NSB-NPP-2016-8 

April 28, 2016 

Final Report of the Task Force on NEON Performance and Plans 

National Science Board
 

Task Force on NEON Performance and Plans
 

i 
 

 

 

 

NATIONAL SCIENCE BOARD
 

Dan E. Arvizu, Chairman, Emeritus Director and Chief Executive, National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, Colorado 

Kelvin K. Droegemeier, Vice Chairman, Vice President for Research, Regents’ Professor of Meteorology and Weathernews 

Chair Emeritus, University of Oklahoma, Norman 

John L. Anderson, Distinguished Professor, Chemical and Biological Engineering, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago 

Deborah L. Ball, William H. Payne Collegiate Chair, Arthur F. Thurnau Professor, Dean of the School of Education, 

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor 

Bonnie L. Bassler, Howard Hughes Medical Institute Investigator and Squibb Professor and Chair, Department of Molecular 

Biology, Princeton University, New Jersey 

Roger N. Beachy, Professor Emeritus, Department of Biology, Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri 

Arthur Bienenstock, Special Assistant to the President for Federal Research Policy and Director, Wallenberg Research Link, 

Stanford University, California 

Vinton G. Cerf, Vice President and Chief Internet Evangelist, Google, Mountain View, CA 

Vicki L. Chandler, Dean of Natural Sciences, Minerva Schools at KGI, San Francisco, CA 

Ruth David, Foreign Secretary, National Academy of Engineering, Washington, DC 

Inez Fung, Professor of Atmospheric Science, University of California, Berkeley 

Robert M. Groves, Provost and Gerald Campbell SJ Professor, Department of Mathematics and Statistics and Sociology, 

Georgetown University, Washington, DC 

James S. Jackson, Professor & Director, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor 

G. Peter Lepage, Professor of Physics, College of Arts and Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York 

Alan I. Leshner, Chief Executive Officer Emeritus, American Association for the Advancement of Science and Executive 

Publisher Emeritus, Science, Washington, DC 

W. Carl Lineberger, E.U. Condon Distinguished Professor of Chemistry and Fellow of JILA, University of Colorado, 

Boulder 

Stephen Mayo, Bren Professor of Biology and Chemistry, William K. Bowes Jr. Leadership Chair, Division of Biology and 

Biological Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena 

Sethuraman “Panch” Panchanathan, Senior Vice President, Office of Knowledge Enterprise Development, Arizona State 

University, Tempe 

G.P. “Bud” Peterson, President, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta 

Geraldine Richmond, Presidential Chair in Science and Professor of Chemistry, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, 

University of Oregon, Eugene; 2015 President, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC 

Anneila I. Sargent, Ira S. Bowen Professor of Astronomy, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena 

Diane L. Souvaine, Vice Provost for Research, Professor of Computer Science, Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts 

Robert J. Zimmer, President, University of Chicago, Illinois 

Maria T. Zuber, E.A. Griswold Professor of Geophysics and Vice President for Research, Massachusetts Institute of 

Technology, Cambridge 

Member ex officio: France A. Córdova, Director, National Science Foundation, Arlington, Virginia 

Michael L. Van Woert, Executive Officer, National Science Board and National Science Board Office Director, Arlington, 

Virginia 

NPP Task Force
 Kelvin Droegemeier, Chair
 

Diane Souvaine, Vice-Chair
 

Bonnie Bassler W. Carl Lineberger
 

Inez Fung Maria T. Zuber
 

G. Peter Lepage 

National Science Board Office 

Elise Lipkowitz, Liaison
 

John J. Veysey, Liaison 

ii 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONTENTS
 

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 4
 

Background: NPP Establishment and Charge .......................................................................................... 5
 

Principal Activities.................................................................................................................................. 6
 

Findings and Outcomes........................................................................................................................... 7
 

Recommendations................................................................................................................................... 8
 

Appendix A: Charge to the NSB ad Hoc Task Force on NEON Performance and Plans .......................... 9
 

Appendix B: Timeline of NEON-Related Activities August 2014-Present ............................................. 10
 

Appendix C: NSB Activities Related to NEON July 1999-February 2015.............................................. 12
 

Appendix D: List of NPP Meetings ....................................................................................................... 14
 

3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
 

This report documents the activities and contributions of the ad hoc Task Force on NEON 

Performance and Plans (NPP). From August 2015 to May 2016, NPP provided additional Board 

oversight of the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON), a Major Research 

Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC) project that the National Science Board 

(Board, NSB) approved in 2010. NPP’s work helped the Board fulfill its fiduciary responsibility 

for MREFC projects and bring this important project for the biological sciences back on track. 

This report describes how NSB and National Science Foundation (NSF) Senior Management 

partnered to address the challenges facing NEON, the Board’s lessons learned, and how NPP set 

the stage for full Board action and catalyzed improvements to address its findings. This report 

and its recommendations are intended to be useful to the Committee on Programs and Plans, the 

Subcommittee on Facilities, to NSB, and to NSF. 

It is also hoped that this final report, by memorializing the Task Force’s work at a time of 

transition in NSB leadership, contributes in some measure to addressing one of NPP’s key 

findings: the need to enhance documentation and transmittal of institutional memory of past 

Board discussions and actions pertaining to large facilities. 

4
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BACKGROUND: NPP ESTABLISHMENT AND CHARGE
 

In August 2015, NSF leadership provided the Committee on Programs and Plans (CPP) with an 

update on the status of the National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON), a Major Research 

Equipment and Facilities Construction (MREFC) project that began over a decade ago and 

whose construction the Board authorized in 2010. That update informed the Board that NSF was 

descoping NEON to ensure it would stay on budget and on schedule, since recent oversight 

activities had determined the project was on a course to be approximately $80 million over 

budget and delayed by as much as 18 months. The Board was informed that the descoping plan 

had been developed by a panel of experts that included Biology Directorate (BIO) Program Staff, 

NEON Inc. staff, members of the NEON Inc. Board of Directors, representatives from NEON 

Inc.’s Science, Technology and Education Advisory Committee (STEAC), and science 

community experts involved in the original NEON design. 

The August 2015 CPP discussion also surfaced significant challenges relating to reporting on the 

status of large facility projects and internal communication both within NSF and between NSF 

and the Board. Responding to the Director’s urgent efforts to get the NEON project back on 

track and the need to address associated process and communications-related challenges, NSB 

Chair Dan Arvizu tasked NSB Vice Chair, Kelvin Droegemeier, with leading an ad hoc Task 

Force on NEON Performance and Plans (NPP). 

The seven-member NPP Task Force was formed in late August 2015 and charged1 to receive 

“frequent reports from NSF on the current performance and future plans of the entire NEON 

project,” to “coordinate its oversight and monitoring activities with NSF leadership, other NSF 

Offices and Board Committees,” and “assist NSF through activities not limited to reviewing and 

evaluating NEON-related materials, making suggestions, and posing questions.” Over time, NPP 

took on the role of considering “NSB Lessons Learned,” an activity designed to complement 

NSF’s externally-contracted “root cause analysis.” After NSF decided to seek a new 

management organization for NEON in December 2015, NPP played a key role in preparing the 

Board for the vote authorizing an award to a new management organization. 

Exploration of process and communications challenges, a task originally given to SCF, was put 

on hold pending the outcome of NSF’s “root cause analysis.” A report on NSF’s “root cause” 

analysis is anticipated at the Board’s May 2016 meeting. It is the hope of the NPP Task Force 

that NSB will revisit these matters, and if necessary consider steps beyond those already taken, 

once the results of the “root cause analysis” are in hand and time-sensitive issues are addressed. 

1 See Appendix A: Charge to the NSB ad hoc Task Force on NEON Performance and Plans 

5
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

PRINCIPAL ACTIVITIES
 

Between September 2015 and May 2016, NPP served as the focal point for the Board’s NEONrelated activities. A list of NPP’s meetings is in Appendix D. Activities included: 

1.	 Conducting regular project oversight. NPP received regular updates from NSF leadership and 

the NPP Chair on the latest project developments and NSF’s response. It also reviewed and 

discussed over 60 written documents including those generated by NSF, NEON, Inc., the 

Office of the Inspector General, and other parties. See Appendix B and NPP meeting minutes 

for further details. These discussions delved into the timeline and origin of challenges, 

looked at NSF’s management structure and roles, considered the Foundation’s options, and 

carefully examined reports on how planned descoping could impact costs and science goals. 

2.	 Preparing the Board following NSF’s decision on December 11, 2015 to seek a new 

management organization for NEON. The Task Force asked questions and gathered 

information about potential new management organizations, selection and vetting plans, 

engagement of the research community, and how NSF was managing morale at NEON, Inc. 

3.	 Exploring the Board’s History with NEON and developing NSB “Lessons Learned.” 

NPP looked at past NSB minutes, transcripts, information items, and resolutions to trace and 

understand the Board’s oversight of this project, to determine lessons learned for NSB, and to 

identify possible improvements to NSB’s processes. In particular, the Task Force tracked the 

issues raised in past Board discussions and reviewed the quality and timeliness of 

information presented to the Board. To assist, NSBO staff examined minutes and transcripts 

of NSB’s NEON discussions from 2007-present and developed a chronology that looked at 

how discussions proceeded from one meeting to the next. 

4. Helping disseminate information to the full Board and in public sessions. 

6
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FINDINGS AND OUTCOMES
 

The Task Force’s examination of past NSB actions helped to identify several areas for 

improvement. Some of these have been addressed by the Director’s parallel initiatives, and 

others are currently being addressed as NSB and the Director act on the recommendations of the 

jointly commissioned National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA) report National 

Science Foundation: Use of Cooperative Agreements to Support Large Scale Investment in 

Research.

2 

First, NPP found a need for more timely, decision-quality information, including advisory and 

external reports. The newly created committee processes and protocols for regular and timely 

sharing of information3 should help address some of these concerns, but NSB members also need 

to critically evaluate all of the information that accompanies Board actions. 

Second, it became readily apparent that a need exists to more effectively promote a culture where 

sharing of bad news is seen as important to effective management and where bad news can 

without fear be brought quickly to NSF senior management and the Board. The Task Force notes 

that the Director has taken a number of positive steps, including through the Large Facility 

Office, to encourage such a culture. 

Third, NPP found that NSB needs to attend to both the science and management aspects of 

facility projects when making award decisions. The Board’s ongoing efforts to add members 

with management and business expertise, as recommended by the NAPA report, will help 

address this finding. 

Fourth, NPP found that NSB could benefit from deeper understanding of how NSF uses 

cooperative agreements to manage large facilities. Developing this expertise within a subset of 

the Board, such as the Subcommittee on Facilities, would likely be most effective. 

Finally, NPP found a need for greater continuity in its large facility oversight and management. 

Large facilities require periodic Board action over timescales of 40 or more years. However, 

Board members have six-year terms, and many members of NSF senior management are on fouryear Intergovernmental Personnel Act (IPA) appointments. To enhance institutional memory and 

track facility issues over time and across NSB cohorts, NSBO is developing a précis of past NSB 

discussions for each large facility. These documents are becoming a routine part of the NSB lead 

reviewer process for action items before CPP. 

Among the principal outcomes of the Foundation’s work are a new Board authorization (NSB2016-16)4

, a new management award for NEON, plans for continued NSB monitoring and 

oversight of NEON, as well as a model for how NSF and NSB can jointly address a troubled 

facility project. 

2 http://www.napawash.org/2015/1785-national-science-foundation-use-of-cooperative-agreements-to-support-large-scale-investment-inresearch.html 

3 Facility Portal and Bi-monthly Facility Reports 4 See Appendix G 

7
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATIONS
 

Based on our findings and our “Lessons Learned,” NPP offers the following recommendations: 

Recommendation 1: NSF and NSB should continue to explore best ways to create a culture of 

information sharing and to furnish NSF senior management and the Board with timely, decisionquality information, including advisory and external reports. 

Recommendation 2: NSB should develop and maintain a précis for each large facility as a 

means of fostering institutional memory. Continue to make the facility précis a standard part of 

CPP processes to ensure that issues raised in past Board discussions are addressed. 

Recommendation 3: NSB should continue moving toward a risk-based approach to facilities, 

with NSB devoting more time to oversight of projects with significant or perceived management 

risks. This should include attention to emerging risks. As part of developing a risk-based 

approach and sharing decision-quality information, ensure that facility reports to the Board and 

Senior Management include information on trends that speak clearly and directly to identified 

facility challenges. 

Recommendation 4: Re-integrate NEON into NSB’s normal committee processes for large 

facility oversight and action. 

Recommendation 5: The Board, its committees, and NSF senior management should consider 

and, as appropriate, address the findings and recommendations related to the pending NSF rootcause analysis. 

Recommendation 6: In light of the extraordinary steps taken by the Foundation to get the 

NEON project back on track, the nominal expiration of the Board’s authorization of initial 

operations (NSB-13-7)5 in August of 2017, and the Board’s revised policy on the recompetition 

of major facilities (NSB-2015-46), NSF Senior Management and the Board should jointly 

consider the optimal time to recompete NEON management. 

Recommendation 7: NSF senior management and NSB should jointly consider how NSF should 

respond to potential significant increases in project costs or changes in scope of the NEON 

project. 

5 See Appendix F 

8
 
 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX A: CHARGE TO THE NSB AD HOC TASK FORCE
 

ON NEON PERFORMANCE AND PLANS
 

On behalf of the National Science Board, the ad hoc Task Force on NEON Performance and 

Plans will receive frequent reports from NSF on the current performance and future plans of the 

entire NEON project, including NSF management activities, and NEON Inc., including NEON’s 

management and its Board of Directors. In so doing, the Task Force will coordinate its oversight 

and monitoring activities with NSF leadership, other NSF Offices and Board Committees as 

appropriate, and report regularly to the Board, Board Chairman, Board Executive Committee, 

and NSF Director. The Task Force will assist NSF through activities that include but are not 

limited to reviewing and evaluating NEON-related materials, making suggestions, posing 

questions, and visiting NEON facilities and sites, including NEON Inc. corporate headquarters, 

as necessary. The Task Force does not serve the role of approving or denying NSF actions, or 

making decisions on behalf of the Board, and will exist until discharged by the Board Chair. 

9
 
APPENDIX B: TIMELINE OF NEON-RELATED ACTIVITIES 

AUGUST 2014-PRESENT 

August 2014 

•	 NSF-NEON, Inc. agree to replan to bring project in within cost and schedule 

November-December 2014 

•	 NSF begins to think that project de-scoping may be necessary 

February 2015 

•	 CPP briefed on NEON; no reference made to project difficulties 

May 2015 

•	 NSF sends warning letters to NEON, Inc. concerning delays and cost overruns 

June 2015 

•	 NSF learns that NEON is on a trajectory to overspend by approximately $86M 

July 2015 

•	 De-scoping plan developed by NSF, NEON, Inc., the NEON, Inc. Board, and the STEAC 

chair to constrain costs and ensure timely delivery 

•	 De-scoping letter issued 

August 2015 

•	 NSB and Congress briefed on projected over-runs, de-scoping plan 

•	 NSB decides to create NPP Task Force 

September 2015 

•	 Project moved from Biology Directorate’s Central Office to the Division of Biological 

Infrastructure 

•	 NPP Task Force holds initial meetings with focus on document review 

•	 NEON, Inc. CEO fired 

•	 General Abrahamson hired to conduct a root cause analysis 

•	 BIO AC subcommittee begins study on descope’s impact on NEON science 

•	 NEON Inc. submits a draft efficiencies plan 

•	 OIG issues Alert Memo 

•	 House Science, Space, and Technology Subcommittees holds hearing 

•	 NSF Director establishes “Watchlist” and adds NEON to it 

October 2015 

•	 NEON submits revised project planning documentation to NSF 

•	 OIG announces inspection into NSF oversight of NEON’s contingency spending 

•	 NPP continues to review documents and holds full Board telecon 

10
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

November 2015 

•	 NSF review of project documentation continues 

•	 Results of BIO AC subcommittee report received 

•	 NAPA Phase II study report received 

•	 NPP considers Board “lessons learned” and updates full Board and the public on its 

activities at November meeting 

•	 Business Systems Review of NEON, Inc./ evaluation of viability 

December 2015 

•	 NEON, Inc. submits revised Total Project Cost proposal on 12/1 

•	 NSF reviews cost reasonableness 

•	 NSF announces intent to seek new management entity for NEON; NPP briefed that day 

•	 NSF begins implementing process for expedited search for a new management entity 

January 2016 

•	 NSF Director makes site visit to NEON, Inc. 

•	 NSF Senior Leadership are on site as prospective management entities visit NEON, Inc. 

as part of preparation of white papers 

•	 NPP briefed on these developments in a teleconference 

February 2016 

•	 NSF receives and reviews final whitepapers and selects preferred new management entity 

•	 NSF and NSB develop plan for Board action regarding a new management entity 

•	 NPP provides full Board Briefing to NSB 

•	 NPP members serve as lead reviewers for modified selection process 

•	 NSB furnished with the full package of materials from the modified 

March 2016 

•	 NSB approves award 

•	 NSF makes initial award to Battelle Memorial Institute to cover a 90-day transition 

period 

•	 NSF receives results of cost estimate 

May 2016 

•	 NSB receives update on Battelle transition, financials, and the results of the root cause 

analyses 

August 2016 

•	 Approximate end of the NSB-authorized 5-year initial construction award. 

August 2017 

•	 Approximate end of the NSB-authorized 3-year initial operations award. 

11
 
 

 

 

 

 

APPENDIX C: NSB ACTIVITIES RELATED TO NEON JULY 

1999-FEBRUARY 2015
 

Date Activity 

July 1999 NSB briefed on NEON as part of MRE/Infrastructure discussion 

June 2000 Written Information Item on NEON (NSB/CPP-00-10) 

August 2000 CPP (NSB/CPP-00-18) briefing on NEON 

October 2001 Resolution on NSB Major Research Equipment Priorities (NSB-01-180) set 

NEON as one of the three highest priorities in the budget. 

April 2003 NSB report Science and Engineering Infrastructure for the 21st Century (NSB02-190) cited NEON as a needed “major distributed research platform.” 

March 2003 Plenary Session science presentation on NEON (NSB-03-58) 

May 2004 NEON Summary for NSB, for CPP discussion of large facilities prioritization 

March 2005 NEON included in NSF Facility Plan, March 2005 

May 2005 NEON Summary for NSB, for CPP discussion of large facilities prioritization 

March 2006 Presentation on NEON 

July 2006 CSB informed of NEON rebaselining, including higher funding levels in FY 

2008 and out-years 

August 2006 CPP discussion of 2006 NSF Facility Plan and re-examination of priority order 

of MREFC candidates 

July 2007 MREFC and R&RA Funding for NEON, data provided by Budget, Finance, and 

Award Management (BFA) as part of Recompetition Briefing Book for NSB 

December 2007 Resolution: Organizational and Project Management Support to Complete NEON (NSB07-133) 

August 2008 Extensive discussions over year on MREFC oversight 

August 2009 CPP Information Item: NEON – notify board in final design expect two actions in 

2010 

December 2009 CPP Information Item: NEON finished and passed FDR in Nov. 09; action 

expected in Feb. 10 for one year bridge funding prior to begin of construction 

12
 
February 2010 Resolution: Award for Final Pre-Construction activities for the NEON Project 

(NSB-10-6) 

May 2010 Resolution: Award for Construction of the NEON (NSB-10-40) 

February 2011 CPP Information Item: Update on Airborne Observation Platform, NEON 

July 2011 CPP Information Item: Update on NEON construction 

July 2012 CPP Information Item: Update on construction, notification of O&M award in 

February 

February 2013 Resolution: NEON Operations and Maintenance (NSB-13-7) 

February 2014 CPP Written Information Item: Update on Construction 

February 2015 CPP Information Item: Update on Science Engagement, Construction, and NSF 

Oversight 

13
 
APPENDIX D: LIST OF NPP MEETINGS
 

September 4, 2015
 

September 11, 2015
 

September 17, 2015 

October 3, 2015 

October 28, 2015 (Full Board invited)
 

November 18, 2015 (Full Board present)
 

November 19, 2015 (Full Board present)
 

December 11, 2015
 

January 28, 2016 (Full Board invited)
 

February 17, 2016 (Full Board present)
 

May 5, 2016 (Full Board present)
 

14