GAO blasts NASA for purposely failing to control the budget of its SLS rocket
In a new report [pdf] released yesterday, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) strongly blasted NASA’s non-budgeting process for financing the costs for this SLS rocket, which appear specifically designed to allow those costs to rise uncontrollably.
This one sentence from the report says it all:
NASA does not plan to measure production costs to monitor the affordability of the SLS program.
That non-plan is actually in direct defiance of four different reports by both the GAO and NASA’s inspector general over the past decade, all of which found that NASA was not using standard budgeting practices with SLS and which all demanded it do so forthwith. As this new report notes in reviewing this history, in every case NASA failed to follow these recommendations, and instead created budgetary methods designed to instead obscure the program’s cost.
This report notes that NASA continues to do so.
Neither the 5-year production and operation cost estimate nor the annual budget requests are a substitute for a cost baseline, and are poor tools to measure cost performance over time. As of July 2023, the program has not updated its 5-year production and operations cost estimate to reflect the current expected costs for the SLS program. Without regular updates, cost estimates lose their usefulness as predictors of likely outcomes and as benchmarks for meaningfully tracking progress. As a result, it is unclear what the current estimates are to produce SLS hardware covered by the fiscal year 2024 budget request.
Essentially, NASA has been given a blank check by Congress for its SLS program. For decades NASA has gotten this blank check because SLS has been a program wholly conceived and financed by Congress. It was not a rocket that NASA proposed, or even really needs at this point, with much better and cheaper options available from the private sector. Having been given it, however, NASA management has used it to provide the agency a large stream of ready cash, to both increase its staffing in congressional districts (thus increasing its power) while sending lots of cash to the big space contractors (mostly Boeing) that it has favored for decades.
I doubt this GAO report will change much. Congress likes NASA, and despite strong pressure from the Republican House leadership to impose real cuts on many programs, NASA’s budget has so far gone unscathed from those cuts. Expect Congress to make some ineffectual complaints about NASA’s poor budget practices relating to SLS, and then expect NASA to continue them, as it has for the past decade despite repeated negative reports from the GAO and NASA’s inspector general.
Readers!
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black. Your support allows me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Only now does it appear that Washington might finally recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are four ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation or subscription:
4. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above.
In a new report [pdf] released yesterday, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) strongly blasted NASA’s non-budgeting process for financing the costs for this SLS rocket, which appear specifically designed to allow those costs to rise uncontrollably.
This one sentence from the report says it all:
NASA does not plan to measure production costs to monitor the affordability of the SLS program.
That non-plan is actually in direct defiance of four different reports by both the GAO and NASA’s inspector general over the past decade, all of which found that NASA was not using standard budgeting practices with SLS and which all demanded it do so forthwith. As this new report notes in reviewing this history, in every case NASA failed to follow these recommendations, and instead created budgetary methods designed to instead obscure the program’s cost.
This report notes that NASA continues to do so.
Neither the 5-year production and operation cost estimate nor the annual budget requests are a substitute for a cost baseline, and are poor tools to measure cost performance over time. As of July 2023, the program has not updated its 5-year production and operations cost estimate to reflect the current expected costs for the SLS program. Without regular updates, cost estimates lose their usefulness as predictors of likely outcomes and as benchmarks for meaningfully tracking progress. As a result, it is unclear what the current estimates are to produce SLS hardware covered by the fiscal year 2024 budget request.
Essentially, NASA has been given a blank check by Congress for its SLS program. For decades NASA has gotten this blank check because SLS has been a program wholly conceived and financed by Congress. It was not a rocket that NASA proposed, or even really needs at this point, with much better and cheaper options available from the private sector. Having been given it, however, NASA management has used it to provide the agency a large stream of ready cash, to both increase its staffing in congressional districts (thus increasing its power) while sending lots of cash to the big space contractors (mostly Boeing) that it has favored for decades.
I doubt this GAO report will change much. Congress likes NASA, and despite strong pressure from the Republican House leadership to impose real cuts on many programs, NASA’s budget has so far gone unscathed from those cuts. Expect Congress to make some ineffectual complaints about NASA’s poor budget practices relating to SLS, and then expect NASA to continue them, as it has for the past decade despite repeated negative reports from the GAO and NASA’s inspector general.
Readers!
Please consider supporting my work here at Behind the Black. Your support allows me the freedom and ability to analyze objectively the ongoing renaissance in space, as well as the cultural changes -- for good or ill -- that are happening across America. Fourteen years ago I wrote that SLS and Orion were a bad ideas, a waste of money, would be years behind schedule, and better replaced by commercial private enterprise. Only now does it appear that Washington might finally recognize this reality.
In 2020 when the world panicked over COVID I wrote that the panic was unnecessary, that the virus was apparently simply a variation of the flu, that masks were not simply pointless but if worn incorrectly were a health threat, that the lockdowns were a disaster and did nothing to stop the spread of COVID. Only in the past year have some of our so-called experts in the health field have begun to recognize these facts.
Your help allows me to do this kind of intelligent analysis. I take no advertising or sponsors, so my reporting isn't influenced by donations by established space or drug companies. Instead, I rely entirely on donations and subscriptions from my readers, which gives me the freedom to write what I think, unencumbered by outside influences.
You can support me either by giving a one-time contribution or a regular subscription. There are four ways of doing so:
1. Zelle: This is the only internet method that charges no fees. All you have to do is use the Zelle link at your internet bank and give my name and email address (zimmerman at nasw dot org). What you donate is what I get.
2. Patreon: Go to my website there and pick one of five monthly subscription amounts, or by making a one-time donation.
3. A Paypal Donation or subscription:
4. Donate by check, payable to Robert Zimmerman and mailed to
Behind The Black
c/o Robert Zimmerman
P.O.Box 1262
Cortaro, AZ 85652
You can also support me by buying one of my books, as noted in the boxes interspersed throughout the webpage or shown in the menu above.
An expendable launcher with a single customer and a flight of once every two years, what could possibly go wrong?
Fiscal Responsibility . . . The final frontier, forever to be left unexplored.
It’s not that NASA’s fiscal irresponsibility could not be fixed without cutting the budget. All it takes is holding senior management accountable. By accountable I mean giving them targets and firing them if those targets are not met. If they cannot be fired, relieve them of their duties, and reassign them to an office in a closet with a bare steel desk and nothing to do (and no computer). They will quit when they get bored enough.
Won’t happen, though. Seriously, it would fix the problem if they did it.
“”””Seawriter
September 8, 2023 at 11:31 am
It’s not that NASA’s fiscal irresponsibility could not be fixed without cutting the budget. All it takes is holding senior management accountable. By accountable I mean giving them targets and firing them if those targets are not met. If they cannot be fired, relieve them of their duties, and reassign them to an office in a closet with a bare steel desk and nothing to do (and no computer). They will quit when they get bored enough.
Won’t happen, though. Seriously, it would fix the problem if they did it.”””””
Kicking butt and taking names works well in movies and novels. In real life it requires knowing what you are doing, having the motivation to do it, and exactly who to do it to. There is no evidence of this at high level NASA or in the congressional control of same.
To get the results you want, it will take a knowledgeable individual fully empowered to act, kinda like a CEO with compensation mainly vested in stock value. I see no cultural route to do that within the existing structures. Only as private enterprise gains momentum enough will SOME of these problems wither a bit.
My guess is the GAO serves the same function in the government as the Dilbert cartoons do in the office. It gives voice to concerns that no one is going to do anything about and everybody knows that nobody is going to do about. It is a safe way for the Federal Government to vent about its own failings so that people within the system don’t go nuts.
Cloudy—excellent observation. Kind of like how these chat/rant boards serve us.
The most recent Perun video (search on YouTube if you’re not aware of him; he’s very, very good) is about military procurement and just this issue: The system is working as designed. This isn’t like corruption, which everyone at least nominally agrees is bad, but rather trying to please as many constituencies as possible.
It’s a fascinating problem. Economic efficiency is far, far down the list of priorities – by design.