that came out of the process– Roughly equal numbers of measurements facing gaps and

presenting significant opportunities– Substantial balance of both space-based and in situ

measurements were identified• Reinforced the need for diversity of measurements to achieve

scientific understanding– Ground truth / calibration– Course and fine-scale resolution

8

Applicability to ST-09-01

9

• Process parallels needs for Output 3– Would require review of the Work Plan as well as

elements including but not limited to• Existing science and/or technology plans• Output of US-09-01a

• Review process needs to be determined – Panel only or Panel then STC and/or Plenary or…?

• [whatever else…]