FINANCIAL REPORT

FY 2021 AGENCY

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration
PERSEVERANCE ROVER TAKES TO MARS

This illustration shows the events that occur in the final minutes of the nearly seven-month journey 

that NASA’s Perseverance rover takes to Mars. Hundreds of critical events must execute perfectly 

and exactly on time for the rover to land on Mars safely on Feb. 18, 2021.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/JPL-Caltech

COVER IMAGE

An illustration of NASA’s Perseverance rover landing safely on Mars. 

Hundreds of critical events must execute perfectly and exactly on 

time for the rover to land safely on Feb. 18, 2021.

At about 6,900 feet (2,100 meters) above the surface, the rover 

separates from the backshell, and fires up the descent stage engines. 

As the descent stage levels out and slows to its final descent speed 

of about 1.7 mph (2.7 kph), it initiates the “skycrane” maneuver. About 

12 seconds before touchdown, roughly 66 feet (20 meters) above 

the surface, the descent stage lowers the rover on a set of cables 

about 21 feet (6.4 meters) long. The rover unstows its mobility system, 

locking its legs and wheels into landing position.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/JPL

COVER IMAGE CAPTION AND CREDITS

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 01
TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION & ANALYSIS 6

Welcome to NASA 7

Achieving Our Vision and Mission 8

Organizational Structure 9

Centers and Facilities 10

NASA by the Numbers 11

Mission Performance 12

Strategic Plan Framework 13

Strategic Goals and Objectives 14

Strategic Goals and Highlights 16

Assessment Approach 17

FY 2021 Performance Assessment 18

Financial Performance 23

Financial Highlights 24

Overview of Financial Position 24

Results of Operations 27

Sources of Funding 29

Financial and Performance Impact of COVID-19 30

Limitations of the Financial Statements 31

Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance 32

Internal Control Framework 33

Enterprise Risk Management 35

Management Assurances 37

Financial Systems Strategies 38

Foward Looking 39

FY 2022 and Beyond 40

SECTION 2

FINANCIAL SECTION 41

Message from the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) 42

Introduction to the Principal Financial Statements 43

Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental 

Information 44

Letter from the Inspector General on Audit 70

Independent Auditor’s Report 72

SECTION 3

OTHER INFORMATION 79

Office of Inspector General (OIG) Report on 

NASA’s Top Management and Performance 

Challenges

81

Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top 

Management and Performance Challenges 135

Payment Integrity Information Act (PIIA) 

Reporting 148

Undisbursed Balances in Expired Grant 

Accounts 151

Grants Programs Information 152

Civil Monetary Penalty Adjustment for Inflation 153

Summary of Financial Statement Audit and 

Management Assurances 154

INTRODUCTION

MESSAGE FROM THE ADMINISTRATOR 4

HERstory: Past, Present, and Future 5

SECTION 4

APPENDIX 156

Certificate of Excellence in Accountability 

Reporting (CEAR) Award 157

Glossary of Acronyms 158

Connect with NASA 163

Acknowledgments 164
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 03

LEARN MORE

What is Next Gen STEM?

NASA’s Office of STEM Engagement executed 

a series of efforts to develop STEM products 

and opportunities that provide a platform for 

students to contribute to NASA’s endeavors 

in exploration and discovery. These missiondriven activities include over 20 evidencebased products and opportunities to engage 

students in authentic STEM experiences. 

NASA is working to provide mission driven 

opportunities that enhance STEM literacy 

and help build a vibrant and diverse next 

generation STEM workforce. See NASA’s 

STEM engagement activities at https://www.

nasa.gov/stem.

NASA STEM Engagement Highlights

Interns use their creativity and innovation to 

work on projects impacting NASA’s mission, 

such as returning to the Moon. Applicants 

for this internship must be U.S. citizens. As a 

NASA intern, you will be part of an amazing 

team that is dedicated to space exploration.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA

NASA Awards $18 Million 

for Research at Minority 

Serving Institutions

A MUREP student explores 

careers in science and 

engineering at NASA.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA

NASA Awards More Than $7 Million to Minority-Serving Institutions Over Three Years

Creating a future for humanity in the stars and continuing to improve life on Earth are 

tasks NASA can only achieve by involving all of humanity. To challenge the barriers to 

entry for students from diverse backgrounds in engineering, NASA’s Minority University 

Research and Education Project, or MUREP, called upon Minority Serving Institutions to 

develop proposals for how they could use NASA funding to strengthen their support for 

underrepresented communities.

Today, NASA has chosen six universities to win the MUREP Inclusion Across the Nation of 

Communities of Learners of Underrepresented Discoverers in Engineering and Science, 

or INCLUDES, award. Each award provides up to $1.2 million for a three-year period to 

implement the institution’s proposal.

The selected institutions are:

Alabama State University

Florida A&M University

J.F. Drake State Technical College

Navajo Technical College

Texas A&M Kingsville

University of Massachusetts, Boston

NASA IN STEM

Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics

INSPIRE | ENGAGE | EDUCATE | EMPLOY

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA Goddard/Chris Gunn

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 04

I am pleased to present the Fiscal Year 2021 Agency Financial Report 

(AFR) for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). 

NASA has achieved amazing accomplishments over the past year. 

These include the launch of American astronauts from American 

soil on American rockets, the landing of the Perseverance rover on 

the surface of Mars, successful flight of the Ingenuity helicopter on 

that far off world, and the continued steady progress of our Artemis 

program to return American men and women to the Moon and beyond. 

This report summarizes many of these achievements toward a more 

equitable, sustainable, and inspired Nation in alignment with our Vision 

and Mission. Consistent with the lofty goals encompassed by our 

Vision and Mission, our activities are aligned to four strategic themes 

– DISCOVER, EXPLORE, DEVELOP, and ENABLE – which are

articulated in our 2018 Strategic Plan. This AFR provides an accounting

of our mission and programmatic performance against these strategic

goals. Transparency about our performance and stewardship of

taxpayer resources is at the center of the confidence we are proud to

maintain with the American public. 

Operating within our coronavirus (COVID-19) framework for almost 21 

months, I could not be prouder of our team and how we have adapted to 

these unforeseen challenges. From the thousands of NASA employees 

working from their kitchen tables, dens, and bedrooms, to the missioncritical employees finding new and safe ways to work and collaborate 

onsite, our teams have done a fantastic job of keeping each other safe 

while also keeping the mission moving forward. Our determination and 

tenacity during this time has not gone unnoticed, as NASA was recently 

ranked number one among large Federal agencies for our response to 

the COVID-19 pandemic by the Partnership for Public Service. 

I want to particularly highlight a few hallmark achievements of the past 

year. On February 18th, the Mars 2020 Perseverance rover landed on 

the Red Planet to begin exploration and address high-priority science 

goals and on September 10th collected the first two samples of Martian 

rock ever taken. The Perseverance rover mission will help enable 

human exploration of the planet in coming years as it demonstrates 

a new and more precise entry approach. Our plan for further human 

exploration of our solar system, including missions to Mars, starts 

with the Moon. NASA is committed to returning American astronauts, 

including the first woman and the first person of color, to the Moon 

through the Artemis program. 

While we look outward to the Moon, Mars, and beyond, we understand 

the importance of our own planet. As climate change continues to 

contribute to more intense and destructive disasters, we know that 

NASA has a critical role in meeting the moment demanded of all of us 

in response to this urgent threat. NASA contributes significantly to what 

we know about Earth’s changing climate. Demonstrating our significant 

focus in this area, we announced the formation of the Earth System 

Observatory this year, a new set of Earth-focused missions to provide 

key information to guide efforts related to climate change, disaster 

mitigation, fighting forest fires, and improving real-time agricultural 

processes. 

Finally, and not least important, NASA continues to play an important 

role in supporting STEM education and outreach in underrepresented 

communities to create the next generation of scientists and explorers, 

supporting hundreds of thousands of good high-paying jobs and 

practical technological innovation across the United States, and 

catalyzing the creation of a healthy and vibrant commercial space 

industry. 

To provide transparency into our business strategy, a full accounting 

of our financial statements in accordance with Generally Accepted 

Accounting Principles is presented within the accompanying financial 

reports. NASA is committed to delivering credible, quality data and 

important information regarding the Agency’s fiscal operations. We 

follow standard financial reporting practices, ensuring appropriate 

controls with efficient and effective management of appropriated and 

reimbursable Agency funds. Under the leadership of the Office of the 

Chief Financial Officer, for 11 straight years, NASA has received an 

unmodified “clean” opinion on its financial statements, with no reported 

material weaknesses, signifying our internal controls are operating 

effectively to provide assurance of complete and reliable financial 

data. The financial and performance data presented in this report are 

complete and reliable.

I am inspired and humbled by the examples of the great men and 

women of NASA. We will continue to push the boundaries of space 

exploration, scientific discovery, climate understanding and action, and 

technological breakthrough in the next year and beyond. We will do all 

of this and more because that is what NASA does, and no one does it 

better.

INTRODUCTION — November 15, 2021

MESSAGE FROM THE ADMINISTRATOR

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 04

NASA’s Major Themes and Strategic Goals

IV. ENABLE 

Optimize capabilities

and operations.

III. DEVELOP

Address national 

challenges and catalyze 

economic growth.

II. EXPLORE 

Extend human presence 

deeper into space and to 

the Moon for sustainable 

long-term exploration and 

utilization.

I. DISCOVER

Expand human

knowledge through new 

scientific discoveries.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 05

INTRODUCTION — HERstory: Past, Present, and Future

HERstory: Past, Present, and Future

Women have made extraordinary contributions to NASA’s rich history serving in many roles from Deputy Administrators, to engineers and 

to astronauts. Take a stroll through time and read about the wonderful contributions women have made – in the past, present, and future. 

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 05

FIRST WOMAN GRAPHIC NOVELS AND INTERACTIVE EXPERIENCES

First Woman tells the tale of Callie Rodriguez, the first woman to explore the Moon. While Callie is a fictional 

character, the first female astronaut and person of color will soon set foot on the Moon – a historic milestone and 

part of upcoming NASA missions. Interact with the graphic novel content by scanning the QR code. SCAN ME

Dr. Irene D. Long 

Dr. Long was the first African-American female to serve in the Senior Executive Service (SES) at Kennedy Space Center (KSC). 

As chief medical officer at the Florida spaceport, she was the first female and the first minority to hold that position. Her NASA 

career spanned 31 years. She helped create the Spaceflight and Life Sciences Training Program at Kennedy, in partnership with 

Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University (FAMU), a program that encouraged more women and minority college students 

to explore careers in science. Dr. Long retired from NASA in 2010 and died in 2020. PHOTO CREDIT — NASA

PAST

Dr. Kalpana Chawla 

Selected by NASA in December 1994, Dr. Chawla was the prime robotic arm operator on STS-87 in 1997, the fourth U.S. 

Microgravity Payload flight. STS-87 focused on how the weightless environment of space affects various physical processes. Dr. 

Chawla died on STS-107 in 2003. Prior to STS-107, Dr. Chawla logged more than 376 hours in space. PHOTO CREDIT — NASA

PAST

Dr. Swati Mohan 

Swati Mohan emigrated from India to the United States when she was 1 year old, and was raised in Northern Virginia /Washington 

DC metro area. She completed her B.S. from Cornell University in Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering, and her M.S. and 

Ph.D from Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Aeronautics/Astronautics. She is currently the Mars 2020 Guidance, 

Navigation, and Controls Operations Lead, at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, CA. PHOTO CREDIT — NASA

PRESENT

Women in STEM 

A “Houston We Have a Podcast” is the official podcast of the NASA Johnson Space Center from Houston, Texas, home for 

NASA’s astronauts and Mission Control Center. Listen to the brightest minds of America’s space agency – astronauts, engineers, 

scientists and program leaders – discuss exciting topics in engineering, science and technology, sharing their personal stories 

and expertise on every aspect of human spaceflight. Learn more about how the work being done will help send humans forward 

to the Moon and on to Mars in the Artemis program. PHOTO CREDIT — NASA

FUTURE

Diana Trujillo 

Diana Trujillo, an aerospace engineer, is currently Technical Group Supervisor for Sequence Planning and Execution and a Tactical 

Mission Lead for the Mars Perseverance rover. Born and raised in Colombia, Trujillo immigrated to the U.S. at the age of 17 to 

pursue her dream of working for NASA. While enrolled in English-as-a-second-language courses, she also worked full time to 

support her studies in community college and later the University of Florida and University of Maryland. PHOTO CREDIT — NASA

PRESENT
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 06

Chemist Trey Barnes prepares a gas sample for injection into a gas chromatography-mass spectrometry system 

preconcentrator for analyzing trace level gas contaminants inside NASA Engineering’s Analytical Laboratories at Kennedy 

Space Center in Florida on July 7, 2021.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/Frank Michaux

MANAGEMENT ’S DISCUSSION

AND ANALYSIS

SECTION 1

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 06
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 07

— Welcome to NASA

WELCOME TO NASA

NASA 

inspires the world through space exploration and

new scientific discoveries. Since NASA’s inception in 

1958 to the present day, our spacecraft have visited every planet in the 

solar system and begun the journey into interstellar space. NASA uses 

the vantage points of ground, air, and space to track and study the effects 

of climate change. We are continuing the human exploration of space 

through the Artemis program. NASA aeronautics has made contributions 

to every U.S. commercial aircraft and U.S. air traffic control tower that 

help improve efficiency and safety, and now we are striving to make air 

transportation more environmentally sustainable.

NASA demonstrates stewardship of its resources and accountability 

for results through compliance with the Chief Financial Officers Act of 

1990 (CFO Act)1 and the Government Performance and Results Act 

Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA)2. Financial aspects of the Agency’s 

business operations are accounted for according to U.S. Generally 

Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). GAAP, for Federal entities, are 

the standards prescribed by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory 

Board (FASAB). 

NASA presents both performance and financial results of operations by 

strategic goals as identified in the NASA 2018 Strategic Plan3. Highlights 

1 Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990 (CFO Act) https://govinfo.library.unt.edu/npr/library/misc/cfo.html

2 Government Performance and Results Act Modernization Act of 2010 (GPRAMA) https://www.congress.gov/111/plaws/publ352/PLAW111publ352.pdf

3 NASA 2018 Strategic Plan https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/6-nasa_2018_strategic_plan.pdf

4 Federal Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996 (FFMIA) https://www.congress.gov/bill/104th-congress/house-bill/4319

5 OMB Circular A-123, Management’s Responsibility for Enterprise Risk Management and Internal Control https://www.whitehouse.gov/

sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/memoranda/2016/m-16-17.pdf

The AFR presents the Agency’s audited FY 2021 and FY 2020 financial statements and disclosures, the related independent auditors’ 

audit opinion, required supplemental information, and other information. The FY 2021 AFR can be found on NASA’s website at Agency 

Financial Reports | NASA.

The growing list of “firsts” for 

Perseverance, NASA’s newest six-wheeled 

robot on the Martian surface, includes 

converting some of the Red Planet’s 

thin, carbon dioxide-rich atmosphere 

into oxygen. A toaster-size, experimental 

instrument aboard Perseverance called the 

Mars Oxygen In-Situ Resource Utilization 

Experiment (MOXIE) accomplished the 

task. The test took place April 20, the 

60th Martian day, or sol, since the mission 

landed Feb. 18.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/JPL-Caltech

of key program activities contributing to each strategic goal are provided in the Mission Performance section (starting 

on page 12). A high-level summary of the linkage between program results and the cost of operations is available in 

the Statement of Net Cost (SNC), found in the Financial section (starting on page 41). The SNC presents comparative 

net cost of operations during FY 2020 and FY 2021 by strategic goal and for the Agency as a whole. In addition, 

the Financial Highlights, in the Financial Performance section explain any significant changes in NASA’s financial 

condition from FY 2020 to FY 2021. 

Financial systems that meet requirements of the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996 (FFMIA)4

are vital to NASA’s financial management program. The AFR describes NASA’s compliance with the FFMIA, as well as 

the built-in checks and balances required by the Office of Management and Budget’s Circular A-123, Management’s 

Responsibility for Enterprise Risk Management and Internal Control5, which places responsibility for internal 

controls over financial reporting on Agency management for the purpose of safeguarding assets and improving 

efficiency and effectiveness of operations. 

DID YOU KNOW?
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 08

 Mission

Lead an innovative and sustainable program of exploration 

with commercial and international partners to enable human 

expansion across the solar system and bring new knowledge 

and opportunities back to Earth. Support growth of the Nation’s 

economy in space and aeronautics, increase understanding of 

the universe and our place.

 Vision

To discover and expand knowledge for the benefit of humanity.

— Welcome to NASA

ACHIEVING OUR VISION AND MISSION

NASA satellite data combined with field measurements help 

scientists construct a clearer picture of the travel routes of 

sharks and other marine animals. In 2019 with the CloudAerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite (CALIPSO), a 

joint venture between NASA and the French space agency, 

the Centre National D’Etudes Spatiales (CNES), observed a 

massive animal migration that takes place on our planet. In 

this case, marine animals such as fish, krill and squid rise from 

the ocean depths to the surface to feast on microscopic plants 

called phytoplankton as well as smaller zooplankton and other 

animals on a daily basis.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/Timothy Marvel

NASA Administrator Bill Nelson gives keynote remarks during the 36th Space Symposium, Tuesday, Aug. 24, 2021, in Colorado Springs, CO.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/JPL-Caltech

NASA’s achievements of tomorrow are being built on a solid 

foundation of performance management and fiscal operations. 

We use credible, quality data to drive Agency decision-making 

and planning. Through the rigorous application of controls and 

standards, we ensure that our programs and projects have the 

resources they need to continue this forward momentum. NASA 

is transparent in these efforts, complying fully with requirements 

on accountability and performance management. We are 

committed to self-evaluation and continuous improvement, 

positioning NASA for long-term success.

This commitment is at the core of the NASA 2018 Strategic Plan 

and drives our Vision and Mission. The Strategic Plan creates a 

framework for our short- and long-term goals, provides a clear 

and unified direction for our activities, and sets the foundation on 

which we can build the success of our programs and projects.

DID YOU KNOW?
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 09

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

— Welcome to NASA

Glenn Research

Center

Goddard Space

Flight Center

Langley Research

Center

Marshall Space 

Flight Center

 Chief Human Capital Officer

 Strategic Infrastructure

 Procurement

 Protective Services

 NASA Shared Services Center

 Headquarters Operations

Chief Information

Officer Inspector General

Chief Financial

Officer

Advisory Groups—

NAC & ASAP

Note: This reflects the FY 2021 NASA Organization Chart

Administrator may delegate reporting to Deputy Administrator

*Mission Support Directorate also oversees and provides Partnerships as an Agency-wide service

JPL will participate in Agency-level functions, such as APMC

JPL is a FFRDC

Dotted lines indicate independent advisory or oversight organizations

6 NASA Policy Directive 1000.3E, NASA Organization

https://nodis3.gsfc.nasa.gov/displayDir.cfm?t=NPD&c=1000&s=3E

NASA’s organizational structure comprises a top-level leadership structure overseeing a matrix relationship 

between Mission Directorates, Mission Support Offices, and Centers. This structure ensures the Agency can 

have both a holistic and narrowly focused approach to business management, safety oversight, and achievement 

of mission and operational goals, as described in the NASA Policy Directive 1000.3E, NASA Organization6. The 

Administrator and senior officials lead the Agency by providing top-level strategies and direction. The Mission 

Directorate and Mission Support Offices at Headquarters manage decisions on programmatic investments and 

guide the operations of the Centers. NASA’s Centers and facilities manage and execute the mission work—

engineering, operations, science, and technology development—and supporting activities.

Stennis Space

Center

NASA Office of

JPL Management

and Overnight

Aeronautics Research 

Mission Directorate

Ames Research

Center

Johnson Space

Center

Armstrong Flight

Research Center

Kennedy Space

Center

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 09

Jet Propulsion Laboratory

NASA Advisory Council (NAC)

Aerospace Safety Advisory 

Panel (ASAP)

Agency Program Management 

Council (APMC)

Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)

Federally Funded Research 

and Development Center 

(FFRDC)

Human Exploration & 

Operations Mission 

Directorate

Science Mission 

Directorate

Space Technology

Mission Directorate

Chief Scientist

Chief Health & 

Medical Officer

Office of Safety & 

Mission Assurance

General Counsel

Diversity & Equal 

Opportunity

Small Business

Programs

STEM

Engagement Communications

International

& Interagency

Relations

Legislative &

Intergovernmental

Affairs

Administrator

Deputy Administrator

Associate Administrator

Deputy Associate Administrator

Chief of Staff

Associate Administrator for Strategic

Engagement & Assessments

Associate Administrator for Space

Policy and Partnerships Chief Technologist

Office of Strategic 

Engagement & 

Assessments

Office of Agency

Council Staff

Senior Climate 

Advisor

Chief Engineer

Mission Support 

Directorate*
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 10

CENTERS AND FACILITIES

— Welcome to NASA

NASA’s Headquarters, located in Washington, DC, provides the overall guidance and direction to the Agency under the leadership of the 

Administrator. A skilled and diverse group of technical and business professionals conduct day-to-day activities throughout our 10 Centers and a 

variety of unique facilities.

LOCATIONS IN THE SPOTLIGHT

WALLOPS FLIGHT FACILITY

Wallops Flight Facility (WFF), managed by GSFC, provides a variety of launch range services, from high-altitude balloons 

to suborbital and orbital rockets. Northrop Grumman launches commercial resupply services missions to the International 

Space Station (ISS) from the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport at WFF. On June 25, 2021, NASA launched 40 university 

student experiments aboard a sounding rocket from WFF. The launch, part of the RockOn! and RockSat-C programs, was 

designed for students to learn and apply skills in building experiments for suborbital space flight. RockOn! is supported by 

NASA’s Office of STEM Engagement.

GODDARD INSTITUTE FOR SPACE STUDIES

The Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) is a laboratory in the Earth Sciences Division of GSFC. GISS’s key objective 

is prediction of atmospheric and climate changes in the 21st century. In FY 2021, experts from GISS, Columbia University’s 

Center for Climate Systems Research and Center on Global Energy Policy, Agricultural Model Intercomparison and 

Improvement Project (AgMIP), New York University, and the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization developed 

new analyses on greenhouse gas emissions from the food system. This improved quantification of food system emissions 

can help to provide scenarios used by global climate models to project future changes in Earth’s climate.

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 10

GODDARD SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC) is home to the Nation’s largest organization of scientists, engineers, and 

technologists who build spacecraft, instruments, and new technology for studying Earth, the Sun, our solar system, and 

the universe. GSFC’s team, led by principal investigator James Garvin, was one of two new missions—both focused on 

Venus—selected for NASA’s Discovery Program. DAVINCI+ will measure the composition of Venus’ thick atmosphere to 

better understand why it is a runaway hothouse compared to Earth’s. Mission launch is currently targeted for FY 2030.
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 11

BUDGET IN FY 2021

$23.3 BILLION

NASA BY THE NUMBERS

— Welcome to NASA

$8.8 BILLION

Operations

$1.2 BILLION

Grants

$1.0 BILLION

Facilities and 

Equipment

$12.3 BILLION

Research, Engineering,

& Development

NASA’S CIVIL

SERVICE WORKFORCE 

BY CENTER*

19%

Goddard Space Flight 

Center (GSFC) 

3,153

17%

Johnson Space 

Center (JSC)

2,866

9%

Glenn Research 

Center (GRC)

1,466

7%

Ames Research 

Center (ARC) 

1,157

7%

NASA Headquarters 

(HQ) 

1,149

3%

Other

424

3%

Armstrong Flight

Research Center (AFRC) 

502

13%

Marshall Space

Flight Center (MSFC)

12% 2,153

Kennedy Space 

Center (KSC)

1,929

10%

Langley Research 

Center (LaRC)

1,721

16,520

*Full-Time Permanent Employees

Voted Best Place to Work in the Federal Government for the 9th Consecutive Year

Mary W. Jackson NASA Headquarters building in Washington, D.C.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA

More information about NASA’s workforce is available at https://wicn.nssc.nasa.gov/
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 12

MISSION PERFORMANCE

M A N A G EM E N T ’ S D I S C U S S I O N A N D A N A LY S I S

A Mars 2020 message is seen on the video board of the Nasdaq MarketSite after NASA’s Perseverance rover landed on the 

surface of Mars, Thursday, Feb. 18, 2021 in New York City. A key objective for Perseverance’s mission on Mars is astrobiology, 

including the search for signs of ancient microbial life. The rover will characterize the planet’s geology and past climate, pave 

the way for human exploration of the Red Planet, and be the first mission to collect and cache Martian rock and regolith.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/Emma Howells
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 13

STRATEGIC PLAN FRAMEWORK

— Mission Performance

The NASA 2018 Strategic Plan created a framework (see the graphic below) topped by strategic goals that describe 

how we will pursue our Mission. Strategic objectives describe what we plan to do to achieve each strategic goal. 

Each strategic objective encompasses one or more portfolios of related programs that work towards the objective’s 

outcomes. Multiyear performance goals measure progress towards achieving the strategic objectives. These 

performance goals have annual performance targets that are consistent with NASA’s budget. 

NASA elevates a subset of performance goals—agency priority goals—for additional attention and external reporting. 

Agency priority goals often reflect Administration priorities, as well those of an agency. Due to the presidential 

transition, the Office of Management and Budget discontinued external reporting for the FY 2020-2021 agency 

priority goals. Because NASA continued performance toward the milestones described in our agency priority goals, 

we transitioned our agency priority goals to performance goals for FY 2021. Those performance results are included 

in the summary of preliminary FY 2021 ratings provided on page 18. Agency priority goal information for FY 2020 is 

available on the Performance.gov archive.

Cross-agency priority goals reflect efforts toward addressing a subset of the President’s Management Agenda. 

These multi-Government agency goals are not part of NASA’s framework, but they inform strategic objective and 

performance goal activities, such as human capital management, cybersecurity, and customer experience with 

NASA’s social media platforms. The Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018 (Evidence Act)7

complements GPRAMA through evaluation and evidence-building activities to answer priority questions in NASA’s 

Learning Agenda. The Annual Evaluation Plan, NASA’s plan for answering its priority questions, inform annual 

performance goal planning.

CROSS-AGENCY PRIORITY GOALS

Contribute to Federal initiatives

AGENCY PRIORITY GOALS

2 years – report quarterly 

Describes the agency’s plan for evaluation and evidence-building activities to 

answer Priority Questions from the Learning Agenda.

STRATEGIC GOAL

Timeless

STRATEGIC OBJECTIVE

Up to 10 Years

PERFORMANCE GOALS

Multiyear - report annually

NASA’s Performance 

Framework Breakdown

STRATEGIC PLAN PERFORMANCE FRAMEWORK

STRATEGIC 

GOALS

4 STRATEGIC

OBJECTIVES

13 PERFORMANCE

GOALS

48

7 Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018 (Evidence Act) https://www.congress.gov/115/plaws/publ435/PLAW115publ435.pdf

ANNUAL EVALUATION PLAN

1 year 
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 14

STRATEGIC GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

As detailed in the NASA 2018 Strategic Plan, NASA’s historic and enduring purpose is aligned to four major strategic themes—

DISCOVER, EXPLORE, DEVELOP, and ENABLE—that characterize our four strategic goals. These four strategic goals, supported 

by 13 strategic objectives, outline the Agency’s Mission.

— Mission Performance

EVER WONDER HOW YOU WOULD SOUND ON MARS?

Grab your headset, turn up the volume and listen for the subtle differences between the sounds on Earth 

versus how they would sound on the Red Planet. Then, try the Mars Playlist to hear actual recordings 

from the Red Planet, as captured by the two microphones onboard the Mars Perseverance rover. 

1.1 Understand the Sun, Earth, Solar System, and Universe.

Conduct scientific studies of the Earth and Sun from space, return 

data and samples from other bodies in the solar system, peer out into 

the vast reaches of the universe, and play a catalyzing role in lunar 

robotic exploration by supporting innovative approaches to advancing 

science.

1.2 Understand Responses of Physical and Biological Systems 

 to Spaceflight.

Conduct a robust program of space-based research to advance 

technologies that enable space exploration, and to pioneer uses of the 

space environment to benefit life on Earth.

2.1 Lay the Foundation for America to Maintain a Constant

 Human Presence in Low Earth Orbit Enabled by a

 Commercial Market.

Enable space-based low Earth orbit economy by transitioning the 

ISS operations and maintenance to commercial and international 

partners, while continuing to leverage ISS for research, technology 

development, and to extend human presence in space.

2.2 Conduct Exploration in Deep Space, Including to the 

Surface of the Moon.

Extend human presence into cislunar space and the lunar surface, with 

capabilities that allow for sustained operations in deep space and the 

lunar surface.

Extend human presence deeper 

into space and to the Moon 

for sustainable long-term 

exploration and utilization.

2. EXPLORE

Expand human 

knowledge through new 

scientific discoveries.

1. DISCOVER

PLAY NOW
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 15

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Mission Performance

3.1 Develop and Transfer Revolutionary Technologies to Enable 

Exploration Capabilities for NASA and the Nation.

Advance revolutionary technologies for NASA and the Nation, involving 

commercial space products, specifically for utilization of near-Earth space; 

efficient transportation through space; access to planetary surfaces; 

enabling human space exploration; next generation science missions; and 

growth and utilization of the U.S. industrial and academic base.

3.2 Transform Aviation Through Revolutionary Technology 

Research, Development, and Transfer.

Maintain and advance U.S. global leadership in aviation through application 

of new concepts and technologies pioneered by NASA and developed in 

partnership with U.S. industry that lead to transformative improvements in 

mobility, efficiency, and safety.

3.3 Inspire and Engage the Public in Aeronautics, Space,

and Science.

Inspire, engage, educate, and employ the next generation of explorers 

through NASA-unique STEM learning opportunities.

4.1 Engage in Partnership Strategies.

Support cooperative, reimbursable, and funded initiatives through domestic 

and international partnerships.

4.2 Enable Space Access and Services.

Support the communication, launch service, rocket propulsion testing, and 

strategic capabilities needs of NASA’s programs.

4.3 Assure Safety and Mission Success.

Assure effective management of NASA programs and operations to complete 

the mission safely and successfully.

4.4 Manage Human Capital.

Cultivate a diverse and innovative workforce with the right balance of skills 

and experience to provide an inclusive work environment in which employees 

that possess varying perspectives, education levels, life experiences, and 

backgrounds can work together and remain fully engaged in our mission.

4.5 Ensure Enterprise Protection.

Increase the resiliency of NASA’s enterprise systems by assessing risks and 

implementing comprehensive, economical, and actionable solutions.

4.6 Sustain Infrastructure Capabilities and Operations.

Enable NASA’s mission by providing the facilities, tools, and services required 

to efficiently manage, operate, and sustain the infrastructure necessary to 

meet mission objectives.

Optimize capabilities and 

operations.

4. ENABLE

Address national 

challenges and catalyze 

economic growth.

3. DEVELOP
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 16

Stacking is complete for the twin Space Launch System (SLS) solid rocket boosters for NASA’s Artemis I mission.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/Isaac Watson

STRATEGIC GOALS AND HIGHLIGHTS

M A N A G EM E N T ’ S D I S C U S S I O N A N D A N A LY S I S
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 17

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — — Strategic Goals and Highlights Strategic Goals and Highlights

ASSESSMENT APPROACH

GREEN

COMPLETE OR ON 

TARGET TO COMPLETE

NASA has completed or is on 

target as planned to complete the 

performance goal.

YELLOW

SLIGHTLY BELOW 

TARGET

NASA completed or expects 

to complete this performance 

measure, but is slightly below the 

target and/or moderately behind 

schedule.

RED

SIGNIFICANTLY BELOW 

TARGET

NASA did not or does not expect to 

complete this performance measure within 

the estimated time frame. The program 

is substantially below the target and/or 

significantly behind schedule.

WHITE

NOT ASSESSED

Data not available to assess this 

performance goal for FY 2021.

GREY

CURRENTLY UNRATED

A final rating will be provided in 

the FY 2023 VIPer.

8 NASA’s VIPer document is comprised of the Annual Performance Report of fiscal year performance results and the Annual 

Performance Plan, which lists the performance goals and provides annual targets consistent with the budget request.

During the third and fourth quarters of the fiscal year, program officials assessed progress towards achieving the performance 

goals listed in the FY 2021 Annual Performance Plan. They determined whether targets or milestones were met as anticipated and 

assigned the appropriate color rating. NASA’s Performance Improvement Officer and executive leadership reviewed the results 

to ensure that they are complete, accurate, and relevant. NASA’s Internal Controls Assessment Team reviewed the GPRAMA 

assessment and reporting approach and confirmed that there were no deficiencies.

For NASA’s 48 performance goals, we indicate the preliminary progress, based on the FY 2021 targets, by assigning a color rating 

of Green (complete or on target to complete), Yellow (slightly below target), or Red (significantly below target). Internal success 

criteria determine the levels of performance for a Yellow or Red rating. A White rating indicates that NASA is unable to assess the 

performance goal for the fiscal year due to missing data and a Grey rating indicates that the performance goal is unrated at this 

time, but a final rating should be provided in the FY 2023 Volume of Integrated Performance (VIPer)8.

MEASUREMENT STATEMENT: Provide cargo transportation through 

commercial partners to support the ISS.

MEASUREMENT APPROACH: Number of commercial cargo missions 

launched/delivered to ISS

TARGET FOR FY 2021: 4 commercial cargo missions

NUMBER OF MISSIONS COMPLETED: 4

FY 2021 RATING: Green

Every strategic objective is supported by at least one performance 

goal. NASA’s performance goals consist of an outcome-based 

statement and an annual performance target. To the right is an 

example of a performance goal supporting Strategic Objective 

4.2: Enable space access and services.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 18

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — — Strategic Goals and Highlights Strategic Goals and Highlights

FY 2021 PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT

9 FY 2022 VIPer

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nasa_fy22_volume_of_integrated_performance.pdf

During FY 2021, program officials assessed progress towards achieving NASA’s 48 performance goal FY 2021 targets 

released in the FY 2022 VIPer9, determined whether these annual targets were met, and assigned one of the color 

ratings described above. The AFR provides a summary of the preliminary color ratings for FY 2021. The final color 

ratings, as well as the final performance results based on the targets, will be provided in the FY 2023 VIPer, which has 

an anticipated publication date of February 7, 2022. 

The following graph shows the summary of preliminary FY 2021 ratings for NASA’s 48 performance goals grouped by 

strategic goal compared to the FY 2020 ratings for the 48 performance goals published in the FY 2022 VIPer. For each 

strategic goal, the graph shows both the percentage and number of performance goals rated Green, Yellow, Red, or 

White, or that are currently Unrated or were Unrated in the FY 2022 VIPer.

Summary of FY 2020 Performance Goal Ratings* Compared to Preliminary FY 2021 

Performance Goal Ratings, Grouped by Strategic Goal

*FY 2020 performance goal ratings published in the FY 2022 VIPer

While 7 performance goals still remain unrated for FY 2021, overall the fiscal year has fewer performance goals rated Yellow 

(slightly below target) or Red (significantly below target). Notably, most programs and projects experienced fewer performance 

impacts due to the COVID-19. The Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, which was a metric source for three performance goals, 

was not opened to employees during FY 2020. As a result, NASA was unable to assess (rated White) 3 performance goals 

supporting Strategic Goal 4.

STRATEGIC GOAL 1 STRATEGIC GOAL 2 STRATEGIC GOAL 3 STRATEGIC GOAL 4

FY2020 FY2021 FY2020 FY2021 FY2020 FY2021 FY2020 FY2021

0

50

10

60

20

70

30

80

40

90

100

1

7

2

1

9

4

1

2

1

3

1

2

13

3

13

1

2

1 1

3

15

Green Yellow Red White Unrated

PERCENT OF ALL PERFORMANCE GOALS

1

9
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 19

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — — Strategic Goals and Highlights Strategic Goals and Highlights

Strategic Goal I. Discover

Expand Human Knowledge Through New Scientific Discoveries.

Overview

Since NASA’s inception, scientific discovery about our Earth, the Sun, the solar system, and the universe beyond has been an 

enduring purpose of the Agency as part of its three major strategic thrusts: discover, explore, and develop. We conduct scientific 

exploration enabled by observatories that view Earth from space, observe and visit other bodies in the solar system, and gaze out 

into the galaxy and beyond. Our scientific exploration will also inform human exploration of the Moon, Mars, and the solar system, 

providing valuable scientific data for such human missions.

Conducting research in space, including aboard the ISS, provides scientists with the unique opportunity to observe natural 

phenomenon in ways not possible on Earth. By studying biological and physical systems under extreme conditions, such as 

altered gravity and radiation, scientists can better understand how biological and physical systems work. This knowledge can 

contribute to important scientific discoveries and technology advancements that not only enable space exploration, but also 

benefit life on Earth.

Finally, NASA acts as a champion of free and open access to scientific data. The Agency’s work incorporates and builds upon the 

work of others in a spirit of global engagement and diplomacy.

Highlights

Strategic Goal 1 is supported by 12 performance goals in the areas of Earth system science, heliophysics, planetary science, and 

astrophysics, as well as responses of biological and physical systems to spaceflight. Below are performance highlights and a 

sample preliminary performance goal ratings for FY 2021.

Annual progress toward achieving NASA’s science-focused performance goals is determined by our Science Committees under 

the NASA Advisory Council and/or our Science Mission Directorate (SMD) senior leadership. Although seven performance goals 

remain Unrated, we are on track to achieve (rate Green) all performance goals for Strategic Goal 1 but one, which is slightly behind 

schedule (rated Yellow). For example, research using data from NASA’s Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution (MAVEN) mission 

shows that the Martian moon Phobos orbits through a stream of charged particles, known as ions, that flow off the Red Planet’s 

atmosphere. Some of these ions have been escaping Mars’ atmosphere for billions of years. The uppermost layer of Phobos’ 

surface may have trapped some of these ions, recording information about the evolution of Martian atmosphere.

We achieved our target to complete 12 critical milestones for major Science Mission Directorate projects, receiving a Green rating 

for the performance goal. The milestones included development launching Sentinel-6 Michael Freilich, an ocean observation 

satellite, on November 21, 2020, landing the Mars 2020 Perseverance Rover in Jezero Crater on February 18, 2021, and 

completing development milestones for Europa Clipper, the Nancy Grace Roman Telescope, and other projects.

NASA completed FY 2021 behind schedule for our target to complete shipment of the James Webb Space Telescope (Webb)—the 

biggest, most complex space telescope ever built—to the European Space Agency’s launch site in Kourou, French Guiana. We 

completed milestones leading up to shipment, such as folding the large and complex sunshield, so the performance goal received 

a Yellow rating.

These images were captured during Webb’s final tests when the 6.5 meter (21 feet 4 inch) mirror was 

commanded to fully expand and lock itself into place, just like it would in space. The conclusion of 

this test represents the team’s final checkpoint in a long series of tests designed to ensure Webb’s 18 

hexagonal mirrors are prepared for a long journey in space, and a life of profound discovery.

PHOTO CREDIT — Joby Aviation

DID YOU KNOW?
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 20

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — — Strategic Goals and Highlights Strategic Goals and Highlights

Strategic Goal II. Explore

Extend Human Presence Deeper into Space and to the Moon for Sustainable 

Long-term Exploration and Utilization.

Overview

America is a Nation of explorers. In everything we do—science, technology, commerce, the arts, sports—we strive to reach higher, 

farther, deeper, or faster than ever before to create a better future for generations to come.

NASA is enabling the development of a space-based low Earth orbit economy by establishing the infrastructure necessary for 

a transition from operations aboard the ISS to one or more future commercial platforms, while continuing to leverage ISS for 

research and technology development. 

NASA’s Artemis program has a goal to return American astronauts—the first woman and the first person of color—to the Moon. 

NASA will use innovative technologies to explore larger areas of the Moon and for longer durations than ever before. Artemis is a 

collaborative effort with commercial and international partners to establish a sustainable lunar exploration capability for long-term 

exploration of the Moon, followed by human missions to Mars.

Highlights

Strategic Goal 2 is supported by four performance goals. Below are performance highlights and sample preliminary performance 

goal ratings for FY 2021.

During FY 2021, NASA achieved (rated Green) the annual Artemis program target leading, incrementally, to the performance goal 

to land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon10. On March 18, 2021, the SLS program successfully completed the 

Green Run Hot Fire test at Stennis Space Center. The year-long, eight-part series of tests gradually brought the SLS core stage 

to life for the first time, culminating with the hot fire of the four RS-25 engines. During the second quarter of FY 2021, engineers 

installed the SLS solid rocket boosters on the Mobile Launcher inside the Vehicle Assembly Building at KSC in preparation for 

Artemis I. On April 27, the fully tested SLS core stage was delivered by barge to KSC for integration. The objective of Artemis I is to 

send an uncrewed Orion module around the Moon and return it to Earth for a safe splashdown and recovery.

NASA exceeded (rated Green) the FY 2021 performance goal target to initiate five research and technology demonstrations 

aboard the ISS by launching and initiating seven demonstrations. These included Radio-frequency identification (RFID) Enabled 

Autonomous Logistics Management (REALM)-2, SERFE, Saffire V, Universal Waste Management System (UWMS), Airborne 

Particulate Monitor (APM), Collapsible Contingency Urinal (CCU) and Biosentinel. WPA Cat-reactor was installed but since replaced 

by legacy h/w due to a leak. The technologies have been designed to support human space exploration beyond low Earth orbit. 

Find out more about research aboard the ISS at Space Station Research & Technology.

10 Performance Goal 2.2.1, published in the FY 2022 VIPer in June 2021, reads: “Advance America’s goal to land the first woman 

and the next man on the Moon by demonstrating the necessary capabilities that advance lunar exploration.“ Since then, NASA 

has revised the goal to land the first woman and the first person of color on the Moon. The technical efforts supporting this goal

were unchanged.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 21

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Strategic Goals and Highlights

STRATEGIC GOAL III. DEVELOP

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Strategic Goals and Highlights

Strategic Goal III. Develop 

Address National Challenges and Catalyze Economic Growth.

Overview

NASA is dedicated to developing transformative, cross-cutting technologies that enable our missions. We develop new 

technologies to enable human and robotic exploration of the Moon, Mars, and beyond and enhance research and development to 

contribute to U.S. leadership in space technology. We foster a community of America’s best and brightest working on the Nation’s 

toughest challenges and closing technology gaps in multiple mission architectures. Furthermore, we make our space technology 

available to commercial companies to generate real world benefits.

NASA explores technologies and capabilities that reduce aircraft noise and fuel use, get you from gate-to-gate safely and on time, 

and transform aviation into an economic engine at all altitudes. Aeronautics researchers, engineers, and pilots use world-class 

NASA facilities to keep U.S. aviation the global leader in safety, efficiency, and innovation.

NASA’s education efforts attract, engage, and educate students and support educators and educational institutions across the 

United States. We provide opportunities for students, especially those underrepresented in STEM fields, to engage with our 

aeronautics, space, and science people, content, and facilities in support of a diverse future STEM workforce. We also enhance 

the reach and effectiveness or our programs and projects through our social media platforms, including Instagram and Twitter.

Highlights

Strategic Goal 3 is supported by 13 performance goals. Below are performance highlights and sample preliminary performance 

goal ratings for FY 2021.

NASA was slightly below the FY 2021 performance goal target to complete at least 60 percent of planned key performance 

parameter events for our technology maturation projects, resulting in a Yellow rating. Completed events represent technology 

advancements that may lead to entirely new mission approaches. For example, the Safe and Precise Landing Integrated 

Capabilities Evolution (SPLICE) project, which was selected in October 2020 as part of the technology maturation Tipping Point 

contract, is slated for demonstration aboard Blue Origin’s 17th Blue Shepard mission. Read more about our technology maturation 

at STMD [Space Technology Mission Directorate]: Game Changing Development.

NASA’s Low Boom Flight Demonstration project has designed and is now building a piloted, large-scale supersonic experimental 

plane, or X-plane, with technology that reduces the perceived loudness of a sonic boom to that of a gentle thump. We ended FY 

2021 behind schedule (rated Yellow) for our performance goal target to ship the demonstrator aircraft from Lockheed Martin’s 

facility in Palmdale, California, to Fort Worth, Texas. NASA is working with the contractor to address COVID-related schedule 

impacts.

NASA is demonstrating tools, technologies, and flight operations methods to support industry and the Federal Aviation 

Administration in the development of a new class of aviation transport called Urban Air Mobility (UAM). We achieved our FY 2021 

performance goal target to complete conceptual design and sizing trade studies of noise versus performance for vertical take-off 

and landing vehicles for the UAM market, resulting in a Green rating for the performance goal. Read more about NASA’s work on 

UAM at https://www.nasa.gov/aam.

NASA’s Revolutionary Vertical Lift Technology Project’s Mobile Acoustics Facility is parked in the background of 

Joby’s prototype aircraft near Big Sur, California. As the aircraft flew planned test scenarios, NASA’s Advanced Air 

Mobility National Campaign team collected information about how the vehicle moved, how the vehicle sounded, and 

how the vehicle communicated with controllers during recent testing from Aug. 30-Sept. 10.

PHOTO CREDIT — Joby Aviation

DID YOU KNOW?
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 22

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — — Strategic Goals and Highlights Strategic Goals and Highlights

Strategic Goal IV. Enable

Optimize Capabilities and Operations.

Overview

While mission requirements evolve with our priorities and external conditions, our mission services and capabilities are focused 

on the permanent and critical essentials that enable all NASA activity. They include a range of foundational services, such as 

a diverse, highly skilled workforce, procurement, cybersecurity, and right sized and efficient facilities. This strategic goal also 

includes services and capabilities critical to space exploration, including launch services, commercial space transportation, and 

space communications and navigation.

NASA strives to accomplish our mission with the utmost care, recognizing that we are stewards of taxpayer dollars, critical human 

capital, and one-of-a-kind facilities. NASA maintains a large and diverse set of technical capabilities and assets to support our 

missions, other Federal agencies’ work, and the private sector to test, validate, and optimize innovations. NASA will continue to 

maintain and ensure the availability and safety of critical capabilities and facilities necessary for advancing our space-, air-, and 

Earth-based activities.

Highlights

Strategic Goal 4 is supported by 14 performance goals. Below are performance highlights and a sample of preliminary 

performance goal ratings for FY 2021.

NASA achieved all FY 2021 performance goal targets for providing space access and services, such as space communications, 

commercial crew transportation and resupply, and rocket propulsion testing. Our commercial partners SpaceX and Northrop 

Grumman completed the four planned commercial resupply services missions. NASA’s SpaceX Crew-1 mission—the first 

commercial crew, long-duration mission aboard ISS—launched November 15, 2020. Crew 2 launched on April 23, 2021.

NASA uses the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS), administered by the Office of Personnel Management, as a useful 

gauge of our employees’ work experiences at the Agency, including their perceptions of NASA as an equal opportunity and 

innovative workplace. FEVS results highlight where our human capital and diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility initiatives 

have been successful and identify where work is still needed. NASA withdrew (rated White) three performance goals focused 

on FEVS results for FY 2021 because the survey was not administered during the fiscal year. However, in June 2021, NASA was 

ranked Best Place to Work in the Federal Government among large agencies for the ninth year in a row based on the results of 

the 2020 FEVS. We also ranked number 1 among large agencies in response to COVID-19-related questions on the FEVS survey.

NASA astronauts Shannon Walker, left, Victor Glover, Mike Hopkins, and Japan Aerospace 

Exploration Agency (JAXA) astronaut Soichi Noguchi, right are seen inside the SpaceX Crew 

Dragon Resilience spacecraft onboard the SpaceX GO Navigator recovery ship shortly after 

landing in the Gulf of Mexico off the coast of Panama City, Florida, at 2:56 a.m. EDT May 2, 

2021. 

DID YOU KNOW?

Photo Credit: NASA/Bill Ingalls
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 23

FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

The SpaceX Crew Dragon Resilience splashes down in the Gulf of Mexico off the coast of Panama City, in Florida, at 2:56 a.m. 

EDT on May 2, 2021. Astronauts Michael Hopkins, Victor Glover, and Shannon Walker of NASA, and Soichi Noguchi of JAXA 

(Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency) completed Crew-1, the first crew rotation mission to the International Space Station in 

partnership with NASA as part of the agency’s Commercial Crew Program. At left is SpaceX’s Go Navigator recovery ship. Crew 

Dragon will be secured and then hoisted onto the main deck of the recovery ship with the astronauts inside.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/Jamie Peer

FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE

M A N A G EM E N T ’ S D I S C U S S I O N A N D A N A LY S I S
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 24

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Financial Performance

$23,009 $21,241

$16,351 $14,939

$6,658 $6,302

2021 2020

Assets Liabilities Net Position

ASSETS

the current and future 

economic benefits owned or 

available for use by NASA.

LIABILITIES

the debts owned by NASA 

but not yet paid.

NET POSITION

the activity between revenue 

and other financing sources, and 

costs incurred since inception.

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Financial Performance

FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS

Overview of Financial Position

NASA’s Balance Sheet provides a comparable snapshot of the Agency’s financial position as of September 30, 2021 and 

September 30, 2020. It displays amounts in three primary categories. 

Balance Sheet Components FY 2021 and FY 2020

(IN MILLIONS)
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 25

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Financial Performance

The Agency’s Fund Balance with Treasury (FBWT) and its General Property, Plant and Equipment (G-PP&E) were the two 

primary components of the total asset balance. 

FBWT, which represents NASA’s cash balance with the U.S. Department of the Treasury, was the largest asset at $16 billion, 69 

percent of total assets. This cash balance included Congressional appropriated funds available for NASA’s mission operations 

(for example, employee labor or purchased goods or services from contractors) that have not yet been paid. 

NASA’s G-PP&E had a net book value of $7 billion as of September 30, 2021, 30 percent of total assets. The balance was 

13 percent higher in FY 2021 compared to FY 2020. The increase is primarily due to the fabrication of equipment items that 

will support Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO), Gateway S Band, Power and Propulsion Element (PPE) Spacecraft, 

Aerospace Communication Facility, Research Support Building, and the Marshall Steam Distribution Revitalization Project, the 

maintenance of ISS, as well as the production work on the Mobile Launcher-2.

The Other category represents the amount of Investments, Accounts Receivable, Advances and Prepayments, and Other 

Assets as of September 30, 2021. There was a decrease of $4 million, or three percent as compared to FY 2020. 

TOTAL LIABILITIES, as of September 30, 2021, were $7 billion, six percent higher than FY 2020. Environmental and Disposal 

Liabilities, Accounts Payable, and Other Liabilities represent the majority of NASA’s liabilities. The increase in FY 2021 is 

primarily due to increased commitments with the Deep Space Network, Mars Rover 2020, and various missions including 

the Psyche mission, Exoplanet Exploration Supporting Research & Technology (SR&T) mission, Europa Clipper mission, Mars 

Mission Operations and Mars Technology, RMB-Science Programmatic mission.

TOTAL ASSETS were the largest of the three categories (Total Liabilities plus Total Net Position will always equal Total Assets). 

NASA’s total asset balance, as of September 30, 2021, was $23 billion or eight percent higher than FY 2020.

Fund Balance 

with Treasury

Property, Plant 

& Equipment 

Other

Assets

$15,899

$6,982

$128

$14,914

$6,195

$132

202l

$23,009 Total $21,241 Total

2020

Assets by Type Comparison

For FY 2021 and FY 2020

(IN MILLIONS)

Assets by Type FY 2021

(IN MILLIONS)

69%

$15,899

Fund Balance

with Treasury 

30%

$6,982

Property, Plant & 

Equipment 

1%

$128

Other Assets 

Total

Assets

$23,009
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 26

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Financial Performance

$2,127

$1,913

$2,095

$320

Advances from others and Deferred 

Revenue

Federal Employee Benefits

Environmental and Disposal Liabilities

$203

$2,173

$1,478

$2,141

$314

$196

Accounts Payable

Other Liabilities

202l

$6,658 Total $6,302 Total

2020

Environmental and Disposal Liabilities of $2 billion represent the estimated cost to clean up both known and projected 

environmental hazards. There was a slight decrease of $46 million, or two percent in FY 2021 as compared to FY 2020. 

Accounts Payable, which represents amounts owed to other entities, was $1.9 billion, an increase of $435 million, or 29 percent, 

compared to FY 2020.

Other Liabilities, which represents various amounts including Accrued Funded Payroll and Contingent Liabilities, were $2 billion, 

a decrease of $46 million, or two percent, compared to FY 2020. The decrease is primarily due to a legal settlement over 

construction delays of Kennedy Space Center’s Headquarters building. 

Federal Employee Benefits are amounts the Department of Labor estimates on behalf of NASA for future workers’ compensation 

liabilities for current employees.

Liabilities by Type Comparison

For FY 2021 and FY 2020

(IN MILLIONS)

Liabilities by Type FY 2021

(IN MILLIONS)

29%

$1,913

Accounts

Payable

31%

$2,095

Other 

Liabilities

32%

$2,127

Environmental and 

Disposal Liabilities

5%

$320

Federal Employee 

Benefits 3%

$203

Advances from others 

and Deferred Revenue

Total

Liabilities

$6,658

TOTAL NET POSITION comprised of Unexpended Appropriations and Cumulative Results of Operations (“net worth”), increased 

by $1.4 billion, 10 percent higher than FY 2020. Unexpended Appropriations, at $12 billion, increased by five percent from FY 

2020. Cumulative Results of Operations, at $5 billion, increased by $820 million or 22 percent from FY 2020. The change to Net 

Position is primarily due to the change in NASA Held Personal Property cost settlement to Asset Under Construction.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 27

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Financial Performance

The Space Canary sensor developed by Lunar Outpost Inc. can detect the ultra-fine lunar dust 

particles inside a habitat, alerting astronauts should an elevated level of contamination occur. 

Adapted for use on Earth, the same technology, now renamed the Canary-S, can monitor forest fire 

emissions, evaluate urban air quality, and more.

PHOTO CREDIT — Lunar Outpost

DID YOU KNOW?

Results of Operations

Net Cost of Operations

The Statement of Net Cost presents NASA’s net cost of operations by strategic goal. NASA’s strategic goals are described in the 

Mission Performance section of the Agency Financial Report (page 12). The Net Cost of Operations represents gross cost incurred 

less revenue earned for work performed for other government organizations or private entities. As of September 30, 2021, NASA’s 

gross costs were $24 billion, a decrease of $357 million from FY 2020. Earned Revenue from other governmental organizations 

or private entities was $2 billion, a $228 million decrease from FY 2020, leaving NASA with a FY 2021 net cost of $22 billion, a 

decrease of $129 million from FY 2020.

25%

$5,540

Goal 4

10%

$2,114

Goal 3

33%

$7,218

Goal 1

32%

$7,130

Goal 2

Strategic Goal 1: Expand Human Knowledge Through New Scientific Discoveries.

Strategic Goal 2: Extend Human Presence Deeper Into Space and to the Moon for 

Sustainable Long-term Exploration and Utilization.

Strategic Goal 3: Address National Challenges and Catalyze Economic Growth.

Strategic Goal 4: Optimize Capabilities and Operations.

Total

Net Cost

$22,002

Net Cost of Operations by

Strategic Goal for FY 2021

(IN MILLIONS)

| Continued on the next page →
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 28

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Financial Performance

Comparative Gross Cost of Operations by Strategic Goal

FY 2021 and FY 2020

(IN MILLIONS)

Results of Operations (Continued)

Gross Cost of Operations

NASA’s day-to-day operations are performed at NASA and contractor facilities around the globe and in space. Gross costs of 

operations is presented in the following table, detailing select NASA programs that support each strategic goal. Gross costs of 

operations include expenses incurred for NASA’s research and development (R&D) investments that are expected to maintain or 

increase national economic productive capacity or yield other future benefits. Top programs by strategic goal in relation to gross 

costs have remained consistent year to year.

2021 2020

STRATEGIC GOAL 4: Optimize capabilities and operations.

FY 2021 TOTAL: $5,723 | FY 2020 TOTAL: $6,158

Other Goal 4 Programs $4,687

$3,479

Crew and Cargo Program $1,471

$1,561

*Ctr Engineering, Safety, & Operations $683

STRATEGIC GOAL 3: Address national challenges and catalyze economic growth.

FY 2021 TOTAL: $2,228 | FY 2020 TOTAL: $2,231

Other Goal 3 Programs $1,671

$1,604

Technology Demonstration $363

$381

SBIR/STTR $197

$243

STRATEGIC GOAL 2: Extend human presence deeper into space and to the Moon 

for sustainable long-term exploration and utilization.

FY 2021 TOTAL: $7,383 | FY 2020 TOTAL: $7,302

Other Goal 2 Programs $3,699

$3,338

Space Launch System $2,300

$2,803

Orion Program $1,303

$1,242

FY 2021 TOTAL: $23,550 | FY 2020 TOTAL: $23,907

STRATEGIC GOAL 1: Expand human knowledge through new scientific discoveries.

FY 2021 TOTAL: $8,216 | FY 2020 TOTAL: $8,216

Other Goal 1 Programs $5,803

$6,057

Science Mission Directorate Reimbursable $1,017

$842

Earth Systematic Missions $756

$679

Outer planets $640

$638

* Created FY2020 Q4
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 29

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Financial Performance

$2,750

Congressional

Appropriations

Expected Revenue 

from Agreements

Prior Year 

Congressional 

Appropriations

$23,272

$1,875

$2,854

$22,620

$2,237

202l

$27,897 Total $27,711 Total

2020

In FY 2021, the total funds available for use by the Agency were $28 billion — an increase of $186 million, or one percent, 

compared to FY 2020.

The $23.3 billion in appropriations from Congress for FY 2021 accounted for 83 percent of the total funds available for use by 

the Agency. Congress designates the funding available to the Agency for a specific NASA mission. Appropriations that remained 

available from prior years totaled $2.8 billion, 10 percent of NASA’s available resources in FY 2021.

NASA’s FY 2021 funding also included $2 billion of spending authority from offsetting collections, primarily comprised of revenue 

earned and collected from agreements, this totaled seven percent of NASA’s available resources in FY 2021. Revenue is earned 

under NASA’s authority to provide goods, services, or use of facilities to other entities on a reimbursable basis.

In FY 2021, NASA obligated $25 billion of the $28 billion available for Agency programmatic and institutional objectives. An 

obligation binds the Government to make an expenditure (or outlay) of funds, and reflects a reservation of budget authority that 

will be used to pay for a contract, labor, or other items. The remaining $3 billion may be obligated until the funds’ periods of 

availability expire.

Sources of Funding Comparison For FY 2021 and FY 2020

(IN MILLIONS)

Sources of Funding FY 2021

(IN MILLIONS)

Sources of Funding 

The Statement of Budgetary Resources (SBR) provides information on the budgetary funding available to NASA. NASA’s resources 

consist primarily of funds received from two sources: 

Appropriations from Congress for the current fiscal year 

and unobligated balances from prior fiscal years.

Revenue from agreements with other governmental 

organizations or private entities.

$

7%

$1,875

Expected Revenue

From Agreements

10%

$2,750

Prior Year Congressional 

Appropriations 

83%

$23,272

Congressional 

Appropriations 

Total

Funding

$27,897
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 30

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Financial Performance

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, or CARES 

Act, was passed by Congress and signed by President Donald 

Trump on March 27, 2020. This bill allotted $2.2 trillion to provide 

fast and direct economic aid to the American people negatively 

impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Of those funds, $60 million 

was provided to NASA within its Safety, Security, and Mission 

Services appropriation to prevent, prepare for, and respond 

to the coronavirus domestically or internationally. These funds 

primarily were used for contractor impact claims, information 

technology services, cleaning supplies, and personal protective 

equipment. These funds include the costs of increased cleaning 

efforts at each NASA facility to protect the health and safety of our 

workforce and ensuring the well-being of every employee. In FY 

2021, we have fully obligated our funding to cover additive costs 

related with COVID-19.

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Financial Performance

FINANCIAL AND PERFORMANCE IMPACT OF COVID-19

NASA has once again joined forces with the community in the continuing effort to fight COVID-19. The agency provided specialized 

ground support on Jan. 11 for Samaritan’s Purse, enabling the aid organization to land their DC-8 cargo jet at NASA’s Armstrong 

Flight Research Center Building 703 in Palmdale, California. The Samaritan’s Purse DC-8 arrived early Monday with supplies to 

aid in Los Angeles County’s Emergency Field Hospital that will expand capacity to care for COVID-19 patients at Antelope Valley 

Hospital. The aircraft is specially configured to carry up to 84,000 pounds of cargo and 32 passengers in support of international 

relief efforts. 

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA / Lauren Hughes

DID YOU KNOW?

FY 2020 FY 2021

0

50

10

60

20

30

40

PLAN

$60

COMMITTED

$40

OBLIGATIONS

$40

COSTS

$20

PAYMENTS

$14

$20 $20

$35

$38

COVID-19 Fund

(In Millions)
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 31

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS —— Financial Performance Financial Performance

LIMITATIONS OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The principal financial statements are prepared to report the financial position, financial condition, 

and results of operations, pursuant to the requirements of 31 U.S.C. § 3515(b). The statements are 

prepared from records of Federal entities in accordance with Federal Generally Accepted Accounting 

Principles (GAAP) and the formats prescribed by OMB. Reports used to monitor and control 

budgetary resources are prepared from the same records. Users of the statements are advised that 

the statements are for a component of the U.S. Government.

This uniform in the center of this image belonged to one of the unsung heroes of the Space Shuttle Program – Travis Thompson, former 

Closeout Crew Lead. 

The closeout crew was responsible for assisting the astronauts to strap into the shuttle’s crew module and take care of any other 

last-minute needs that arose. Ultimately, they close and seal the crew access hatch and leave the astronauts behind before they launch 

into space.

On July 9, 2021, Thompson, who served for nearly 100 missions, and Deputy Administrator and former shuttle commander Pamela 

Melroy met to view his uniform at its exhibit in the National Air and Space Museum, Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center in Chantilly, VA. Melroy 

presented him with a plaque for the occasion and surprised him by showing him she had kept the gift he gave to her many years ago. It 

was an emotional moment that celebrated not just the heroes who venture out into space but also the heroes who make sure they get 

there safely and come back home to us.

Learn more about the closeout crew.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/Taylor Mickal
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 32

FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

The Empire State Building is illuminated in red to celebrate this Thursday’s scheduled landing on Mars of NASA’s Perseverance 

rover, Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2021 in New York City. A key objective for Perseverance’s mission on Mars is astrobiology, including 

the search for signs of ancient microbial life. The rover will characterize the planet’s geology and past climate, pave the way for 

human exploration of the Red Planet, and be the first mission to collect and cache Martian rock and regolith.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/Emma Howells

SYSTEMS, CONTROLS, AND 

LEGAL COMPLIANCE

M A N A G EM E N T ’ S D I S C U S S I O N A N D A N A LY S I S
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 33

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

INTERNAL CONTROL FRAMEWORK INTERNAL CONTROL FRAMEWORK

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

NASA Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act Annual 

Statement of Assurance Process

The Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA)1 requires 

agency heads to evaluate and report on the internal control and 

financial systems to ensure the integrity of Federal programs 

and operations. This evaluation aims to provide reasonable 

assurance that internal controls are operating effectively to 

ensure efficient operations, reliable financial reporting, and 

compliance with applicable laws and regulations. 

An effective system of internal control is at the core of NASA 

fulfilling its mission and achieving its goals while safeguarding 

governmental resources. NASA management is responsible 

for implementing internal control activities that support the 

organization in meeting established objectives. NASA complies 

with OMB Circular A-123, Management’s Responsibility for 

Enterprise Risk Management and Internal Control, which 

provides Government-wide requirements for internal control and 

accountability, based on the FMFIA. OMB Circular A-1232 also 

requires agencies to establish internal controls over operations, 

reporting and compliance. 

NASA evaluates internal control across the Agency at various 

levels of the organization to ensure significant risks are 

identified, and related internal controls that address those risks 

are evaluated. NASA assesses the effectiveness of the internal 

controls over operations, management systems, and reporting 

with consideration of reviews and other relevant sources of 

NASA Officials-in-Charge/Center Directors/

CFO Assurance Statements

Management System 

Working Group (MSWG)

Senior Assessment

Team (SAT)

Mission

Support

Council 

(MSC)

Annual Assessment of Internal Controls over Programs, 

Operations, Financial Reporting & Systems

1 The Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA) https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/omb/financial_fmfia1982

2 OMB Circular No. A-123, Management’s Responsibility for Enterprise Risk Management and Internal Control

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/memoranda/2016/m-16-17.pdf

3 Green Book - https://www.gao.gov/assets/670/665712.pdf

| Continued on the next page →

information. NASA’s executive leadership provides annual certifications reporting on the effectiveness of internal controls that are 

implemented to meet intended objectives. In addition, the NASA Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO) deploys an extensive 

annual assessment methodology and internal control testing techniques that evaluate internal controls over financial reporting. 

NASA considers Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) Program activities, reviews the Agency Risk Profile and considers fraud risk 

in its execution of the Administrator’s Statement of Assurance Process (SoA) in evaluating and providing assurance on internal 

controls. 

The FMFIA assurance statement is based on self-certifications submitted by NASA Officials-in-Charge that ultimately support the 

Administrator’s SoA as well as a review of various internal and external sources of information. The self-certifications are based 

upon organizational self-assessments guided by the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) Standards for Internal Control in 

the Federal Government (known as the Green Book3

). The self-certifications and subsequent reviews are informed by various

NASA FMFIA Annual Statement of Assurance Process

Administrator

Figure 1
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 34

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

Perseverance’s Navigation Camera Captures Sample Borehole

This composite of two images shows the hole drilled by NASA’s Perseverance rover during its second sample-collection attempt. 

The images, which were obtained by one of the rover’s navigation cameras on Sept. 1, 2021 (the 190th sol, or Martian day, of the 

mission), were taken in the “Crater Floor Fractured Rough” geologic unit in Mars’ Jezero Crater. The team nicknamed the rock 

“Rochette” for reference and the spot on the rock where the sample was cored “Montdenier.”

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/JPL-Caltech

DID YOU KNOW?

NASA Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act Annual 

Statement of Assurance Process (Continued)

sources of information such as internal reviews of controls, as well as recommendations for improvements from external audits, 

investigations, and reviews conducted by the Office of Inspector General (OIG) and the GAO. The Mission Support Council (MSC), 

the organization responsible for oversight of NASA’s Internal Control Program, advises the Administrator on the Statement of 

Assurance. The Senior Assessment Team (SAT), which is an arm of the MSC, helps guide the internal control evaluation and 

reporting process that recommends the type of assurance that results from their execution of the SoA Program.

The Management System Working Group (MSWG) performs the first level evaluation of annual results and serves as the primary 

advisory body for NASA internal control activities. The MSWG analyzes the annual assessment results and reports issues that 

may significantly impact the effective design and operation of internal controls to the SAT. Figure 1 depicts the Agency’s Annual 

Statement of Assurance process and organizational components.

In FY 2021, as the COVID-19 pandemic continued to impact how the Agency operates, leadership maintained a strong working 

culture, ensuring that processes and internal controls could withstand long-term telework and new health protocols. NASA 

leadership reiterated that the health and safety of the NASA community is a top priority and critical to the success of the mission 

as evidenced by its core values of Safety, Integrity, Teamwork, Excellence and Inclusion.

NASA leadership continuously evaluates Agency operations based on lessons learned from the pandemic and makes changes, 

as appropriate, to better protect the health and safety of the workforce and missions while meeting mission objectives. Internal 

control processes at NASA are robust and continue to operate in an effective and efficient manner.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 35

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

ENTERPRISE RISK MANAGEMENT

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

OMB Circular No. A-123, Management’s Responsibility for 

Enterprise Risk Management and Internal Control, requires 

Federal agencies to implement Enterprise Risk Management 

(ERM) to ensure Federal managers are effectively managing 

risks that could affect the achievement of Agency strategic 

objectives. 

Risk management continues to be embedded in NASA’s 

culture, and the principles and practices are inherent in 

everyday operations. NASA’s Office of the Chief Financial 

Officer, Quality Assurance Division (QAD) leads the Agency’s 

ERM effort. The NASA Unified Comprehensive Operational Risk 

Network (UNICORN), is the framework for the communication 

and exchange of risk information between NASA’s functional 

organizations and the Agency leadership (see Figure 2). The 

UNICORN’s foundation is the Agency’s risk management 

activities and decisional councils. 

U N IFIED

COMPREHENSIVE

OPERATIONAL

RISK

NETWORK

NASA’s UNICORN

Figure 2

| Continued on the next page →
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 36

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

In FY 2021, NASA’s maturation of its ERM Program continued. The NASA Enterprise Risk Management Working Group (ERMWG) 

continues to identify enterprise-level risks and opportunities and collaborates with organizations to address identified enterprise 

risks. The ERMWG, which is comprised of representatives from several stakeholder organizations, proposes enterprise-level risks to 

the Chair for consideration and integration into the Agency Risk Profile. The Chair of the ERMWG presents the Agency Risk Profile, 

highlighting the Agency’s most significant risks, each month at Baseline Performance Reviews (BPR) for concurrence by the BPR 

Chair, the Associate Administrator.

As illustrated in Figure 3, NASA leverages a variety of sources to identify potential enterprise risks and relies upon the Agency 

governance structure of decisional councils, as well as other bodies such as the Agency Risk Management Working Group (ARMWG) 

and MSWG to facilitate the integration of risks across the Agency for appropriate consideration as enterprise risks. The ARMWG is 

distinct from the ERMWG in that it covers the spectrum of risk management activities at the institutional, program, and project level 

versus the ERMWG which focuses on integrating risks at the enterprise level.

As a result of the pandemic, NASA continues to face new challenges in carrying out essential functions necessary to achieve its core 

mission. Long standing risk management processes and activities are inherently woven throughout NASA’s culture, so beneficially, 

the Agency is well-positioned to respond to unknown threats or national emergencies that may disrupt operations for an extended 

period. NASA leadership has developed agency-wide guidance that considers guidelines provided by the White House, Office of 

Personnel Management (OPM), and OMB. As the pandemic remains, uncertainty still exists as to the future of normal operations. 

The ERMWG takes these challenges into consideration when identifying and prioritizing enterprise risks. The ERMWG continues 

to analyze the impact of the pandemic on the risks being reported on the Agency Risk Profile. The QAD works closely with senior 

leaders to understand the impact of COVID-19 on their ability to meet organizational objectives and to identify additional emerging 

risks and opportunities.

NASA will continue to strengthen its risk management and reporting process through comprehensive collaboration with the various 

risk bodies and stakeholders throughout the Agency, to effectively identify key risks and opportunities particularly as they have arisen 

as a result of the COVID-19 response, develop effective risk responses, and implement timely mitigation actions.

ERM Sources

Figure 3

GAO, OIG, 

Audit Reports, 

Fraud Risk Assessments 

ERM 

Sources

ERM

Roadshows

Management 

Councils

ARMWG

ERMWG

Strategic 

Review

Baseline

Performance

Review

SoA, 

MSWG, SAT, 

AFR

Audits

Internal Control 

Reviews

Risk 

Management 

Working Groups

Organizational

Performance 

Reporting

External Reporting

EC, SMC, 

MSC, PMC 

Visits with Key 

Internal 

Stakeholders

Technical

Authorities

OSMA, OCE &

OCHMO 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 37

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) management is responsible for establishing and maintaining 

an effective system of internal control to support reliable financial reporting, and effective and efficient programmatic 

operations. Accordingly, NASA conducted its Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 annual assessment of the effectiveness of 

management’s internal controls for compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and policies; the Federal Managers’ 

Financial Integrity Act (FMFIA); Federal Financial Management Improvement Act (FFMIA); the Office of Management and 

Budget’s (OMB) Circular A-123, Management’s Responsibility for Enterprise Risk Management and Internal Control; the 

U.S. Government Accountability Office’s Standards for Internal Controls in the Federal Government, and NASA policies. 

Based on the results of this evaluation, NASA provides reasonable assurance that its system of internal control over the 

effectiveness and efficiency of operations and compliance with laws, regulations, and policies was operating effectively as 

of September 30, 2021, and no material weaknesses were found in the design or implementation of internal controls.

In accordance with OMB requirements to integrate Enterprise Risk Management (ERM) and internal control in Federal 

agencies, NASA’s ERM Program conducts enterprise risk activities and fraud risk activities, evaluates internal control, and 

provides an overall assurance on the internal control environment. As a result, managers and employees throughout the 

Agency are actively engaged in assessing risks, identifying and updating key control objectives, implementing controls and 

other mitigation strategies, conducting reviews, and taking corrective actions as appropriate.

In addition, NASA complies with FMFIA and OMB requirements to evaluate and assure the reliability of its internal controls 

over its financial management systems, complies with Federal financial management system requirements, and assures 

reliability of its Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014 (DATA Act) submissions.

FFMIA requires agencies to have financial management systems that substantially comply with Federal financial 

management system requirements, Federal Accounting Standards, and the U.S. Government Standard General Ledger 

at the transaction level. NASA conducted its evaluation of financial management systems for compliance with FFMIA in 

accordance with Appendix D of OMB Circular A-123. NASA financial management systems substantially comply with FFMIA 

as of September 30, 2021.

NASA’s Certification of Reasonable Assurance is based upon management’s knowledge gained from daily operations, 

monitoring activities, assessment of risk and internal control, and other internal controls that govern the effectiveness and 

efficiency of operations. NASA makes an unmodified statement of assurance that its internal controls for FY 2021 were 

operating effectively. NASA remains committed to ensuring that a sound system of internal control exists over operations, 

reporting, and financial management systems.

Sincerely,

Bill Nelson 

Administrator

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

MANAGEMENT ASSURANCES

Administrator’s Statement of Assurance - November 15, 2021

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 37
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 38

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

NASA’s financial management system strategy is to establish an overarching roadmap 

that aligns with the Agency’s mission for innovation and strategic goals to optimize 

capabilities and operations which promote the technologies of tomorrow. Current 

financial management systems initiatives seek to enable integrated solutions which 

utilize modern business processes, meet evolving stakeholder needs and comply with 

internal and external Federal policies, standards and OMB requirements.

The Systems, Applications & Product ERP Central Component (SAP ECC) is the 

dedicated enterprise resource planning (ERP) solution serving as NASA’s integrated 

financial accounting system of record since 2003. The eBudget Suite of applications 

designed to develop, manage, and maintain the NASA Federal Budget by phases, 

has supported budget formulation and Congressional justifications since 2007. These 

financial management tools are supported by commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) software, 

NASA developed applications, and interfaces with systems managed by other Federal 

agencies.

In collaboration with Agency Information Technology (IT) Governance structure, a 

financial application management board was established to prioritize significant 

IT investments, establish functional roadmaps, and continually review inventory of 

applications for modernization opportunities across the financial management portfolio 

evaluating whether enterprise solutions meet current business needs.

This approach is in adherence with the FY 2018 President’s Management Agenda: 

Modernizing Government for the 21st Century, which lays out a long-term vision 

for modernizing the Federal Government in key areas that will improve the ability 

of agencies to deliver mission outcomes, provide excellent service, and effectively 

steward taxpayer dollars on behalf of the American people. A key component of the 

Administration’s Information Technology Framework effort includes addressing aging IT 

infrastructure and modernizing citizen facing services.

NASA utilized the Treasury Invoice Processing Platform to meet OMB’s directive M-15-19, 

Improving Government Efficiency and Saving Taxpayer Dollars Through Electronic 

Invoicing. Treasury’s platform is a web-based system that provides one integrated, 

secure system to simplify the management of vendor invoices. This effort improved 

accounts payable business processes, provided a single Agency-wide electronic 

solution, and significantly reduced manual invoice data entry. NASA successfully met the 

FY 2018 target to implement expanding eInvoicing.

NASA is currently working to implement G-Invoicing, Treasury’s long-term solution 

for Federal Program Agencies (FPAs) to manage intragovernmental (IGT) Buy/Sell 

transactions by the mandated implementation deadline.

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Systems, Controls, and Legal Compliance

FINANCIAL SYSTEMS STRATEGIES

A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket, with the company’s uncrewed Dragon spacecraft atop, is raised to 

a vertical position at NASA Kennedy Space Center’s Launch Complex 39A on Aug. 25, 2021, in 

preparation for the 23rd commercial resupply services launch to the International Space Station.

PHOTO CREDIT — SpaceX
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 39

FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

FORWARD LOOKING

M A N A G EM E N T ’ S D I S C U S S I O N A N D A N A LY S I S

A Northrop Grumman Antares rocket carrying a Cygnus resupply spacecraft is seen as it is rolled out of the Horizontal 

Integration Facility on its way to the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport’s Pad-0A, Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2021, at NASA’s Wallops Flight 

Facility in Virginia. Northrop Grumman’s 15th contracted cargo resupply mission with NASA to the International Space Station 

will deliver about 8,000 pounds of science and research, crew supplies and vehicle hardware to the orbital laboratory and its 

crew. The CRS-15 Cygnus spacecraft is named after NASA mathematician, Katherine Johnson, a Black woman who time and 

again broke through barriers of gender and race. The launch is scheduled for 12:36 p.m. EST, Feb. 20, 2021.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/Patrick Black
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 40

MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS — Forward Looking

FY 2022 AND BEYOND

In February 2022, NASA will release a new quadrennial strategic plan that updates the strategic direction, goals,

and priorities in the 2018 Strategic Plan. The 2022 Strategic Plan is aligned with presidential priorities and provides a unified, 

long-term, and achievable direction for all of our activities.

At the top of NASA’s strategic plan framework will continue to be four strategic goals focused on scientific discovery, human 

space exploration, innovation, and capabilities and operations to advance mission success. We have added new strategic 

objectives, and reframed continuing ones, to support Administration and Agency priorities, and we have created stronger 

budget-performance alignment by assigning mission directorates to specific strategic goals. NASA cross-walked the FY 2022 

performance goals to the new strategic plan framework. Beginning with the FY 2022 AFR, the updated alignment will be reflected 

in where ratings are grouped in the summary of preliminary performance ratings. It also will change the Comparative Gross Cost 

of Operations by Strategic Goal and the Consolidated Statement of Net Cost.

At the end of September 2021, Administrator Nelson announced that the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate 

(HEOMD), which was responsible for NASA’s ambitious human space exploration effort and largest budget lines, would be 

separated into two mission directorates. As of FY 2022, the Space Operations Mission Directorate will focus on launch, space 

operations (including the International Space Station), the commercialization of low Earth orbit, and eventually, sustaining 

operations on and around the Moon. The Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate will define and manage systems 

development for programs critical for our Artemis program. These refocused mission directorates will be well positioned to 

implement the strategies in the 2022 Strategic Plan and address the ongoing challenges described in the Office of Inspector 

General’s Letter on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges (see page 81).

This organizational change should not alter the Required Supplementary Information Combining Statement of Budgetary 

Resources, which already uses separate budget lines for the Space Operations mission and the Exploration mission.

Members of NASA’s Perseverance Mars rover team watch in mission control as the first images arrive moments after the spacecraft successfully 

touched down on Mars, Thursday, Feb. 18, 2021, at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California. A key objective for Perseverance’s 

mission on Mars is astrobiology, including the search for signs of ancient microbial life. The rover will characterize the planet’s geology and past 

climate, pave the way for human exploration of the Red Planet, and be the first mission to collect and cache Martian rock and regolith.

PHOTO CREDIT — SpaceX

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 40
Teams with NASA’s Exploration Ground Systems and contractor Jacobs prepare to lower the Space Launch System (SLS) core 

stage – the largest part of the rocket – onto the mobile launcher, in between the twin solid rocket boosters, inside High Bay 3 of 

the Vehicle Assembly Building at NASA’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida on June 12, 2021.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/Cory Huston

41

FINANCIAL SECTION

SECTION 2

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 41
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 42

FINANCIAL SECTION — Introduction to the Principal Financial Statements

I am pleased to join Administrator Nelson in presenting the Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 NASA Agency Financial Report (AFR). The Office of the Chief 

Financial Officer (OCFO) carries the immense responsibility of supporting NASA’s mission and workforce needs through effective stewardship 

of taxpayer resources, while providing transparent and accurate reporting on NASA’s operating performance, resource management, and 

accomplishment of strategic goals. I am proud of the incredible dedication, skill, and perseverance shown by the OCFO team over the past year 

to meet the highest standards for budgetary performance, risk management, internal control, and innovative financial reporting all against the 

backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic. The dedication of this workforce is recognized in a tangible way with the achievement of NASA’s eleventh 

consecutive unmodified “clean” audit opinion with no material internal control weaknesses from our independent auditor. This certifies that 

NASA’s financial statements conform in all material respects with the requirements of U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), 

and our system of internal controls is operating effectively. This ensures that the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements are 

free from material misstatements and compliant with laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements applicable to NASA. I want to send a 

special thank you to the entire OCFO team and our supporting stakeholders for their contributions to the success of this report.

NASA is undertaking a number of highly important and complex missions, with goals designed to create educational opportunities, combat 

climate change, catalyze technological innovation and new realms of commerce, and venture out farther into the cosmos than ever before. 

These goals are pursued with determination and dedication across the Centers, divisions, and directorates by the world’s most talented 

workforce. 

Audit and Compliance Activities

In FY 2021, NASA’s independent auditors identified no material weaknesses in their financial audit. NASA’s “clean” unmodified audit opinion 

shows our FY 2021 financial statements are presented fairly and conform with GAAP. Additionally, the auditors disclosed no instances of 

deficiency complying with the applicable provisions of the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act (FFMIA) in NASA’s financial 

management systems.

Our independent auditors identified one significant deficiency in the FY 2021 audit. It was determined that enhancements were needed in the 

notes to the statements to comply with the disclosure requirements of Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board’s (FASAB) Statement of 

Federal Financial Accounting Standards (SFFAS) 49, Public-Private Partnerships: Disclosure Requirements, and OMB Circular A-136, Financial 

Reporting Requirements. NASA will work to timely resolve this deficiency as recommended by our independent auditors. The OCFO team will 

collaborate with the NASA Centers, as required, to refine and standardize our Public-Private Partnerships analysis and disclosure process.

OCFO Key Accomplishments

The OCFO team has achieved much over the past year, despite the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. We are especially proud that NASA was 

again recognized by the Association of Government Accountants (AGA) for excellence in financial reporting with the prestigious Certificate of 

Excellence in Accountability Reporting (CEAR) for our FY 2020 AFR, reflecting the painstaking efforts, resourcefulness and collaboration of the 

OCFO team and our Agency stakeholders to produce clear, compelling, and accurate Agency financial reporting.

Complementing our focus on the core OCFO mission, we are also devoted to strengthening the knowledge, skills, and abilities of our workforce 

across the enterprise. We successfully deployed a comprehensive CFO University course curriculum, in a completely virtual environment, for 

the second year in a row, providing NASA-focused financial management, program planning and control, and management and leadership 

training to our OCFO community. This ensures that the crucial connections, sharing of knowledge, and camaraderie which have always been 

our strengths are maintained and sustained during these unprecedented times. 

This year has shown just how resilient NASA can be in achieving its ambitious goals through the incredible efforts of our world-class teams. I 

have every confidence in our continued success as we move forward together.

FINANCIAL SECTION — November 15, 2021

MESSAGE FROM THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Sincerely,

MARGARET VO SCHAUS

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 42
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 43

FINANCIAL SECTION FINANCIAL SECTION — — Introduction to the Principal Financial Statements Introduction to the Principal Financial Statements

INTRODUCTION TO THE PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Consolidated Balance Sheets

provide information on assets, liabilities, and net position as of the end of the reporting 

periods. Net position is the difference between assets and liabilities. It is a summary 

measure of the Agency’s financial condition at the end of the reporting periods.

Consolidated Statements of Net Cost

report net cost of operations during the reporting periods by strategic goal and at 

the entity level. It is a measure of gross costs of operations less earned revenue, and 

represents the cost to taxpayers for achieving each strategic goal and Agency Mission at 

the entity level.

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Net Position

report the beginning balances of net position, current financing sources and use of 

resources, unexpended resources for the reporting periods, and ending net position for 

the current reporting periods.

Combined Statements of Budgetary Resources

report information on the sources and status of budgetary resources for the reporting 

periods. Information in these statements is reported on the budgetary basis of accounting, 

which supports compliance with budgetary controls and controlling legislation. Created by Irdat Purwadi from the Noun Project

The principal financial statements are prepared to report the financial position and results of operations of the National 

Aeronautics and Space Administration, pursuant to the requirements of 31 U.S.C.3515 (b).
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 44

Expedition 65 Russian cosmonaut Pyotr Dubrov, top, NASA astronaut Mark Vande Hei, middle, and Russian cosmonaut 

Oleg Novitskiy wave farewell prior to boarding the Soyuz MS-18 spacecraft for launch, Friday, April 9, 2021 at the Baikonur 

Cosmodrome in Kazakhstan. Launch of the Soyuz rocket will send the trio on a mission to the International Space Station. 

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/Bill Ingalls

44

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, NOTES, AND 

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

FINANCIAL SECTION
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 45

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

2021 2020

Assets:

Intragovernmental:

Fund Balance with Treasury (Note 2) $ 15,899 $ 14,914

Investments (Note 3) 16 16

Accounts Receivable, Net (Note 4) 90 110

Total Intragovernmental 16,005 15,040

With the Public:

Accounts Receivable, Net (Note 4) 1 –

General Property, Plant and Equipment, Net (Note 5) 6,982 6,195

Advances and Prepayments 16 –

Other Assets (Note 7) 5 6

Total with the Public 7,004 6,201

Total Assets $ 23,009 $ 21,241

Stewardship PP&E (Note 6)

Liabilities (Note 8):

Intragovernmental:

Accounts Payable $ 166 $ 187

Advances from Others and Deferred Revenues 55 61

Other Liabilities (Note 10) 50 45

Total Intragovernmental 271 293

With the Public:

Accounts Payable 1,747 1,291

Federal Employee Benefits Payable (Note 8) 320 314

Environmental and Disposal Liabilities (Note 9) 2,127 2,173

Advances from Others and Deferred Revenues 148 135

Other Liabilities (Note 10) 2,045 2,096

Total with the Public 6,387 6,009

Total Liabilities $ 6,658 $ 6,302

Commitments and Contingencies (Note 11)

Net Position:

Unexpended Appropriations $ 11,822 $ 11,230

Cumulative Results of Operations 4,529 3,709

Total Net Position $ 16,351 $ 14,939

Total Liabilities and Net Position $ 23,009 $ 21,241

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Consolidated Balance Sheets

As of September 30, 2021 and 2020

(In Millions)
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 46

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Consolidated Statements of Net Cost

For the Fiscal Years Ended September 30, 2021 and 2020

(In Millions)

 2021 2020

Strategic Goal 1 – Expand human knowledge through new 

scientific discoveries:

Gross Costs $ 8,216 $ 8,216

Less: Earned Revenue 998 1,229

Net Cost 7,218 6,987

Strategic Goal 2 – Extend human presence deeper into 

space and to the Moon for sustainable long-term exploration 

and utilization:

Gross Costs $ 7,383 $ 7,302

Less: Earned Revenue 253 260

Net Cost 7,130 7,042

Strategic Goal 3 – Address national challenges and catalyze 

economic growth:

Gross Costs $ 2,228 $ 2,231

Less: Earned Revenue 114 116

Net Cost 2,114 2,115

Strategic Goal 4 - Optimize capabilities and operations:

Gross Costs $ 5,723 $ 6,158

Less: Earned Revenue 183 171

Net Cost 5,540 5,987

Net Cost of Operations

Total Gross Costs $ 23,550 $ 23,907

Less: Total Earned Revenue 1,548 1,776

Net Cost $ 22,002 $ 22,131
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 47

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

2021 2020

Unexpended Appropriations:

Beginning Balance $ 11,230 $ 10,542

Appropriations Received 23,271 22,689

Other Adjustments (26) (90)

Appropriations Used (22,653) (21,911)

Net Change in Unexpended Appropriations 592 688

Total Unexpended Appropriations $ 11,822 $ 11,230

Cumulative Results of Operations:

Beginning Balance $ 3,709 $ 3,708

Appropriations Used 22,653 21,911

Non-Exchange Revenue – –

Donations and Forfeitures of Property 14 72

Imputed Financing 155 149

Other – –

Net Cost of Operations (22,002) (22,131)

Net Change in Cumulative Operations 820 1

Cumulative Results of Operations: Ending $ 4,529 $ 3,709

Net Position $ 16,351 $ 14,939

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Consolidated Statements of Changes in Net Position

For the Fiscal Years Ended September 30, 2021 and 2020

(In Millions)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 48

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

 2021 2020

Budgetary Resources:

Unobligated balance from prior year budget authority, net $ 2,750 $ 2,854

Appropriations 23,272 22,620

Spending authority from offsetting collections 1,875 2,237

Total Budgetary Resources $ 27,897 $ 27,711

Status of Budgetary Resources:

New obligations and upward adjustments (total) $ 25,239 $ 25,271

Unobligated balance, end of year:

Apportioned, unexpired accounts 2,490 2,286

Exempt from apportionment 1 –

Unapportioned, unexpired accounts 44 40

Unexpired unobligated balance, end of year 2,535 2,326

Expired unobligated balance, end of year 123 114

Unobligated balance, end of year (total) 2,658 2,440

Total Status of Budgetary Resources $ 27,897 $ 27,711

Outlays, net:

Outlays, net (total) $ 22,253 $ 21,545

Distributed offsetting receipts (-) (4) (22)

Agency Outlays, net $ 22,249 $ 21,523

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Combined Statements of Budgetary Resources

For the Fiscal Years Ended September 30, 2021 and 2020

(In Millions)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 49

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

Reporting Entity

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is an independent agency established by Congress on October 1, 

1958 by the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958. NASA was incorporated from its predecessor agency, the National 

Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, which provided technical advice to the United States (U.S.) aviation industry and performed 

aeronautics research. Today, NASA serves as the principal agency of the U.S. Government for initiatives in civil space and aviation.

NASA is organized into four Mission Directorates supported by one Mission Support Directorate (see Organization on page 9): 

• Aeronautics Research: conducts research which enhances aircraft performance, environmental compatibility, capacity, flexibility,

and safety of the future air transportation system;

• Human Exploration and Operations: develops new capabilities, supporting technologies and foundational research for

affordable, sustainable human and robotic exploration;

• Science: explores the Earth, Moon, Mars, and beyond; charts the best route of discovery, and obtains the benefits of Earth and

space exploration for society; and

• Space Technology: develops new technologies needed to support current and future NASA missions, other agencies, and the

aerospace industry.

The Agency’s administrative structure includes the Senior Management Council, Executive Council, Mission Support Council, 

Agency Program Management Council, Acquisition Strategy Council, and other Committees to integrate strategic, tactical, and 

operational decisions in support of strategic focus and direction. 

Operationally, NASA is organized into nine Centers and other facilities across the country, the Headquarters Office, and the NASA 

Shared Services Center (NSSC). 

The Agency’s consolidated financial statements present the accounts of all funds that have been established and maintained to 

account for the resources under the control of NASA management.

Disclosure Entities

The Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board’s (FASAB) Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards (SFFAS) No. 

47, Reporting Entity, is intended to guide Federal agencies in recognizing complex, diverse organizations possessing varying legal 

designations (e.g., government agencies, not-for-profit organizations, and corporations) that are involved in addressing public 

policy challenges. It provides guidance for determining what organizations should be included in a Federal agency’s financial 

statements (consolidation entities) and footnote disclosures (disclosure entities and related parties) for financial accountability 

purposes and is not intended to establish whether an organization is or should be considered a Federal agency for legal or 

political purposes. See Note 15, Disclosure Entity, for information on NASA’s disclosure entity. 

Basis of Accounting and Presentation

These consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board 

(FASAB) standards in the format prescribed by the OMB Circular No. A-136, Financial Reporting Requirements, Revised (August 

2021). FASAB’s authority to set Federal Government accounting standards is recognized by the American Institute of Certified 

Public Accountants (AICPA). The financial statements present the financial position, net cost of operations, changes in net position, 

and budgetary resources of NASA, as required by the Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990, Public Law (P.L.) 101-576, and the 

Government Management Reform Act, P.L. 103-356.

The accounting structure of Federal agencies is designed to reflect proprietary and budgetary accounting. Proprietary accounting 

uses the accrual method of accounting. Under the accrual method of accounting, revenues are recognized when earned and 

expenses are recognized when incurred, without regard to the timing of receipt or payment of cash. Budgetary accounting does 

not use the accrual method of accounting; it accounts for the sources and status of funds to facilitate compliance with legal 

controls over the use of Federal funds.

Material intra-agency transactions and balances have been eliminated from the principal financial statements for presentation on a 

consolidated basis, except for the Statement of Budgetary Resources, which is presented on a combined basis in accordance with 

OMB Circular No. A-136. 

| Continued on the next page →

Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 50

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

Accounting standards require all reporting entities to disclose that accounting standards allow certain presentations and 

disclosures to be modified, if needed, to prevent disclosure of classified information.

In FY 2020, NASA implemented the requirements of paragraphs 2, 9, and 10 of SFFAS No. 57, Omnibus Amendments. The 

requirements set forth in paragraphs 3-8, 11 and 12 of the standard are effective in FY 2024 and early adoption is not permitted.

Budgets and Budgetary Accounting

NASA complies with Federal budgetary accounting guidelines of OMB Circular No. A-11, Preparation, Submission and Execution 

of the Budget, Revised (August 2021). Congress funds NASA’s operations through nine main appropriations: Science; Aeronautics; 

Exploration; Space Operations; Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Engagement; Safety, Security and Mission 

Services; Space Technology; Office of Inspector General; and Construction and Environmental Compliance and Restoration. NASA 

also receives reimbursements from reimbursable service agreements that cover the cost of goods and services NASA provides to 

other Federal entities or non-Federal entities. The reimbursable agreement price is based on cost principles to reasonably reflect 

the actual cost for the goods and services provided to the customer. 

Research and Development (R&D), Other Initiatives and Similar Costs

NASA makes substantial R&D investments for the benefit of the U.S. The R&D programs include activities to extend our 

knowledge of Earth, its space environment, and the universe; and to invest in new aeronautics and advanced space transportation 

technologies supporting the development and application of technologies. Following guidance outlined in the FASAB Technical 

Release No. 7, Clarification of Standards Relating to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Space Exploration 

Equipment, NASA applies the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 730-10-25, 

Research and Development - Recognition, and FASB ASC 730-10-50 Research and Development - Disclosure, to its R&D projects. 

Consistent with the above guidance, costs to acquire PP&E that is expected to be used only for a specific R&D project are 

expensed in the period they are incurred. 

Exchange and Non-Exchange Revenue

NASA classified revenues as either exchange or non-exchange. Exchange revenues are those transactions in which NASA provides 

goods and services to another party for a price, primarily through reimbursable agreements that are priced based on cost principles 

to reasonably reflect the actual cost for the goods and services provided to the customer. These revenues are presented on the 

Statement of Net Cost and serve to offset the costs of these goods and services. Non-exchange revenues result from donations 

to the Government and from the Government’s right to demand payment, for taxes, fines, and penalties. These revenues are not 

considered to reduce the cost of NASA’s operations and are reported on the Statement of Changes in Net Position.

Application of Significant Accounting Estimates

The preparation of financial statements requires management to make assumptions and reasonable estimates affecting the 

reported amounts of assets, liabilities, and disclosures of contingent liabilities as of the date of the financial statements. Also, the 

reported amounts of revenues and expenses for the reporting period. Accordingly, actual results may differ from those estimates.

Fund Balance with Treasury

The U.S. Department of the Treasury (Treasury) collects and disburses cash on behalf of Federal agencies during the fiscal year. 

The collections include funds appropriated by Congress to fund the Agency’s operations and revenues earned for services that 

are provided to other Federal agencies or for the public. The disbursements are for goods and services in support of NASA’s 

operations and for other liabilities. The Fund Balance with Treasury (FBWT) is an asset account that shows the available budget 

spending authority of Federal agencies.

Investments in U.S. Government Securities

NASA investments include the following intragovernmental non-marketable securities: 

(1) The Endeavor Teacher Fellowship Trust Fund (Endeavor Trust Fund) was established from public donations in tribute to the

crew of the Space Shuttle Challenger. The Endeavor Trust Fund biannual interest earned is reinvested in short-term bills. P.L. 102-195

requires the interest earned from the Endeavor Trust Fund investments be used to create the Endeavor Teacher Fellowship Program.

| Continued on the next page →

Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies ote 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 51

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

(2) The Science, Space and Technology Education Trust Fund (Challenger Trust Fund) was established to advance science and

technology education. The Challenger Trust Fund balance is invested in short-term bills and/or a bond when feasible. P.L. 100-404

requires that a quarterly payment of $250,000 be sent to the Challenger Center from interest earned on the Challenger Trust

Fund investments. In order to meet the requirement of providing funds to the Challenger Center, NASA typically invests the

biannual interest earned in short-term bills with maturity that coincides with quarterly payments of $250,000 to beneficiaries.

Interest received in excess of the amount needed for quarterly payment to beneficiaries may be reinvested. NASA has not been

able to secure favorable returns on investment through securities issued by Treasury’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service in recent years

that were available for previous long-term bond investments. In anticipation of insufficient interest earnings that will not meet

NASA’s requirement to make quarterly disbursements, the Committees on Appropriations included a provision in the FY 2021

Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 116-260) enabling NASA to utilize up to $1M from the Safety, Security, and Mission Services

(SSMS) appropriation for disbursement to the Challenger Center.

Accounts Receivable

Most of NASA’s Accounts Receivable are for intragovernmental reimbursements for cost of goods and services provided to other 

Federal agencies; the rest are for debts to NASA by employees and non-Federal vendors. Allowances for delinquent non-Federal 

accounts receivable are based on factors such as: aging of accounts receivable, debtors’ ability to pay, payment history, and 

other relevant factors. Delinquent non-Federal accounts receivable over 120 days are referred to Treasury for collection, wage 

garnishment or cross-servicing in accordance with the Debt Collection Improvement Act (DCIA), as amended. An allowance for 

uncollectible accounts is recorded for Accounts Receivable due from the public and Federal sector in order to reduce Accounts 

Receivable to its net realizable value in accordance with SFFAS No. 1, Accounting for Selected Assets and Liabilities. 

General Property, Plant and Equipment (G-PP&E)

NASA reports depreciation and amortization expense using the straight-line method over an asset’s estimated useful life, 

beginning with the month the asset is placed in service. G-PP&E are capitalized assets with acquisition costs of $500,000 or more, 

a useful life of two years or more, and R&D assets that are determined at the time of acquisition to have alternative future use. 

Assets that do not meet these capitalization criteria are expensed. Capitalized costs include costs incurred by NASA to bring the 

property to a form and location suitable for its intended use. Certain NASA assets are held by Government contractors. Under 

provisions of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), the contractors are responsible for the control and accountability of the 

assets in their possession. These Government-owned, contractor-held assets are included within the balances reported in NASA’s 

financial statements.

NASA has barter agreements with international entities; the assets and services received under these barter agreements 

are unique, with limited easement to only a few countries, as these assets are on the International Space Station (ISS). The 

intergovernmental agreements state that the parties will seek to minimize the exchange of funds in the cooperative program, 

including the use of barters to provide goods and services. NASA has received some assets from these parties in exchange for 

future services. The fair value is indeterminable; therefore, no value was ascribed to these transactions in accordance with FASB 

ASC 845-10-25, Non-Monetary Transactions – Recognition, and ASC 845-10-50, Non-Monetary Transactions – Disclosure.

Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards (SFFAS) No. 10, Accounting for Internal Use Software, requires the 

capitalization of internally developed, contractor developed, and commercial off-the-shelf software. Capitalized costs for internally 

developed software include the full costs (direct and indirect) incurred during the software development stage only. For purchased 

software, capitalized costs include amounts paid to vendors for the software and other material costs incurred by NASA to 

implement and make the software ready for use through acceptance testing. NASA capitalizes costs for internal use software 

when the total projected cost is $1 million or more, and the expected useful life of the software is two years or more.

Liabilities Covered by Budgetary Resources

As a component of a sovereign entity, NASA cannot pay for liabilities unless authorized by law and covered by budgetary resources. 

Liabilities Covered by Budgetary Resources are those for which appropriated funds are available as of the balance sheet date. Budgetary 

resources include: new budget authority, unobligated balances of budgetary resources at the beginning of the year or net transfers of 

prior year balances during the year, spending authority from offsetting collections (credited to an appropriation or fund account), and 

recoveries of unexpired budget authority through downward adjustments of prior year obligations.

| Continued on the next page →

Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 52

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

Liabilities and Contingencies Not Covered by Budgetary Resources

Liabilities and Contingencies Not Covered by Budgetary Resources include future environmental cleanup liability, legal claims, pensions 

and other retirement benefits, workers’ compensation, annual leave, and payables related to cancelled appropriations. Liabilities 

not covered by budgetary resources require future congressional action whereas liabilities covered by budgetary resources reflect 

prior congressional action. Liabilities that do not require the use of budgetary resources are covered by monetary assets that are not 

budgetary resources to the entity.

Federal Employee Benefits

A liability is recorded for workers’ compensation claims related to the Federal Employees’ Compensation Act (FECA), administered by the 

U.S. Department of Labor. The FECA provides income and medical cost protection to covered Federal civilian employees injured on the 

job, employees who have incurred a work-related occupational disease, and beneficiaries of employees whose death is attributable to a 

job-related injury or occupational disease. The FECA program initially pays valid claims and subsequently seeks reimbursement from the 

Federal agencies employing the claimants. The FECA liability includes the actuarial liability for estimated future costs of death benefits, 

workers’ compensation, medical and miscellaneous costs for approved compensation cases.

Personnel Compensation and Benefits

Annual, Sick and Other Leave

Annual leave is accrued as it is earned; the accrual is reduced as leave is taken. Each year, the balance in the accrued annual leave 

account is adjusted to reflect current pay rates. To the extent current or prior year appropriations are not available to fund annual 

leave earned but not taken, funding will be obtained from future financing sources. Sick leave and other types of non-vested leave are 

expensed as taken.

Retirement Benefits

NASA employees participate in the Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS), a defined benefit plan, or the Federal Employees Retirement 

System (FERS), a defined benefit and contribution plan. For CSRS employees, NASA makes contributions of 7.0 percent of gross pay. For 

FERS employees, NASA makes contributions to the defined benefit plan of 16.0 percent of gross pay. For employees hired January 1, 

2013, and after, NASA contributes 14.2 percent of gross pay. The Agency also contributes 1.0 percent to a thrift savings plan (contribution 

plan) for each employee and matches employee contributions to this plan up to an additional 4.0 percent of gross pay.

Insurance Benefits

SFFAS No. 5, Accounting for Liabilities of the Federal Government, requires Government agencies to report the full cost of Federal 

Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) and the Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance (FEGLI) Programs. NASA uses the applicable cost 

factors and data provided by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to value these liabilities.

Public Private Partnerships

SFFAS No. 49, Public-Private Partnerships: Disclosure Requirements, defines public-private partnerships as “risk-sharing arrangements 

or transactions with expected lives greater than five years between public and private sector entities” and was effective beginning in FY 

2019. NASA performed an extensive assessment of agreements with the public and reviewed the terms of the agreements against risk 

sharing and other criteria for financial statement disclosure as provided in the standard. NASA determined that as of September 30, 2021 

there are no public-private partnerships that meet the criteria for disclosure.

Reclassification of FY 2021 Information

Certain reclassifications have been made to FY 2021 financial statements, notes, and supplemental information to better align with the 

Agency’s policies and procedures effective in FY 2021, in accordance with the Treasury Financial Manual and OMB Circular A-136. 

Subsequent Events

Subsequent events have been evaluated per guidance in OMB Circular A-136 for FY 2021. The auditors’ report date is the date the 

financial statements are available to be issued and management determined that there are no other items to disclose related to NASA’s 

FY 2021 financial statements.

Note 1: Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 53

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

Note 3: Investments

Investments consist of non-marketable par value intragovernmental securities issued by Treasury’s Bureau of the Fiscal Service. 

Trust fund balances are invested in Treasury securities, which are purchased at either a premium or discount, and redeemed 

at par value exclusively through Treasury’s Federal Investment Branch. The effective-interest method is used to amortize the 

premium on the bond, and the straight-line method is used to amortize discounts on bills.

Interest receivable on investments was zero in FY 2021 and less than one-half million dollars in FY 2020. In addition, NASA did not 

have any adjustments resulting from the sale of securities prior to maturity or any change in value that was more than temporary.

2021

(In Millions) Cost Amortization

Method

Amortized

(Premium)

Discount

Interest

Receivable

Investments, 

Net

Other

Adjustments

Market 

Value 

Disclosure

Intragovernmental Securities: Straight-Line

Effective interest

Non-Marketable: Par value $ 16 0.055 - 0.065% $ — $ — $ 16 $ — $ 16

Total $ 16 $ — $ — $ 16 $ — $ 16

2020

(In Millions) Cost Amortization

Method

Amortized

(Premium)

Discount

Interest

Receivable

Investments, 

Net

Other

Adjustments

Market 

Value 

Disclosure

Intragovernmental Securities: Straight-Line

Effective interest

Non-Marketable: Par value $ 16 0.105 - 1.487% $ — $ — $ 16 $ — $ 16

Total $ 16 $ — $ — $ 16 $ — $ 16

Note 2: Fund Balance with Treasury 

The status of Fund Balance with Treasury (FBWT) represents the total fund balance recorded in the general ledger for unobligated 

and obligated balances. Unobligated balances – available is the amount remaining in appropriated funds available for obligation. 

Unobligated balances – unavailable is primarily comprised of amounts remaining in appropriated funds used only for adjustments 

to previously recorded obligations. Obligated balance not yet disbursed is the cumulative amount of obligations incurred for which 

outlays have not been made. Non-Budgetary FBWT is comprised of amounts in non-appropriated funds.

(In Millions) 2021 2020

Status of Fund Balances with Treasury:

Unobligated Balances

Available $ 2,491 $ 2,286

Unavailable 167 154

Obligated Balance not yet Disbursed 13,215 12,441

Non-Budgetary FBWT 26 33

Total $ 15,899 $ 14,914
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 54

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

Note 5: General Property, Plant and Equipment, Net

There are no known restrictions to the use or convertibility of NASA G-PP&E. The composition of NASA G-PP&E as of 

September 30, 2021 and 2020 is presented in the table below.

2021

(In Millions) Depreciation

Method

Estimated

Useful Life Cost Accumulated Depreciation Book Value

General PP&E

Structures, Facilities and Leasehold Improvements Straight-line 15–40 Years $ 12,017 $ (8,812) $ 3,205

Equipment Straight-line 5–20 Years 16,504 (15,161) 1,343

Work in Progress - Personal Property N/A N/A 1,695 — 1,695

Construction In Progress - Real Property N/A N/A 608 — 608

Internal Use Software Straight-line 5 years 253 (246) 7

Land N/A N/A 124 — 124

 Total $ 31,201 $ (24,219) $ 6,982

Note 4: Accounts Receivable, Net

The Accounts Receivable balance represents net valid claims by NASA to cash or other assets of other entities. Intragovernmental 

Accounts Receivable represents reimbursements due from other Federal entities for goods and services provided by NASA on a 

reimbursable basis. Accounts Receivable due from the public is the total of miscellaneous debts owed to NASA from employees 

and/ or smaller reimbursements from other non-Federal entities. A periodic evaluation of accounts receivable is performed to 

estimate any uncollectible amounts based on current status, financial and other relevant characteristics of debtors, and the overall 

relationship with the debtor. An allowance for uncollectible accounts is recorded for Accounts Receivable due from the public and 

Federal sector in order to reduce Accounts Receivable to its net realizable value in accordance with SFFAS No. 1, Accounting for 

Selected Assets and Liabilities. The total allowance for uncollectible accounts during FY 2021 and FY 2020 is less than one–half 

million dollars. 

2021

(In Millions) Accounts 

Receivable

Allowance for 

Uncollectible 

Accounts

Net Amount 

Due

Intragovernmental $ 90 $ — $ 90

Public 1 — 1

Total $ 91 $ — $ 91

2020

(In Millions) Accounts 

Receivable

Allowance for 

Uncollectible 

Accounts

Net Amount 

Due

Intragovernmental $ 110 $ — $ 110

Public — — —

Total $ 110 $ — $ 110

| Continued on the next page →
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 55

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

Note 6: Stewardship PP&E

Federal agencies are required to classify and report heritage assets, multi-use heritage assets, and stewardship land in 

accordance with SFFAS No. 29, Heritage Assets and Stewardship Land. Stewardship PP&E have physical characteristics similar to 

those of G-PP&E, but differ from G-PP&E because their value is more intrinsic and not easily determinable in dollars. The only type 

of stewardship PP&E owned by NASA are heritage assets..

Heritage assets are PP&E that possess one or more of the following characteristics:

• Historical or natural significance;

• Cultural, educational, or artistic (e.g., aesthetic importance);

• Significant architectural characteristics.

There is no minimum dollar threshold for designating PP&E as a heritage asset, and depreciation expense is not taken on these 

assets. For these reasons, heritage assets (other than multi-use heritage assets) are reported in physical units, rather than with 

assigned dollar values. In accordance with SFFAS No. 29, the cost of acquisition, improvement, reconstruction, or renovation of 

heritage assets is expensed in the period incurred.

The following table presents the changes in total General PP&E and accumulated depreciation from October 1, 2020 to September 30, 

2021 and October 1, 2019 to September 30, 2020.

2020

(In Millions) Depreciation

Method

Estimated

Useful Life Cost Accumulated Depreciation Book Value

General PP&E

Structures, Facilities and Leasehold Improvements Straight-line 15–40 Years $ 11,642 $ (8,539) $ 3,103

Equipment Straight-line 5–20 Years 16,560 (15,109) 1,451

Work in Progress - Personal Property N/A N/A 741 — 741

Construction In Progress - Real Property N/A N/A 766 — 766

Internal Use Software Straight-line 5 Years 253 (243) 10

Land N/A N/A 124 — 124

 Total $ 30,086 $ (23,891) $ 6,195

Net PP&E

(In Millions) 2021 2020

Balance Beginning of Year $ 6,195 $ 6,008

Capitalized acquisitions 1,418 769

Disposition (101) (106)

Depreciation expense (544) (547)

Donations 14 71

Balance End of Year $ 6,982 $ 6,195

| Continued on the next page →
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 56

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

Heritage Assets (In Physical Units) 2020 Additions Withdrawals 2021

Collection-type

Air and Space Displays and Artifacts 2 — — 2

Art 1 — — 1

Non-Collection type

NASA Locations 9 — — 9

Total Heritage Assets 12 — — 12

Throughout the history of NASA’s operations, the Agency has become an owner of historic buildings, structures, historical artifacts, 

art, and other cultural resources. The protection and conservation of these heritage assets is an essential part of the agency’s 

mission. NASA acquires such assets as a result of donation, or acquires the assets as a result of historically significant items being 

retired from active service and preserved by the agency for historic purposes. When capitalized assets are identified as heritage 

assets and no longer predominately serve NASA’s primary operations, their values are removed from the PP&E accounts. Any 

maintenance costs incurred for the upkeep of the heritage assets are expensed in the period incurred.

Assets that have a heritage function and are used in NASA’s day-to-day operations are considered multi-use heritage assets. 

NASA’s multi-use heritage assets consist of items such as launch pads, research labs, and wind tunnels still in operational use. 

Such assets that meet the capitalization criteria are accounted for as G-PP&E and depreciated over their estimated useful life in 

the same manner as other G-PP&E. Multi-use heritage assets are presented at the individual item level. As of September 30, 2021 

and 2020, the total number of NASA’s multi-use heritage assets were 523 and 520 respectively.

When a G-PP&E has no use in operations, but is designated as a heritage asset, its cost and accumulated depreciation are 

reclassified and removed from the G-PP&E asset accounts. Such assets remain on the record as heritage assets, except where 

there is legal authority for transfer or sale at which time they are removed from the heritage asset record. Heritage assets are 

withdrawn when they are disposed or reclassified as multi-use heritage assets. Heritage assets are generally in fair condition 

suitable for display.

SFFAS No. 29 provides agencies with considerations for defining individual physical heritage assets units as a collection, or 

a group of assets, where appropriate. NASA has reviewed and categorized its heritage assets into collection-type and noncollection-type assets. NASA’s collection-type heritage assets include Air and Space Displays and Artifacts, and Art as described 

in the following paragraphs.

• Air and Space Displays and Artifacts collections are classified based on the physical custody of the asset. There are two

collections: NASA-held and Contractor-held. Each collection is composed of assorted mementos of historic NASA events.

Examples include items from previous missions that have historical significance to NASA and historic mission control artifacts

that possess educational value and enhance the public’s understanding of NASA’s numerous programs.

• Art collection includes artwork inspired by the U.S. Aerospace program, as well as historical books, documents, and other library

materials that document NASA’s history. This collection is comprised of items created by artists who have contributed their time

and talent to record their impressions of the history of the U.S. Aerospace Program through paintings, drawings, written form,

and other media. These works of art not only provide a historic record of NASA projects, but they also support NASA’s mission

by giving the public a new and more comprehensive understanding of advancements in aerospace.

NASA’s non-collection-type heritage assets include historic buildings, bunkers, towers, test stands, and properties that are listed or 

eligible to be listed on the National Register of Historic Places and National Historic Landmarks, and other resources.

• Non-collection-type heritage assets were established by locations for specific reasons and to pursue a variety of goals. Each

is home to specific areas of expertise and support different elements of NASA’s missions, taking on a unique identity. They

provide the public with tangible examples of assets with historical significance or educational importance to NASA programs

and missions at each location.

Total physical units, along with 

the additions and withdrawals for 

the fiscal year ended September 

30, 2021 and 2020 for NASA’s 

heritage assets are displayed in 

the table right:
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 57

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

(In Millions) 2021 2020

Intragovernmental:

Accounts Payable $ 166 $ 83

Advances from Others and Deferred Revenue 55 61

Other 50 149

Total Intragovernmental $ 271 $ 293

Accounts Payable 1,747 1,291

Federal Employee Benefits Payable 320 314

Environmental and Disposal Liabilities 2,127 2,173

Less: Environmental and Disposal Liabilities - Funded (118) (138)

Advances from Others and Deferred Revenues 148 135

Other 2,045 2,096

Total Liabilities Not Covered by Budgetary Resources 2,463 2,462

Total Liabilities Covered by Budgetary Resources 4,173 3,809

Total Liabilities Not Requiring Budgetary Resources 22 31

Total Liabilities $ 6,658 $ 6,302

(In Millions) 2021 2020

Non-Intragovernmental Assets

G-PP&E - Removed from Service and

Pending Disposal $ 5 $ 5

Other Advances _ 1

Total Other Assets $ 5 $ 6

Note 7: Other Assets

NASA’s Other Assets consists of G-PP&E that NASA 

determined are no longer needed and are awaiting 

disposal, retirement, or removal from service. The G-PP&E 

Other Assets are recorded at estimated net realizable 

value. Other Assets at the end of the period totaled $5 

million as of September 30, 2021 and $6 million as of 

September 30, 2020.

Note 8: Liabilities Not Covered by Budgetary Resources

Liabilities not covered by budgetary resources require future congressional action whereas liabilities covered by budgetary 

resources reflect prior congressional action. Regardless of when the congressional action occurs, when the liabilities are 

liquidated, Treasury will finance the liquidation in the same way that it finances all other disbursements, using some combination 

of receipts, other inflows, and borrowing from the public (if there is a budget deficit).

The present value of the FECA actuarial liability estimate at year-end was calculated by the Department of Labor using a discount 

rate of 2.23 percent in FY 2021 and 2.41 percent in FY 2020. This liability includes the estimated future costs for claims incurred 

but not reported (IBNR) or approved as of the end of each year. NASA has recorded accounts payable related to canceled 

appropriations for which there are contractual commitments to pay. These payables will be funded from appropriations available 

for obligation at the time a bill is processed, in accordance with P.L. 101-510, National Defense Authorization Act.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 58

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

Note 9: Environmental and Disposal Liabilities

In accordance with guidance issued by FASAB, if an agency is required by Federal, state, and local statutes and regulations to 

clean up hazardous waste resulting from Federal operations, the amount of cleanup cost, if estimable, must be reported and/or 

disclosed in the financial statements. The statutes and regulations most applicable to NASA environmental response, clean-up, 

and monitoring liabilities include: The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act; the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act; the Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982; and applicable state and local laws. 

NASA assesses the likelihood of required cleanup as probable (more likely than not to occur), reasonably possible (more than 

remote but less than probable), or remote (slight chance of occurring). If the likelihood of required cleanup is probable and 

the cost can be reasonably estimated, a liability is recorded in the financial statements. If the likelihood of required cleanup 

is reasonably possible, the estimated cost of cleanup is disclosed in the notes to the financial statements. If the likelihood of 

required cleanup is remote, no liability or estimate is recorded or disclosed. 

Environmental and Disposal Liabilities Represent Cleanup Costs Resulting From:

• Operations, including facilities obtained from other governmental entities, that have resulted in contamination from waste

disposal methods, leaks and spills;

• Other past activity that created a public health or environmental risk, including identifiable costs associated with asbestos

abatement; and

• Total cleanup costs associated with the removal, containment, and/or disposal of hazardous wastes or material and/or property

at permanent or temporary closure or shutdown of associated PP&E.

Environment and disposal liabilities as of September 30, 2021 and 2020 were as follows: 

Restoration Projects

NASA recorded a total estimated liability for known restoration projects of $1.893 billion in FY 2021. This was a decrease of $19 

million from $1.912 billion recorded in FY 2020. The decrease in this liability is primarily due to the availability of new or updated 

information on the extent of contamination and refinements to the estimation methodology. The liability for each restoration 

project is estimated for a duration of no more than 30 years, except where required by state statutes, regulations, or an 

agreement.

In addition to the probable cleanup costs for known hazardous conditions recognized in the financial statements, there are other 

remediation sites where the likelihood of required cleanup for known hazardous conditions is reasonably possible. Remediation 

costs at certain sites classified as reasonably possible were estimated to be $12 million for FY 2021 and $13 million for FY 2020. 

The estimate is primarily due to the addition of a large-scale demolition project at Santa Susana Field Laboratory where clean-up 

was deemed reasonably possible.

With respect to environmental remediation that NASA considers probable or reasonably possible but not estimable, NASA 

concluded that either the likelihood of a NASA liability is less than probable but more than remote, but the regulatory drivers and/

or technical data that exist are not reliable enough to calculate an estimate.

(In Millions) 2021 2020

Environmental Liabilities

Restoration Projects $ 1,893 $ 1,912

Asbestos 182 179

End of Life Disposal of Property, Plant & Equipment 52 82

Total Environmental and Disposal Liabilities $ 2,127 $ 2,173

| Continued on the next page →
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 59

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

Note 9: Environmental and Disposal Liabilities (Continued)

Asbestos

NASA maintains numerous structures and facilities across each of its Centers that are known to contain asbestos. In 

accordance with FASAB Technical Bulletin 2006-1, Recognition and Measurement of Asbestos Related Cleanup Costs, NASA 

and other Federal entities are required to recognize a liability for probable asbestos cleanup costs. FASAB Technical Release 

10, Implementation Guidance on Asbestos Cleanup Costs Associated with Facilities and Installed Equipment, allows for an 

extrapolation of asbestos cleanup cost estimates for similar properties to develop an Agency-wide cleanup estimate. NASA uses 

actual costs incurred to clean up asbestos in NASA structures and facilities that were recently demolished or fully renovated 

to estimate the asbestos liability. Agency-wide asbestos cleanup cost factors were developed for both structures and facilities 

measured in square feet and for those not measured in square feet. These cost factors were then extrapolated across applicable 

NASA structures and facilities. The asbestos cleanup cost liability of $182 million in FY 2021 represents an increase of $3 million 

compared to the $179 million recorded in FY 2020. 

End of Life Disposal of Property, Plant & Equipment

Consistent with SFFAS No. 5, Accounting for Liabilities of the Federal Government and with SFFAS No. 6, Accounting for Property, 

Plant, and Equipment, NASA estimates the anticipated environmental disposal cleanup costs for PP&E. NASA recognizes 

and records in its financial statements an environmental cleanup liability for end-of-life disposal of PP&E that is probable and 

measurable.

NASA recorded a total estimated liability for the end-of-life disposal of PP&E of $52 million in FY 2021. This was a decrease of

$30 million over the $82 million recorded in FY 2020. The decrease was due to a disposal of one of the mobile launch platforms, 

change in estimate regarding the remaining two mobile launch platforms, and a reduction in the number of permitted facilities. 

This estimate includes both facilities with permits that require cleanup and an estimate for all remaining PP&E. As described in the 

following paragraphs, this estimate also considers end-of-life disposal costs for assets in space, including the ISS and satellites.

The current proposed decommissioning approach for the ISS is to execute a controlled targeted deorbit to a remote ocean 

location. This is consistent with the approach used to deorbit other space vehicles (e.g., Russia’s Progress, Europe’s Automated 

Transfer Vehicle (ATV) and Japan’s H-II Transfer Vehicle (HTV)). The documented target reliability for this decommissioning 

approach is 99 percent. Prior to decommissioning the ISS, any hazardous materials on board the ISS would be removed 

or jettisoned. As a result, only residual quantities of hazardous, toxic, and radioactive materials would remain prior to the 

decommissioning.

Based on past experience with the re-entry of satellites, larger portions or fragments of the ISS would be expected to survive the 

thermal and aerodynamic stresses of reentry. However, the historical disposal of satellites and vehicles into broad ocean areas 

with a controlled deorbit has left little evidence of their re-entry. Any remaining contamination in the ISS debris field would not be 

expected to have a substantive impact on marine life. Therefore, the probability of NASA incurring environmental cleanup costs 

related to the ISS is remote and no estimate for such costs has been developed or reported in these financial statements.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 60

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

Note 10: Other Liabilities and Other Accrued Liabilities

Intragovernmental Other Liabilities primarily represent accrued cost estimates for goods and services performed by Federal 

trading partners, and Advances from Others relates to agreements for services between NASA and Federal trading partners for 

reimbursable services performed.

Other Liabilities with public entities primarily represents unfunded annual leave and funded sick leave that have been earned but 

not taken by NASA employees, and Advances from Others primarily consists of payments received from non-Federal entities in 

advance of NASA’s performance of services under reimbursable agreements.

Other Accrued Liabilities primarily consist of the accrual of contractor costs for goods and services performed. The period of 

performance for contractor contracts typically spans the duration of NASA programs, which could be for a number of years prior to 

final delivery of the product. In such cases, NASA records a cost accrual throughout the fiscal year as the work is performed. Other 

Accrued Liabilities also include the accrual of IBNR grant program costs incurred in support of NASA’s research and development 

and other related activities.

2021 2020

(In Millions) Current Non-current Total Current Non-current Total

Intragovernmental:

Employer Contributions and Payroll Taxes Payable 44 — 44 38 — 38

Other Post-Employment Benefits Due and Payable 5 1 6 6 1 7

Total Intragovernmental $ 49 $ 1 $ 50 $ 44 $ 1 $ 45

With the Public:

Other Liabilities With Related Budgetary Obligations 1,823 — 1,823 1,892 — 1,892

Accrued Funded Payroll and Leave 128 — 128 117 — 117

Liability for Non-Fiduciary Deposit Funds and Undeposited 

Collections 22 — 22 31 — 31

Contingent Liabilities 16 — 16 — — —

Other Liabilities Without Related Budgetary Obligations 56 — 56 56 — 56

Total With the Public $ 2,045 — $ 2,045 $ 2,096 — $ 2,096

Total Other Liabilities and Other Accrued Liabilities $ 2,094 $ 1 $ 2,095 $ 2,140 $ 1 $ 2,141
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 61

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

Note 12: Explanation of Differences Between the SBR and the Budget of the U.S. 

Government

The FY 2023 Budget of the United States Government (President’s Budget), which presents the actual amounts for the year ended 

September 30, 2021, has not been published as of the issue date of these financial statements. The FY 2023 Budget of the United 

States Government will be published on a later date at https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget. 

NASA reconciled the amounts of the FY 2020 column on the SBR to the actual amounts for FY 2020 in the FY 2022 President’s 

Budget for budgetary resources, new obligations, upward adjustments (total), distributed offsetting receipts, and net outlays as 

presented below.

Note 11: Commitments and Contingencies

NASA is a party in various administrative proceedings, court actions (including tort suits), and claims. For cases in which 

management and legal counsel believe it is probable that the outcomes will result in a loss to NASA, contingent liabilities are 

recorded. There are certain cases where the likelihood of loss is deemed reasonably possible. A contingent liability is not required 

to be recorded for these cases; however, the estimated range of loss is disclosed below.

Additionally, there are cases reviewed by legal counsel where the likelihood of loss is deemed remote. A contingent liability is not 

required to be recorded or disclosed for these cases.

The difference between the SBR and the President’s Budget represents expired accounts and distributed offsetting receipts 

reported on the SBR but not in the President’s Budget.

(In Millions) Budgetary 

Resources

New Obligations 

& Upward 

Adjustments (Total)

Distributed 

Offsetting 

Receipts

Net Outlays

Combined Statement of Budgetary Resources $ 27,711 $ 25,271 $ (22) $ 21,545

Included on SBR, not in President's Budget

Expired Accounts (143) (29) — —

Distributed Offsetting Receipts — — 22 —

Budget of the United States Government $ 27,568 $ 25,242 $ — $ 21,545

2021 2020

ESTIMATED RANGE OF LOSS ESTIMATED RANGE OF LOSS

(In Millions) Accrued 

Liabilities

Accrued Lower End Upper End Liabilities Lower End Upper End

 Legal Contingencies

Probable $ 16 $ — $ — $ — $ — $ —

Reasonably Possible $ — $ 16 $ — $ 8
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 62

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

(In Millions) 2021

Federal

Unpaid $ 730

Paid 200

Total 930

Nonfederal

Unpaid 10,326

Paid 10

Total 10,336

Total Undelivered Orders 11,266

2021

(In Millions) Intragovernmental With the Public Total

Net Cost $ 138 $ 21,864 $ 22,002 

Components of Net Cost Not Part of the Budgetary Outlays

Property, plant, and equipment depreciation expense — (544) (544)

Property, plant, and equipment disposals and revaluations — (101) (101)

Applied overhead/cost capitalization offset — 1,418 1,418

Donations — 14 14

Increase/(Decrease) in Assets:

Accounts receivable, net (19) — (19)

Other assets 15 15 30

(Increase)/Decrease in Liabilities:

Accounts payable 17 (456) (439)

Environmental and disposal liabilities — 46 46

Federal employee benefits payable — (6) (6)

Other Liabilities (11) 32 21

Financing Sources:

Imputed Cost (156) — (156)

Total Components of Net Cost Not Part of the Budgetary Outlays (154) 418 264

Misc Items

Distributed offsetting receipts (SBR 4200) (4) — (4)

Custodial/Non-exchange revenue — (18) (18)

Non-Entity Activity 4 — 4

Appropriated Receipts for Trust/Special Funds 1 — 1

Total Other Reconciling Items 1 (18) (17)

Total Net Outlays (Calculated Total) $ (15) $ 22,264 $ 22,249

Budgetary Agency Outlays, net (SBR 4210) $ 22,249

Note 13: Undelivered Orders at 

the End of the Period

Undelivered Orders represent the amount of 

goods and/or services ordered to perform NASA’s 

mission objectives, which have not been received. 

Undelivered Orders at the end of the period totaled 

$11.3 billion as of September 30, 2021.

Note 14: Reconciliation of Net Cost to Net Outlays

Budgetary accounting is used for planning and control purposes and relates to both the receipt and use of cash, as well as reporting the 

Federal deficit. Financial accounting is intended to provide a picture of the Government’s financial operations and financial position on an 

accrual basis. The accrual basis includes information about costs arising from the consumption of assets and the incurrence of liabilities. 

The reconciliation of net outlays is presented on a budgetary basis, and the net cost is presented on an accrual basis, which provides 

an explanation of the relationship between budgetary and financial accounting information. The reconciliation serves not only to identify 

costs in the past and those paid in the future, but also to assure integrity between budgetary and financial accounting. The analysis below 

illustrates this reconciliation by listing the key differences between net cost and net outlays.

| Continued on the next page →
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 63

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

2020

(In Millions) Intragovernmental With the Public Total

Net Cost $ (267) $ 22,398 $ 22,131 

Components of Net Cost Not Part of the Budgetary Outlays

Property, plant, and equipment depreciation — (547) (547)

Property, plant, and equipment disposal & reevaluation — (105) (105)

Other — 764 764

Increase/(decrease) in assets not affecting Budgetary Outlays

Accounts receivable (29) (1) (30)

Other assets 40 (1) 39

(Increase)/decrease in liabilities not affecting Budgetary Outlays

Accounts payable (48) (19) (67)

Salaries and benefits (19) (11) (30)

Environmental and disposal liabilities — (204) (204)

Other liabilities (Unfunded leave, unfunded FECA, actuarial FECA) (12) (245) (257)

Other financing sources

Federal employee retirement benefit costs paid by OPM and imputed to agency (149) — (149)

Total Components of Net Cost Not Part of the Budgetary Outlays (217) (369) (586)

Components of the Budgetary Outlays That Are Not Part of Net Cost

Other (1) (21) (22)

Total Components of the Budgetary Outlays That Are Not Part of Net Cost (1) (21) (22)

Net Outlays (Calculated Total) $ (485) $ 22,008 $ 21,523

Related Amounts on the Statement of Budgetary Resources

Outlays, net (SBR 4190) $ 21,545

Distributed offsetting receipts (SBR 4200) (22)

Agency Outlays, Net (SBR 4210) $ 21,523

$21,241 $21,241

$14,939 $14,939

Note 15: Disclosure Entity

The Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) is a NASA-owned facility which serves as a Federally Funded Research and Development Center 

(FFRDC). The facility commenced activities in the mid-1930s and at that time was sponsored by the U.S. Army to develop rocket 

technology and missile systems.

The California Institute of Technology (Caltech), a private, not-for-profit 501(c)(3) university, manages JPL pursuant to a sole-source, fiveyear, Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)-based contract with NASA. The value of NASA’s Caltech contract for FY 2021 was $3 billion. 

Under this contract, NASA issues task orders to Caltech for various research programs and projects conducted at JPL. The contract is 

subject to the usual FAR-based Federal contract oversight and reporting requirements. Caltech has managed JPL as a NASA FFRDC 

since 1959.

Caltech and NASA’s relationship at JPL is governed by the terms and conditions of their contract which does not give NASA responsibility 

for or insight into Caltech’s business objectives or operations at JPL. JPL staff is comprised of Caltech employees and contractors, while 

NASA has a resident office at the facility staffed by Federal managers who administer the NASA/Caltech contract. The physical plant and 

equipment used to conduct operations under the contract are Government-furnished property and material, made available to Caltech for 

the performance of its contract with NASA, and includes contractor-acquired property. The work performed by JPL for NASA is funded by 

NASA as part of one or more of NASA’s major programs and supports NASA’s missions and programs. Every year, JPL issues a review of 

its accomplishments. JPL’s Annual Reports are found at JPL Annual Reports (nasa.gov).

NASA has the unilateral authority to establish or amend the fundamental purpose and mission of activities at its JPL FFRDC. NASA’s 

contract with Caltech reflects and incorporates NASA’s authority into its terms and conditions. NASA also has the unilateral authority to 

orderly phase down and close its FFRDC and thus, the NASA contract with Caltech. As such, the contract terms allow NASA to close the 

FFRDC, transfer sponsorship of the FFRDC to another sponsor (Federal agency), transition the FFRDC to another contractor (e.g., another 

University), or renew the contract. In the event of a termination of its contract with Caltech for the management of JPL, JPL would only 

receive costs that NASA deems allowable, allocable, and reasonable under the contract’s terms.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 64

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

FY 2021 NASA Statement of Net Cost Line Items Used to Prepare

FY 2021 Government-wide Statement of Net Cost

Financial Statement Line Amounts

(In Millions)

Amounts

(In Millions) Reclassified Financial Statement Line

Gross Costs 23,550 Gross Cost

22,122 Non-Federal Gross Cost

22,122 Total Non-Federal Gross Cost

Federal Gross Cost

567 Benefit Program Costs

156 Imputed Costs

541 Buy/Sell Costs

164 Other Expenses (without reciprocals)

1,428 Total Federal Gross Costs

Total Gross Costs 23,550 23,550 Department Total Gross Cost

Earned Revenue 1,548 Earned Revenue

258 Non-Federal Earned Revenue

Federal Earned Revenue

1,290 Buy/Sell Revenue (Exchange)

1,290 Total Federal Earned Revenue

Total Earned Revenue 1,548 1,548 Department Total Earned Revenue

Net Cost 22,002 22,002 Net Cost of Operations

| Continued on the next page →

Note 16: Reclassification of Financial Statement Line Items for Financial Report 

Compilation Process 

To prepare the Financial Report of the U.S. Government (FR), the Department of the Treasury requires agencies to submit an adjusted trial balance, 

which is a listing of amounts by U.S. Standard General Ledger account that appear in the financial statements. Treasury uses the trial balance 

information reported in the Governmentwide Treasury Account Symbol Adjusted Trial Balance System (GTAS) to develop a Reclassified Statement 

of Net Cost and a Reclassified Statement of Changes in Net Position for each agency, which are accessed using GTAS. Treasury eliminates all 

intragovernmental balances from the reclassified statements and aggregates lines with the same title to develop the FR statements. This note 

shows the Agency’s financial statements and the Agency’s reclassified statements prior to elimination of intragovernmental balances and prior to 

aggregation of repeated FR line items. A copy of the 2020 FR can be found here: https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/reports-statements/ and a copy 

of the 2021 FR will be posted to this site as soon as it is released.

The term “intragovernmental” is used in this note to refer to amounts that result from other components of the Federal Government.

The term “non-Federal” is used in this note to refer to Federal Government amounts that result from transactions with non-Federal entities. These 

include transactions with individuals, businesses, non-profit entities, and State, local, and foreign governments. The Agency does not have funds 

from dedicated collections.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 65

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

Note 17: COVID-19 Activity

NASA received $60 million in FY 2020, provided for its Safety, Security, and Mission Services appropriation to prevent, prepare 

for, and respond to the coronavirus domestically or internationally. There was no funding received in FY 2021. 

Please see page 30 for more information.

Note 16: Reclassification of Financial Statement Line Items for Financial Report 

Compilation Process (Continued)

FY 2021 NASA Statement of Changes in Net Position Line Items Used to Prepare

FY 2021 Government-wide Statement of Changes in Net Position

Financial Statement Line Amounts

(In Millions)

Amounts

(In Millions) Reclassified Financial Statement Line

Unexpended Appropriations

Beginning Balance 11,230 11,230 Net Position, Beginning of Period

Appropriations Received 23,271

23,245 Appropriations Received as Adjusted

Other Adjustments (26)

Appropriations Used (22,653) (22,653) Appropriations Used

Net Change in Unexpended Appropriations 592 592

Total Unexpended Appropriations 11,822 11,822

Cumulative Results of Operations

Beginning Balance 3,709 3,709 Net Position, Beginning of Period

Appropriations Used 22,653 22,653 Appropriations Expended

Non-Exchange Revenue _

17 Other Taxes and Receipts

Donations and Forfeitures of Property 14

Imputed Financing 155 156 Imputed Financing Sources

Other _ (4) Non-Entity Collections Transferred to the General Fund of the U.S. 

Government

Net Cost of Operations (22,002) (22,002) Net Cost of Operations

Net Change 820 820

Cumulative Results of Operations 4,529 4,529

Net Position 16,351 16,351 Net Position, End of Period
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 66

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

(In Millions)

Space 

Operations

Mission 

Science 

Mission

Exploration 

Mission

Aeronautics 

Mission

Safety, 

Security 

and Mission 

Services

STEM

Engagement

Mission

Budgetary Resources:

Unobligated Balance from Prior Year Budget Authority, Net $ 289 $ 703 $ 252 $ 38 $ 998 $ 13

Appropriations 3,987 7,297 6,512 829 2,936 127

Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections — — — — 1,328 —

Total Budgetary Resources $ 4,276 $ 8,000 $ 6,764 $ 867 $ 5,262 $ 140

Status of Budgetary Resources:

New Obligations and Upward Adjustments (Total) $ 3,926 $ 7,105 $ 6,591 $ 845 $ 4,497 $ 129

Unobligated Balance, End of Year: 

Apportioned, Unexpired Accounts 272 875 143 20 762 7

Exempt from Apportionment — — — — — —

Unapportioned, Unexpired Accounts 18 — 18 — — —

Unexpired Unobligated Balance, End of Year 290 875 161 20 762 7

Expired Unobligated Balance, End of Year 60 19 12 2 4 3

Unobligated Balance, End of Year (Total) 350 894 173 22 766 10

Total Status of Budgetary Resources $ 4,276 $ 7,999 $ 6,764 $ 867 $ 5,263 $ 139

Outlays, Net:

Outlays, Net (Total) $ 3,902 $ 6,767 $ 6,229 $ 763 $ 3,024 $ 118

Distributed Offsetting Receipts (-) — — — — — —

Agency Outlays, Net $ 3,902 $ 6,767 $ 6,229 $ 763 $ 3,024 $ 118

(In Millions)

Office of 

Inspector 

General

Space 

Technology

Mission

Construction and 

Environmental 

Compliance and 

Restoration

Other Total

Budgetary Resources:

Unobligated Balance from Prior Year Budget Authority, Net $ 3 $ 109 $ 305 $ 40 $ 2,750

Appropriations 44 1,100 439 1 23,272

Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections 1 — 21 525 1,875

Total Budgetary Resources $ 48 $ 1,209 $ 765 $ 566 $ 27,897

Status of Budgetary Resources:

New Obligations and Upward Adjustments (Total) $ 44 $ 1,175 $ 426 $ 501 $ 25,239

Unobligated Balance, End of Year: 

Apportioned, Unexpired Accounts 2 27 327 55 2,490

Exempt from Apportionment — — — 1 1

Unapportioned, Unexpired Accounts — — 8 — 44

Unexpired Unobligated Balance, End of Year 2 27 335 56 2,535

Expired Unobligated Balance, End of Year 2 7 4 10 123

Unobligated Balance, End of Year (Total) 4 34 339 66 2,658

Total Status of Budgetary Resources $ 48 $ 1,209 $ 765 $ 567 $ 27,897

Outlays, Net:

Outlays, Net (Total) $ 41 $ 1,067 $ 376 $ (34) $ 22,253

Distributed Offsetting Receipts (-) — — — (4) (4)

Agency Outlays, Net $ 41 $ 1,067 $ 376 $ (38) $ 22,249

| Continued on the next page →

Required Supplementary Information

Combining Statement of Budgetary Resources

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2021

(Continued)
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 67

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

(In Millions)

Space 

Operations

Mission 

Science 

Mission

Exploration 

Mission

Aeronautics 

Mission

Safety, 

Security 

and Mission 

Services

STEM

Engagement

Mission

Budgetary Resources:

Unobligated Balance from Prior Year Budget Authority, Net $ 395 $ 859 $ 247 $ 36 $ 836 $ 13

Appropriations 4,135 7,073 5,960 784 2,973 120

Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections — — — — 1,697 —

Total Budgetary Resources $ 4,530 $ 7,932 $ 6,207 $ 820 $ 5,506 $ 133

Status of Budgetary Resources:

New Obligations and Upward Adjustments (Total) $ 4,361 $ 7,277 $ 5,999 $ 788 $ 4,561 $ 121

Unobligated Balance, End of Year: 

Apportioned, Unexpired Accounts 111 640 188 30 929 9

Unapportioned, Unexpired Accounts 1 — 9 — 12 —

Unexpired Unobligated Balance, End of Year $ 112 640 197 30 941 9

Expired Unobligated Balance, End of Year 57 15 11 2 4 3

Unobligated Balance, End of Year (Total) 169 655 208 32 945 12

Total Status of Budgetary Resources $ 4,530 $ 7,932 $ 6,207 $ 820 $ 5,506 $ 133

Outlays, Net:

Outlays, Net (Total) $ 4,364 $ 6,743 $ 5,382 $ 826 $ 2,737 $ 106

Distributed Offsetting Receipts (-) — — — — — —

Agency Outlays, Net $ 4,364 $ 6,743 $ 5,382 $ 826 $ 2,737 $ 106

(In Millions)

Office of 

Inspector 

General

Space 

Technology

Mission

Construction and 

Environmental 

Compliance and 

Restoration

Other Total

Budgetary Resources:

Unobligated Balance from Prior Year Budget Authority, Net $ 3 $ 80 $ 340 $ 45 $ 2,854

Appropriations 42 1,100 432 1 22,620

Spending Authority from Offsetting Collections 1 — 21 518 2,237

Total Budgetary Resources $ 46 $ 1,180 $ 793 $ 564 $ 27,711

Status of Budgetary Resources:

New Obligations and Upward Adjustments (Total) $ 44 $ 1,091 $ 502 $ 527 $ 25,271

Unobligated Balance, End of Year: 

Apportioned, Unexpired Accounts — 82 270 27 2,286

Unapportioned, Unexpired Accounts — — 18 — 40

Unexpired Unobligated Balance, End of Year — 82 288 27 2,326

Expired Unobligated Balance, End of Year 2 7 3 10 114

Unobligated Balance, End of Year (Total) 2 89 291 37 2,440

Total Status of Budgetary Resources $ 46 $ 1,180 $ 793 $ 564 $ 27,711

Outlays, Net:

Outlays, Net (Total) $ 40 $ 973 $ 397 $ (23) $ 21,545

Distributed Offsetting Receipts (-) — — — (22) (22)

Agency Outlays, Net $ 40 $ 973 $ 397 $ (45) $ 21,523

(Continued)

Required Supplementary Information

Combining Statement of Budgetary Resources

For the Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2020

| Continued on the next page →
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 68

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

Federal agencies are required to report information related to the estimated cost to remedy deferred maintenance of property, 

plant and equipment as required supplementary information in accordance with SFFAS No. 42, Deferred Maintenance and Repairs.

Maintenance and repairs (M&R) are activities directed toward keeping fixed assets in an acceptable condition. Activities include 

preventive maintenance; replacement of parts, systems, or components; and other activities needed to preserve or maintain the 

asset. M&R, as distinguished from capital improvements, excludes activities directed toward expanding the capacity of an asset or 

otherwise upgrading it to serve needs different from, or significantly greater than, its current use. Deferred maintenance and repairs 

(DM&R) are M&R activities that were not performed when they should have been or were scheduled to be and which, therefore, 

are put off or delayed for a future period. DM&R reporting enables NASA to be accountable to citizens for the proper administration 

and stewardship of its assets. Specifically, DM&R reporting assists users by providing an entity’s realistic estimate of DM&R amounts 

and the effectiveness of asset maintenance practices the entities employ in fulfilling their missions.

Facilities, Buildings, and Other Structures

It is NASA’s policy to ensure that NASA-owned and operated assets are properly aligned with the NASA mission and are safe, 

environmentally sound, affordable, the right type and size, and in acceptable operating condition. NASA’s facilities are maintained 

in the most cost effective fashion to minimize risk to processes and products, protect the safety and health of personnel and the 

environment, protect and preserve capabilities and capital investments, provide quality work places for NASA employees, and 

enable the Agency’s mission. Estimates reported herein include DM&R for all facilities on-site or off-site that are owned, leased, 

occupied, or used by NASA (NASA Programs or Contractors) including heritage assets without regard to capitalization thresholds or 

depreciation status. NASA does not assess DM&R on general land parcels.

Equipment

Pursuant to the cost/benefit considerations provided in SFFAS No. 6 and SFFAS No. 42, NASA has determined that it is not cost 

beneficial to report DM&R on personal property (capital equipment).

Defining and Implementing M&R Policies

NASA uses a Deferred Maintenance parametric estimating method (DM method) in order to conduct a consistent condition 

assessment of its facilities, buildings and other structures (including heritage assets). This method measures NASA’s current real 

property asset condition and documents the extent of real property deterioration. The DM method produces both a cost estimate 

of DM&R, and a Facility Condition Index (FCI). Both measures are indicators of the overall condition of NASA’s facilities. The facilities 

condition assessment methodology involves an independent, rapid visual assessment of nine different systems within each facility 

to include: structure, roof, exterior, interior finishes, heating, ventilating and air conditioning (HVAC) systems, electrical, plumbing, 

conveyance, and program support equipment (PSE). The DM method is designed for application to a large population of facilities; 

results are not necessarily applicable for individual facilities or small populations of facilities.

Ranking and Prioritizing M&R Activities

NASA typically prioritizes the M&R activities for health, safety, life safety, fire detection and protection, and environmental 

requirements. NASA also prioritizes the M&R projects with an emphasis on mission critical facilities, followed by mission support, 

then Center support. The evaluation of the facility conditions by building type indicates that NASA continues to focus M&R activities 

on direct mission-related facilities and infrastructure.

Factors Considered in Determining Acceptable Condition Standards

NASA applies industry accepted codes and standards or equipment manufacturer’s recommendations to all facilities related work. 

The standard of condition depends on the intended use, the mission criticality, utilization or health and safety aspects of that use. 

Required Supplementary Information

Deferred Maintenance and Repairs for FY 2021

| Continued on the next page →
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 69

FINANCIAL SECTION — Financial Statements, Notes, and Supplemental Information

(In Millions) 2021 2020

Asset Category

General PP&E - Real Property $ 2,713 $ 2,609

Heritage Assets - Real Property 55 54

Total Deferred Maintenance and Repairs $ 2,768 $ 2,663

Changes from Prior Year

As of September 30, 2021, $2,768 billion of DM&R was estimated to be required to return real property assets to an acceptable 

operating condition. This is an overall increase of $105 million from $2,663 billion as of September 30, 2020. The increase in 

the DM&R estimate can be attributed to various reasons; including changes to deterioration of facilities due to natural disasters, 

damage from testing to PSE in high-value assets (HVA), normal inflation increases in Current Replacement Value (CRV) of assets 

and high-value infrastructure assets as upgrades progress, and demolition of assets and the reduction of their DM&R.

NASA performs DM assessment on Real Property Assets in a two-year cycle. Due to the impacts of COVID-19 in FY 2020, an 

in-person assessment was performed at two NASA Centers and the remaining four Centers were assessed virtually. In FY 2021, 

the remaining assets were physically assessed. These alternating assessments result in a physical and virtual assessment of all 

Real Property Assets in a two-year cycle.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 70

FINANCIAL SECTION — Letter from the Inspector General on Audit

LET TER FROM THE INSPECTOR GENERAL ON AUDIT

NASA OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL

OFFICE OF AUDITS

SUITE 8U71, 300 E ST SW

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20546-0001

November 15, 2021 

TO: Bill Nelson

Administrator

Margaret Vo Schaus

Chief Financial Officer

SUBJECT: Audit of NASA’s Fiscal Year 2021 Financial Statements 

(Report No. IG-22-004; Assignment No. A-21-011-00)

The Office of Inspector General contracted with the independent public accounting firm 

Ernst & Young LLP (EY) to audit NASA’s fiscal year (FY) 2021 financial statements. EY performed 

the audit in accordance with the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) Government Auditing 

Standards and the Office of Management and Budget’s Bulletin No. 21-04, Audit Requirements for 

Federal Financial Statements. 

This audit resulted in a “clean” or unmodified opinion on NASA’s FY 2021 financial statements (see 

Enclosure 1). An unmodified opinion means the financial statements present fairly, in all material 

respects, the financial position and results of NASA’s operations in conformity with U.S. generally 

accepted accounting principles. 

EY also reported on NASA’s internal control over financial reporting and compliance with laws and 

regulations (see Enclosure 2). For FY 2021, EY identified one significant deficiency related to 

NASA’s evaluation of public-private partnerships for disclosure in the financial statements and no 

instances of noncompliance. 

In our oversight of the contract, we reviewed EY’s reports and related documentation and inquired 

of its representatives. Our review, as differentiated from an audit of the financial statements in 

accordance with GAO’s Government Auditing Standards, was not intended to enable us to express, 

and we do not express, an opinion on NASA’s financial statements, conclusions about the 

effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, or conclusions on compliance with certain 

laws and regulations, including but not limited to the Federal Financial Management Improvement 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 71

FINANCIAL SECTION — Letter from the Inspector General on Audit

2

Act of 1996. Rather, EY is responsible for the enclosed auditor’s reports dated November 15, 2021, 

and the conclusions expressed therein. However, our review disclosed no instances where EY did 

not comply, in all material respects, with GAO’s Government Auditing Standards. 

We appreciate the courtesies extended to our team during the audit. Please contact Kimberly F.

Benoit, Assistant Inspector General for Audits, at 202-358-0378 or kimberly.f.benoit@nasa.gov if 

you have any questions about the enclosed report.

Paul K. Martin

Inspector General

Enclosures – 2 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 72

FINANCIAL SECTION — Independent Auditor’s Report

INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT

1 

Report of Independent Auditors

The Administrator and Inspector General of the

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Report on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration (NASA), which comprise the consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2021, 

and the related consolidated statements of net cost and changes in net position and combined 

statement of budgetary resources for the fiscal year then ended, and the related notes to the 

financial statements. 

Management’s Responsibility for the Financial Statements

Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements 

in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States; this includes the 

design, implementation, and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair 

presentation of financial statements that are free of material misstatement, whether due to fraud or 

error. 

Auditors’ Responsibility

Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit. We 

conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States 

of America; the standards applicable to financial audits contained in Government Auditing 

Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) Bulletin No. 21-04, Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements. Those 

standards and OMB Bulletin No. 21-04 require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain 

reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free from material misstatement.

An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and 

disclosures in the financial statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditors’ judgment, 

including the assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether 

due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the auditors consider internal control 

relevant to the entity’s preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements in order to 

design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of 

expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control. Accordingly, we express 

no such opinion. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used 

and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well as 

evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements.

Ernst & Young LLP 

1775 Tysons Blvd

Tysons, VA 22102

Tel: +1 703 747 1000

Fax: +1 703 747 0100

ey.com

A member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 73

FINANCIAL SECTION — Independent Auditors’ Report

2 

We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis 

for our audit opinion. 

Opinion 

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, 

the financial position of NASA as of September 30, 2021, and its net cost, changes in net position, 

and budgetary resources for the year then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally 

accepted in the United States. 

Report of Other Auditors on NASA’s FY 2020 Financial Statements 

The financial statements of NASA for the year ended September 30, 2020, were audited by other 

auditors who expressed an unmodified opinion on those statements on November 16, 2020. 

Other Matters

Required Supplementary Information

Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that 

Management’s Discussion and Analysis and Required Supplementary Information as identified on 

NASA’s Agency Financial Report’s Table of Contents, be presented to supplement the financial 

statements. Such information, although not a part of the financial statements, is required by the 

Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board which considers it to be an essential part of 

financial reporting for placing the financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or 

historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary 

information in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of 

America, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the 

information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our 

inquiries, the financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the 

financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information 

because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or 

provide any assurance. 

Other Information 

Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the financial statements that 

collectively comprise NASA’s financial statements. The Other Information, as identified on 

NASA’s Agency Financial Report’s Table of Contents, is presented for purposes of additional 

analysis and is not a required part of the financial statements or Required Supplementary 

Information. 

A member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 74

FINANCIAL SECTION — Independent Auditors’ Report

3 

The Other Information has not been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of 

the financial statements, and, accordingly, we do not express an opinion or provide any assurance 

on it. 

Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards

In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we also have issued our report dated 

November 15, 2021, on our consideration of NASA’s internal control over financial reporting and 

on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant 

agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is solely to describe the scope of our 

testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, 

and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of NASA’s internal control over financial 

reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance 

with Government Auditing Standards in considering NASA’s internal control over financial 

reporting and compliance. 



November 15, 2021 

A member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 75

FINANCIAL SECTION — Independent Auditors’ Report

1 

Report of Independent Auditors on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and 

on Compliance and Other Matters Based on an Audit of Financial Statements

Performed in Accordance with Government Auditing Standards

The Administrator and the Inspector General of the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of 

America; the standards applicable to financial statement audits contained in Government Auditing 

Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States; and Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) Bulletin No. 21-04, Audit Requirements for Federal Financial Statements, the 

financial statements of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), which 

comprise the consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2021, and related consolidated 

statements of net cost and changes in net position, and combined statement of budgetary resources 

for the fiscal year then ended, and the related notes to the financial statements, and have issued our 

report thereon dated November 15, 2021. 

Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements, we considered NASA’s internal 

control over financial reporting (internal control) as a basis for designing audit procedures that are 

appropriate in the circumstances for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial 

statements, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of NASA’s 

internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we do not express an opinion on the 

effectiveness of NASA’s internal control over financial reporting. We did not consider all internal 

controls relevant to operating objectives as broadly defined by the Federal Managers’ Financial 

Integrity Act of 1982, such as those controls relevant to preparing performance information and 

ensuring efficient operations.

A deficiency in internal control exists when the design or operation of a control does not allow 

management or employees, in the normal course of performing their assigned functions, to prevent, 

or detect and correct misstatements on a timely basis. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a 

combination of deficiencies, in internal control such that there is a reasonable possibility that a 

material misstatement of the entity’s financial statements will not be prevented or detected and 

corrected on a timely basis. A significant deficiency is a deficiency or a combination of 

deficiencies, in internal control that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough 

to merit attention by those charged with governance. 

Ernst & Young LLP 

1775 Tysons Blvd

Tysons, VA 22102

Tel: +1 703 747 1000

Fax: +1 703 747 0100

ey.com

A member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 76

FINANCIAL SECTION — Independent Auditors’ Report

2 

Our consideration of internal control over financial reporting was for the limited purpose described 

in the first paragraph of this section and was not designed to identify all deficiencies in internal 

control that might be material weaknesses or significant deficiencies and, therefore, material 

weaknesses or significant deficiencies may exist that have not been identified. Given these 

limitations, during our audit, we did not identify any deficiencies in internal control that we 

consider to be material weaknesses. We did identify a deficiency in internal control as described 

below that we consider to be a significant deficiency. 

Significant Deficiency 

Improvements Are Needed in NASA’s Evaluation of Public-Private Partnerships

Public-Private Partnerships are risk-sharing arrangements or transactions with expected lives 

greater than five years between public and private sector entities. Such arrangements or 

transactions provide a service or an asset for government and/or general public use where in 

addition to the sharing of resources, each party shares in the risks and rewards of said arrangements 

or transactions. Although NASA has identified and entered into numerous Public-Private 

Partnerships to meet its mission and strategic goals, NASA concluded that none of its PublicPrivate Partnership arrangements were required to be disclosed in its notes to the fiscal year 2021 

financial statements. We determined that NASA’s Public-Private Partnership analysis lacked 

adequate documentation to include documentation of decisions made, the sources used, input from 

all relevant NASA stakeholders, and application of qualitative and quantitative considerations. We 

also noted that the analysis did not fully meet the guidance provided within the Federal Accounting 

Standards Advisory Board’s (FASAB) Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards 

(SFFAS) 49, Public-Private Partnerships: Disclosure Requirements, and OMB Circular A-136, 

Financial Reporting Requirements. Further, NASA’s review controls were not sufficient to 

identify inconsistencies between current and prior year analyses and its training and guidance was 

not adequate to provide for consistent interpretation and application of the standard across NASA 

Centers. 

Recommendation

We recommend that NASA design and implement adequate controls over its identification and 

evaluation of Public-Private Partnerships to include adequate documentation of its analysis, as well 

as controls over the completeness of the analysis and compliance with SFFAS 49. NASA should 

also provide operating procedures and training to the Centers’ personnel to ensure a consistent 

understanding and application of policies and procedures related to the identification, evaluations, 

and resulting analyses of Public-Private Partnerships. Lastly, NASA should consider conducting 

discussions with FASAB personnel regarding identification requirements and how they should be 

applied to NASA specific Public-Private Partnership arrangements.

A member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 77

FINANCIAL SECTION — Independent Auditors’ Report

3 

Compliance and Other Matters

As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether NASA’s financial statements are free 

from material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, 

regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and 

material effect on the financial statements as well as the requirements referred to in the Federal 

Financial Management Improvement Act of 1996 (FFMIA). However, providing an opinion on 

compliance with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not 

express such an opinion. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other 

matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards and OMB Bulletin 

No. 21-04. 

Under FFMIA, we are required to report whether NASA’s financial management systems 

substantially comply with federal financial management systems requirements, applicable federal 

accounting standards, and the United States Standard General Ledger at the transaction level. To 

meet this requirement, we performed tests of compliance with FFMIA Section 803(a)

requirements. The results of our tests disclosed no instances in which NASA’s financial 

management systems did not substantially comply with requirements as discussed above. 

NASA’s Response to Findings

NASA’s response to the finding identified in our audit is described in the accompanying letter 

dated November 15, 2021. NASA’s response was not subjected to the auditing procedures applied 

in the audit of the financial statements and, accordingly, we express no opinion on it. 

Purpose of This Report

The purpose of this report is solely to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over 

financial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on 

the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. This 

report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards

in considering the entity’s internal control over financial reporting and compliance. Accordingly, 

this communication is not suitable for any other purpose. 



November 15, 2021 

A member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 78

FINANCIAL SECTION — Independent Auditors’ Report

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Mary W. Jackson NASA Headquarters

Washington, DC 20546-0001

November 15, 2021

Reply to Attn of: Office of the Chief Financial Officer

TO: Inspector General 

FROM: Chief Financial Officer

SUBJECT: Management Response to Report of Independent Auditors

I am pleased to respond to your audit report on the Consolidated Financial Statements of the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for FY 2021 and FY 2020. NASA’s 

efforts and achievements toward improved financial management are clearly reflected in the 

audit opinion. For the 11th year in a row, NASA has earned an unqualified “clean” opinion 

with no material weaknesses on its Financial Statements. 

I am particularly gratified to note NASA’s resolution of the prior year significant deficiencies 

in NASA’s Vulnerability Management Process and Financial Systems’ Information 

Technology General Application Controls. This is a direct result of the commitment and 

effort to financial management by the entire Agency. As a result of our continual successful 

mitigation of IT findings related to the financial accounting system, NASA remains 

substantially compliant with the Federal Financial Management Improvement Act.

I understand that the independent auditors identified one significant deficiency related to 

Improvements Needed in NASA’s Evaluation of Public-Private Partnerships in Accordance 

with SFFAS 49. The Agency is committed to working collaboratively with the Office of the

Inspector General (OIG) and the independent audit firm to resolve this deficiency as quickly 

as possible.

I appreciate the efforts and leadership of NASA's OIG and of the auditors throughout the 

audit of NASA's financial statements and related internal controls over financial reporting. 

Please convey my sincere appreciation and thanks to your team for the professionalism and 

cooperation exhibited during this audit.

Chief Financial Officer

Margaret V. Schaus
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 79

SpaceX’s Crew Dragon “Endeavour,” atop the company’s Falcon 9 rocket, leaves the SpaceX integration hangar adjacent 

to NASA Kennedy Space Center’s Launch Complex 39A for rollout to the launch pad on April 16, 2021. NASA astronauts 

Shane Kimbrough and Megan McArthur, JAXA astronaut Akihiko Hoshide, and ESA astronaut Thomas Pesquet, who arrived 

at Kennedy on April 16, will fly to the International Space Station on NASA’s SpaceX Crew-2 mission. Liftoff is targeted for 

Thursday, April 22, at 6:11 a.m. 

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA Kennedy/Space X

OTHER INFORMATION

SECTION 3

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 79

79
This page has been left blank intentionally.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 81

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

NASA

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

Office of Inspector General 

Office of Audits 

2021 REPORT ON NASA’S 

TOP MANAGEMENT AND 

PERFORMANCE CHALLENGES

November 15, 2021
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 82

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

Office of Inspector General 

To report, fraud, waste, abuse, or mismanagement, contact the NASA OIG Hotline at 800-424-9183 or 800-535-8134 (TDD) or 

visit https://oig.nasa.gov/hotline.html. You can also write to NASA Inspector General, P.O. Box 23089, L’Enfant Plaza Station, 

Washington, D.C. 20026. The identity of each writer and caller can be kept confidential, upon request, to the extent permitted 

by law.

To suggest ideas or request future audits, contact the Assistant Inspector General for Audits at https://oig.nasa.gov/aboutAll.html. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 83

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Message from the Inspector General .......................................................................................................... 1 

Challenge 1: Returning Humans to the Moon............................................................................................ 4 

Challenge 2: Improving Management of Major Projects.........................................................................11

Challenge 3: Sustaining a Human Presence in Low Earth Orbit...............................................................17

Challenge 4: Managing and Mitigating Cybersecurity Risk...................................................................... 22

Challenge 5: Improving Oversight of Contracts, Grants, and Cooperative Agreements ........................28

Challenge 6: Attracting and Retaining a Highly Skilled and Diverse Workforce ..................................... 34 

Challenge 7: Managing NASA's Outdated Infrastructure and Facilities..................................................39

Challenge 8: Managing the Impacts of COVID-19 on NASA's Mission and Workforce ...........................43

Appendix A: Strategic Goals and Objectives ............................................................................................46

Appendix B: Acronyms.............................................................................................................................. 47

Appendix C: Relevant OIG Reports........................................................................................................... 48
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 84

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 1

MESSAGE FROM THE INSPECTOR GENERAL

This report presents the Office of Inspector General’s (OIG) independent assessment of the top 

management and performance challenges facing NASA.1

 For 2021, we identified eight challenges and 

linked each challenge to one or more of NASA’s strategic goals and objectives (see Appendix A).2

• Challenge 1: Returning Humans to the Moon

• Challenge 2: Improving Management of Major Projects

• Challenge 3: Sustaining a Human Presence in Low Earth Orbit

• Challenge 4: Managing and Mitigating Cybersecurity Risk

• Challenge 5: Improving Oversight of Contracts, Grants, and Cooperative Agreements

• Challenge 6: Attracting and Retaining a Highly Skilled and Diverse Workforce

• Challenge 7: Managing NASA’s Outdated Infrastructure and Facilities

• Challenge 8: Managing the Impacts of COVID-19 on NASA’s Mission and Workforce

NASA stands at the forefront of aeronautics, science, and space exploration and is responsible for 

numerous scientific discoveries and technological innovations. The Agency’s achievements in long‐term 

human space flight missions such as Apollo, the Space Shuttle Program, and the International Space 

Station (ISS or Station) are unparalleled. Likewise, science and aeronautics research such as the 

continuing Voyager missions into interstellar space and the X-15 hypersonic aircraft demonstrate 

NASA’s position as a global leader in space and aeronautics. To maintain its preeminence, NASA must 

remain agile in an environment of shifting Administration priorities, evolving international interests, 

and unanticipated global events such as the ongoing Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. 

In 2020, NASA altered—essentially overnight—how it does business to protect its employees and 

contractors from the COVID-19 virus by closing facilities and having 90 percent of its workforce operate 

from home for an extended period of time. Nonetheless, NASA maintained vital operations such as the 

ISS and successfully launched and landed the Perseverance Rover on Mars as well as the first 

commercial flight of astronauts into space, closing a 9-year crew transportation gap after the end of the 

Space Shuttle Program in 2011. To avoid another gap—this time in a low Earth orbit destination when 

the ISS retires—NASA is again pursuing alternative acquisition approaches, such as purchasing services 

instead of using traditional developmental contracts, to become a customer on commercially owned 

and operated space destinations. The Agency is increasingly relying on public-private partnerships and 

alternative acquisition approaches in an attempt to achieve cost savings and accelerate development of 

new technologies, including several key systems for its Artemis mission to return humans to the Moon. 

This shift in acquisition approaches, however, does not negate the Agency’s long-standing challenge to 

temper its culture of optimism and develop more realistic cost and schedule estimates for its many and 

varied major projects (see Figure 1). In addition, NASA continues to face long-standing challenges with 

1 The Reports Consolidation Act of 2000 (Pub. L. No. 106–531) requires NASA to include in its performance and accountability 

report a statement by the Inspector General summarizing the most serious management and performance challenges facing 

the Agency and the progress made in managing them. 

2 NASA, NASA Strategic Plan 2018 (February 12, 2018; last accessed October 7, 2021).
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 85

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 2

cybersecurity, workforce gaps, and aging infrastructure. As the Agency moves forward with key 

decisions on several of its major projects, addressing the challenges discussed in this report will be 

paramount to its success. 

Figure 1: Agency Timeline of Major Projects and Missions

Source: NASA OIG presentation of Agency information.

Note: Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).

In deciding whether to identify an issue as a “top challenge,” we considered its significance in relation to 

NASA’s mission; whether its underlying causes are systemic in nature; and its susceptibility to fraud, 

waste, and abuse. These eight highlighted challenges are not the only significant issues that confront 

NASA. Moreover, identification of an issue as a top challenge does not denote lack of attention on the 

Agency’s part. Rather, most of these issues are long‐standing, difficult challenges that are central to 

NASA’s core missions and will likely remain top challenges for many years. Consequently, they require 

consistent, focused attention from NASA leadership and ongoing engagement with Congress, the public, 

and other stakeholders. 

This year’s list includes many of the same challenges discussed in previous reports. However, we 

reframed the Artemis and workforce challenges to reflect the most up‐to‐date Agency perspectives on 

these issues, and we added a standalone COVID‐19 challenge because the impact of the pandemic on 

NASA’s operations will cost billions of dollars, lead to schedule delays, and affect how the Agency 

conducts business for years to come. Our discussion of each challenge includes an explanation of why it 

is a challenge, identification of NASA’s progress in addressing the challenge, and remaining work that 

needs to be done. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 86

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 3

In this report and all related work, the OIG is committed to providing independent, objective, and 

comprehensive oversight of NASA programs, projects, and personnel with the singular goal of improving 

Agency outcomes. To that end, we plan to conduct audits and investigations in the coming year that 

focus on NASA’s continuing efforts to address these and other challenges. 

Paul K. Martin

Inspector General 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 87

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 4

Challenge 1: Returning 

Humans to the Moon 

Why This Is a Challenge 

The Artemis program—currently NASA’s most ambitious and costly ongoing activity—is projected to 

cost the Agency $93 billion by fiscal year (FY) 2025 and will require decades-long engagement from 

NASA and its commercial and international partners to build and support multiple exploration systems, 

conduct research and technology demonstrations to return humans to the Moon, and prepare for an 

eventual crewed mission to Mars.3

 Artemis will return astronauts to the Moon more than 50 years after 

the last Apollo mission, and NASA intends to maintain an ongoing lunar presence (see Figure 2). The 

date of the long-awaited return, however, remains a question since development delays compounded 

by the COVID-19 pandemic will preclude NASA from meeting its goal of landing astronauts on the Moon 

by late 2024.

Figure 2: Planned Artemis Missions Through Moon Landing

Source: NASA OIG presentation of Agency information.

Note: Space Launch System (SLS) and Orion Multi‐Purpose Crew Vehicle (Orion). Exploration Ground Systems is comprised of 

the ground hardware, software, and Launch Control System.

Artemis is a multi-mission program that allows NASA to extend the length and complexity of lunar 

missions over time. The first three missions—Artemis I, II, and III—culminate with astronauts landing 

on the Moon with Artemis III. NASA will use the Space Launch System (SLS) heavy-lift rocket and Orion 

Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle (Orion) capsule in all three missions. Artemis I will be an uncrewed test 

flight, and Artemis II will fly astronauts to the Moon’s orbit and back. For Artemis III, the Orion

capsule—with four astronauts on board—will dock in lunar orbit with a Human Landing System (HLS) 

to transport astronauts to the lunar surface. Beginning with Artemis III, the astronauts will require nextgeneration spacesuits, known as Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Units, to explore the lunar surface. 

Prior to the astronauts’ arrival, NASA intends to explore the lunar landing area with robotic systems as 

part of the Commercial Lunar Payload Services initiative.4

 Subsequent Artemis missions are expected to

3 We derived the $93 billion figure from examining NASA’s obligations, appropriations, and budget projections across all 

Mission Directorates for programs and projects involved in the Artemis program from FY 2012 through FY 2025. 

4 Initiated in 2018, NASA’s Commercial Lunar Payload Services initiative seeks to rapidly acquire lunar delivery services from 

American companies for payloads that advance capabilities for science, exploration, and commercial development of the 

Moon. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 88

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 5

include a longer‐term presence on the Moon that incorporates additional systems including a lunar 

orbiting outpost called the Gateway and Lunar Terrain Vehicles to transport crew on the Moon’s 

surface. See Figure 3 for images of the various Artemis systems in development. NASA intends to use 

its human presence on the Moon as a research platform to understand planetary processes, conduct 

experimental science, and investigate and mitigate long‐term exploration risks to humans. 

Figure 3: Artemis Systems in Development

Source: NASA OIG presentation of Agency information.

As we have consistently reported in previous reports, NASA’s greatest challenge with its human 

exploration ambitions is development of the systems required to get humans to the Moon and Mars 

safely with the funding Congress has allocated and within the timeframe the Administration has 

imposed. In September 2020, more than a year after the White House directed NASA to escalate its 

timeline to land the first woman and next man on the Moon by 2024, the Agency estimated it would 

need approximately $28 billion between FYs 2021 and 2025 to achieve the initial crewed lunar landing 

4 years ahead of its original schedule.5

 Funding is needed primarily to support development of multiple 

5 The $28 billion figure is for Phase I of the Artemis missions and includes costs for Artemis I, II, and III, but does not include 

the Gateway. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 89

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 6

Artemis systems including the SLS rocket and Orion capsule to transport astronauts to lunar orbit, a 

Moon orbiting outpost known as Gateway, the HLS to ferry astronauts to the lunar surface, and new 

spacesuits for the astronauts to operate outside of their spacecraft and on the lunar surface. However, 

Congress appropriated only $850 million in FY 2021 out of an estimated need of $3.4 billion for the HLS. 

As a result, the Agency selected a single company, thereby affecting NASA’s acquisition strategy to 

promote competition and redundancy.6

 To mitigate the risk of having only one provider, NASA decided 

to accelerate its Lunar Exploration Transportation Services procurement to allow other companies to 

develop technologies and potentially receive a contract to deliver astronauts to the Moon. We also 

found that delays in development of the Agency’s next-generation spacesuits—attributed to technical 

challenges, funding issues, and COVID-19 impacts—will preclude the new suits from being ready for 

flight until April 2025 at the earliest and will cost NASA more than a billion dollars for their development 

and assembly.7

 These are only two recent examples in a series of long-standing challenges to build the 

systems required for the Agency’s Artemis missions and follow-on Mars exploration plans. 

Progress in Addressing the Challenge 

Artemis systems are making progress in their development and procurement. Over the past year, 

NASA’s SLS, Orion, and Exploration Ground Systems Programs that form the Exploration Systems 

Development (ESD) Division have made steady progress, and although in a November 2021 report 

we found that NASA’s planned November 2021 Artemis I launch date is not feasible, the Programs 

are in our estimation positioned to launch the first Artemis mission by summer 2022.8

 In addition, 

NASA completed all the contract awards necessary for the initial Gateway capability when it awarded 

Northrop Grumman a fixed-price contract in July 2021 for the final design and build phase of the 

Habitation and Logistics Outpost where astronauts will live and conduct research on the Gateway. 

Development continues for the electrical power system for the Gateway’s Power and Propulsion 

Element. For Artemis III, NASA allowed flexibility for HLS proposers to either dock with the Gateway or 

directly with the Orion. NASA’s award to Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) for the 

Artemis III demonstration includes its HLS Starship linking up directly with the crewed Orion in lunar 

orbit to ferry astronauts to and from the Moon’s surface. NASA aims to have the Gateway operational 

in time for Artemis IV. Lastly, the Agency continues to develop its next-generation spacesuit capabilities, 

including a testing suit, two qualification suits, an ISS demonstration suit, and two lunar flight suits. 

Overall, NASA has made progress towards executing the first three Artemis missions, culminating with 

the planned return of astronauts to the surface of the Moon. 

Artemis I. Four years after inception of the Artemis program but over 10 years into development of its 

SLS rocket and Orion capsule, NASA’s preparations are nearly complete for the inaugural uncrewed flight 

of its rocket/capsule combination. The stacking of the SLS’s Core Stage, Upper Stage, and Solid Rocket 

Boosters on the Mobile Launcher is complete, and NASA is conducting tests on the Orion before placing 

6 In April 2021, NASA selected SpaceX for the contract award, concluding that its proposal was the most highly rated, and that 

HLS funding availability did not allow for a second award. 

7 NASA OIG, NASA’s Development of Next-Generation Spacesuits (IG-21-025, August 10, 2021). The $1 billion includes 

$420.1 million spent from 2007 through December 2020 and planned spending of $625.2 million from FY 2021 through 

FY 2025. The work covered by this funding includes design, testing, qualification, an ISS demonstration suit, two flight-ready 

suits, related support, and future suit production costs. Related support includes vehicle support hardware, training 

hardware and facilities, testing facilities, and extravehicular activity tools. 

8 NASA OIG, NASA’s Strategy for the Artemis Missions (IG-22-003, November 15, 2021). 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 90

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 7

it on top of the rocket.9 Once the Orion is stacked, fully integrated, and testing is complete, the system 

will be transported to Launch Pad 39B for additional testing and eventual launch. While NASA was 

attempting to launch the system by the end of 2021, in November 2021 we reported that a launch 

before summer 2022 is more likely due to the first-time challenges integrating a system of this 

magnitude and the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and multiple adverse weather events.10 With 

respect to budget, NASA acknowledged the need to control the systems’ cost and schedule through a 

June 2020 rebaselining of the SLS and Exploration Ground Systems Programs. For Artemis I, officials 

reported that additional cost increases and schedule slippages are expected to be minimal given the 

high probability of a launch before mid-2022. 

Artemis II. For Artemis II, the Orion Program decided to purchase a second set of core avionics for its 

capsule and will only reuse non-core avionics. Given that astronauts will be flying on this second 

mission, the Agency needs to add to Orion an environmental control and life support system which is 

not on Artemis I. To reduce the risk of flying this system for the first time with astronauts on board, the 

Artemis II flight plan will include additional time in low Earth orbit to test the system before continuing 

to the Moon. NASA is actively building all the elements for Artemis II, but due to the reuse of the noncore avionics—considered on the critical path—launch preparations will take approximately 27 months 

between the first two Artemis flights.11 Given that this flight is crewed, adjustments will also be made to 

the Mobile Launcher after Artemis I; however, these adjustments are not expected to impact the 

planned December 2023 launch date. 

Artemis III. Besides continued production of the SLS and Orion, Artemis III preparations include 

development and testing of the HLS Starship being built by SpaceX. The HLS contract has faced 

numerous challenges from the start, beginning with Government Accountability Office (GAO) protests 

by two companies—Blue Origin Federation, LLC and Dynetics, Inc.—that were denied in July 2021.

12 

Although the protests resulted in a 6-month delay to HLS development according to Agency officials, 

SpaceX still planned to conduct an orbital flight test of its Super Heavy Booster and Starship by the end 

of 2021. A subsequent civil suit brought by Blue Origin denied in November 2021 further delayed HLS 

development and testing. 

Crosscutting all Artemis missions are NASA’s efforts to reduce future costs of ESD systems. In 

January 2021, the Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate’s Associate Administrator 

announced that a senior advisor would lead a sustainability assessment team to develop ideas on how 

to make ESD systems more cost effective. Further, as part of the recent FY 2023 budget process, 

programs were directed to present potential cost-saving actions. Among the ideas suggested were 

collaboration with contractors on process improvements and a reduction in both the civil servant and 

contractor workforce. For example, in June 2021 the SLS Program forecasted a 13 percent reduction in 

labor hours between the production of Core Stage 1 and Core Stage 2. As previously reported, Orion is 

moving forward on a number of initiatives aimed at reducing production costs with the Program aiming 

9 The Mobile Launcher is the ground structure that will be used to assemble, process, and launch NASA’s SLS rocket and Orion 

spacecraft from Launch Pad 39B at the Agency’s Kennedy Space Center in Florida in support of Artemis mission objectives. 

10 IG-22-003. 

11 Critical path is the sequence of tasks that determines the longest duration of time needed to complete a project. It is 

important to identify the critical path and the resources needed to complete the critical tasks along the path if a project is 

to be completed on time and within its allocated resources. 

12 NASA awarded contracts to three companies for initial design work of the HLS—SpaceX, Blue Origin, and Dynetics—which 

concluded in April 2021 when SpaceX was selected to further develop and demonstrate its HLS. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 91

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 8

to transition to a fixed-price contract structure for Artemis IX and beyond.13 There are also plans to 

reuse Orion’s high-value interior components, including avionics and life support systems beginning on 

Artemis V, and to reuse the entire assembled pressure vessels and all interior components for two 

missions beginning with Artemis VI. Additionally, NASA hopes to leverage economies of scale to reduce 

costs by 21 percent by ordering Orion capsules in batches of three with the first order in 2019 for 

Artemis III through V. 

Work That Needs to Be Done 

Despite progress towards developing its Artemis systems, NASA still needs to produce a comprehensive 

estimate that consolidates all Artemis costs across Mission Directorates. Because Artemis is not a 

formal program as defined by the Agency’s Space Flight Program and Project Management 

Requirements, an Artemis-wide full life-cycle cost estimate was not required. Instead, NASA’s disparate 

programs and projects individually submit budget estimates through their divisions and directorates to 

the Office of the Chief Financial Officer. Without understanding and accurately reporting the overall 

cost of current and future missions, Congress will lack the information needed to make informed 

decisions about NASA’s long-term funding needs, and the Agency will be challenged to make Artemis a 

sustainable venture. 

Overall, NASA has experienced cost increases of $4.3 billion for SLS, Orion, and Exploration Ground 

Systems. Furthermore, given that we estimate the cost of the SLS/Orion system at $4.1 billion per 

launch for at least the first four Artemis missions, NASA must continue to identify ways to make its ESD 

systems much more affordable.14 Otherwise, relying on such an expensive heavy-lift rocket system will, 

in our judgment, inhibit if not derail NASA’s ability to sustain its long-term human exploration goals. 

We have also reported over the last several years that ESD continues to struggle to control its costs and 

13 NASA OIG, NASA’s Management of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle Program (IG-20-018, July 16, 2020). 

14 The $4.1 billion total cost represents production of the SLS, Orion, and the operations needed to launch the space flight 

system including materials, labor, facilities, and overhead, but does not include any money spent concurrently on the 

development of next-generation technologies such as the SLS’s Exploration Upper Stage, Orion’s docking system, or 

Mobile Launcher-2. 

⚫ Key Implemented Recommendations

Confirm at selection the launch system provider for the co-manifested Power and

Propulsion Element and Habitation and Logistics Outpost will meet spacecraft mass,

length, and other requirements (IG-21-004).

Ensure total development and production contract costs (for Orion) currently not

reported as part of the Agency Baseline Commitment are included in quarterly

financial status reporting to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Office of

Management and Budget, and Congress (IG-20-018).

Ensure procurement officials minimize the availability of award fees (for Orion)

when contract modifications and value increases are the result of shortcomings in

contractor performance and require documentation of the rationale for any award

fees granted (IG-20-018).

For new acquisitions of SLS deliverables, develop a cost accounting model that

separates each deliverable into its own contract line item number for

tracking costs, performance, and award fees (IG-20-012).
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 92

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 9

schedule using more traditional acquisition methods for development and production of its exploration 

systems, including sole-sourced development and cost-plus production contracts that have suffered 

from undefined contract requirements and overly generous award fees to underperforming contractors. 

However, NASA’s Commercial Crew Program shows how competitively awarded fixed-price contracts 

can control costs if requirements are properly defined. NASA has applied this acquisition model to the 

Gateway’s Power and Propulsion Element and HLS procurements and intends to use a commercial 

services approach for next-generation spacesuits. 

Besides reducing costs, NASA needs to develop a realistic, risk-informed schedule that includes sufficient 

margin to better align Agency expectations with the development schedule. The Artemis I launch date 

has slipped 3 years, which has delayed the launch date for Artemis II. Although the Agency continues to 

work towards a late 2024 Moon landing, a Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directoratedirected schedule risk analysis showed that 2026 is a more likely date. While developmental delays in 

such a complex program are to be expected, NASA has consistently been challenged to manage space 

flight-related schedules for these primary reasons: 

• Changing and evolving requirements, both internally and externally driven (including

congressional and presidential directives);

• Developing an overly optimistic schedule for employees and contractors to work toward in

the hope it will speed development;

• Underestimating the scope of work and technical challenges in developing human-rated

systems; and

• Numerous severe weather events and COVID-19 restrictions affecting both production

and testing.

Finally, NASA will continue to face risks maturing the design and critical technologies for the HLS until 

it ensures its new tailored programmatic approach meets the intent of traditional oversight milestones. 

While the HLS Program leveraged lessons learned and is modeled, in part, after the Commercial Crew 

Program, HLS tailored its programmatic milestone approach to better fit a services model approach 

versus the traditional hardware development program. The tailored approach replaces the traditional 

hardware development milestones with annual synchronization reviews that provide oversight of 

provider development.15 NASA also stood up “collaboration teams” and insight teams that will work 

with SpaceX throughout HLS development. In our judgment, this is a useful resource but may not 

compensate for the oversight provided by the design and operational milestone reviews. Notably, 

NASA’s initial success in defining its safety and engineering requirements during the initial HLS design 

phase will help ensure SpaceX and future HLS contractors understand the human rating standards they 

are required to achieve. Nonetheless, as was done in the Commercial Crew Program, the Agency will 

need to utilize a program board to evaluate hazards and variations to NASA standards to ensure safety 

and human rating standards are met. 

15 For example, NASA is replacing the following milestone reviews that occur in a traditional acquisition: Key Decision Point-D is 

the milestone event that allows a project to proceed to Assembly, Integration and Test, and Launch; Key Decision Point-E 

moves the project into Operations and Sustainment. A Systems Integration Review ensures segments, components, and 

subsystems are on schedule to be integrated into the system. The Operational Readiness Review ensures that all system and 

support (flight and ground) hardware, software, personnel, procedures, and user documentation accurately reflect the 

deployed state of the system. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 93

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 10

 Key Unimplemented Recommendations

Baseline the Gateway requirements and specifications in contract modifications

prior to updating and awarding the Power and Propulsion Element and Habitation

and Logistics Outpost fixed-price contracts (IG-21-004).

Ensure Power and Propulsion Element and Habitation and Logistics Outpost delivery

and launch dates are realistic by including sufficient schedule margin in their

development schedules (IG-21-004).

Ensure the maturity of system requirements are fully understood before selecting

the acquisition method and contract type for future acquisition strategies supporting

Artemis and Mars missions by describing the state of the program requirements in

the acquisition strategy memorandum for each new acquisition (IG-21-004).

To the extent practicable, adjust Orion’s production schedules for Artemis IV and V

to better align with the successful demonstration of Artemis II to reduce schedule

delays associated with potential rework (IG-20-018).

Review Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate and NASA program

management policies, procedures, and Agency Baseline Commitment reporting

processes to provide greater visibility into current, future, and overall cost and

schedule estimates for the SLS Program and other human space flight programs

(IG-20-012).

Ongoing and Anticipated Future Audit Work 

NASA’s Management of Its Astronaut Corps

This audit will assess to what extent NASA’s processes for sizing, training, and assigning its astronaut 

corps align with the Agency’s current and future mission needs.

Mobile Launcher-2 

This audit will examine the extent to which NASA has met its cost, schedule, and performance goals for 

the Mobile Launcher-2 development contract. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 94

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 11

Challenge 2: Improving 

Management of Major Projects 

Why This Is a Challenge 

For six decades, NASA has been the world’s leader in space exploration, advancing knowledge of Earth 

while making discoveries about the furthest reaches of the universe with its portfolio of major 

projects.16 These projects include satellites equipped with advanced sensors to study the Earth; rovers 

to collect soil and rock samples on other celestial bodies; telescopes intended to explore the far reaches 

of the universe; and complex systems to support transportation of humans to the ISS, Moon, and 

beyond. NASA is planning to invest at least $69 billion over the life cycle of its portfolio of 34 major 

projects currently in development. However, this investment is likely to increase because the number 

of projects in development is expected to grow as the Agency plans for 8 of 13 major projects in 

formulation—including 6 Artemis projects—to enter development in 2021. Historically, NASA’s major 

projects have cost significantly more and taken much longer to complete than initially planned with the 

Agency’s current development projects resulting in total cumulative cost growth of $9.6 billion since 

their original cost baselines were set. Moving forward, NASA’s ability to deliver projects on time and 

within budget is critical to meeting mission objectives, strategic goals, and commitments to Congress 

and taxpayers. 

Although $7.1 billion of $9.6 billion in cumulative cost growth comes from two of NASA’s 34 major 

projects—James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) and SLS—other major projects such as Surface Water 

and Ocean Topography (SWOT), NASA-Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) Synthetic Aperture 

Radar (NISAR), Low-Boom Flight Demonstrator (LBFD), and Laser Communications Relay Demonstration 

(LCRD) have also experienced cost growth, schedule delays, or both—some of which can be attributed 

to the COVID-19 pandemic.17

• James Webb Space Telescope. JWST is an infrared observatory designed to help understand

the origin of the universe, creation and evolution of the first stars and galaxies, and formation

of stars and planetary systems. Under development since 2008, in June 2018 NASA established

a revised life-cycle cost commitment of $9.7 billion and launch readiness date of March 2021—

$828 million more and 2 years later than the baselines established by the project in 2011. Since

then, technical challenges, delays related to COVID-19, and issues with Ariane 5, the European

Space Agency’s rocket that will launch JWST, have pushed the date out until at least

December 2021.

• Surface Water and Ocean Topography. SWOT will use its wide-swath radar altimetry technology

to take repeated high-resolution measurements of the world’s oceans and freshwater bodies to

develop a global survey. SWOT entered implementation in 2016 with a life-cycle cost

commitment of $755 million and an April 2022 launch readiness date. Because SWOT used

16 GAO categorizes “major projects” as those with life‐cycle costs over $250 million. GAO, NASA: Assessments of Major 

Projects (GAO-21-306, May 20, 2021). 

17 The status of SLS is discussed in Challenge 1, Returning Humans to the Moon. COVID-19 impacts on cost growth are 

discussed in Challenge 8, Managing the Impacts of COVID-19 on NASA’s Mission and Workforce. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 95

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 12

most of its cost and schedule reserves to mitigate instrument delivery delays prior to COVID‐19, 

it did not have sufficient reserves to cover additional delays related to the pandemic.18 

Based on a recent assessment, NASA concluded SWOT will exceed its launch readiness 

date by 14 months and incur $67.5 million in cost overruns to cover schedule delays and 

COVID‐19 impacts. 

• NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar. NISAR is a joint project between NASA and ISRO to study

Earth’s ice masses and ecosystems. NASA’s FY 2022 budget provides an additional $104 million

to support life‐cycle cost increases associated with delayed delivery of the S‐band SAR

instrument and COVID‐19 impacts.19 The updated NISAR life‐cycle cost exceeds the Agency’s

development estimate of $661 million by more than 15 percent and the baseline launch

readiness date of September 2022 by 12 months.

• Low-Boom Flight Demonstrator. LBFD is a flight demonstration project that plans to show that

noise from supersonic flights—a sonic boom—can be reduced to levels acceptable to the public

for commercial use in overland flights. In August 2020, NASA approved a net increase of

$74.7 million over the LBFD Project’s life‐cycle cost estimate of $582.4 million and a delay of

5 months beyond its planned January 2022 first flight because the contractor delayed releasing

design drawings and had quality issues with supplier deliveries.

• Laser Communications Relay Demonstration.

LCRD is a technology demonstration mission

to advance two‐way optical (laser)

communication technology for Earth using

the LCRD relay satellite. In May 2021, LCRD’s

launch readiness date was delayed due to

launch vehicle readiness issues and launch

slot availability, with November 22 or 23,

2021, providing the next available launch

opportunity. The mission previously

experienced a $47.8 million life‐cycle cost

increase, with officials anticipating an

additional $6.1 million for funding to retain

key staff to support this latest launch delay.

Due to the Agency’s history of persistent cost growth and schedule delays in the majority of its major 

projects, 30 years ago GAO first designated NASA’s acquisition management as a high risk and since then 

has identified a variety of management weaknesses that have exacerbated this challenge.20 NASA has 

historically struggled to provide reliable life‐cycle cost estimates for complex projects involving multiple, 

first‐of‐their‐kind components. This includes projects such as JWST, and missions such as Artemis that 

involve multiple iterations of major projects without a definitive life‐cycle end date, like the SLS rocket 

18 Cost reserves are for costs that are expected to be incurred—for instance, to address project risks—but are not yet allocated 

to a specific part of the project. Schedule reserves are extra time in project schedules that can be allocated to specific 

activities, elements, and major subsystems to mitigate delays or address unforeseen risks. 

19 The NISAR S‐Band SAR instrument is a synthetic aperture radar that actively collects data by producing its own energy and 

then recording the amount of that energy reflected back after interacting with Earth. 

20 GAO first cited the Agency’s acquisition management as a high‐risk area in 1990. GAO, High-Risk Series: Dedicated 

Leadership Needed to Address Limited Progress in Most High-Risk Areas (GAO‐21‐119SP, March 2, 2021) is the most recent 

list in which NASA’s acquisition management was cited as a high risk. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 96

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 13

and Orion capsule, which because they are not completely reusable will be built multiple times for an 

indefinite number of years.21 Overall, NASA remains challenged to complete its major projects within 

their planned costs and schedules due to a culture of optimism, underestimating technical complexity, 

and funding instability—all long-standing issues.

Progress in Addressing the Challenge 

NASA’s efforts in the last few years to improve management of its major projects have shown 

indications of improved performance for several projects, including Landsat 9 and Psyche, which have 

seen reduced costs.22 In fact, GAO’s 2021 High-Risk Series report listed NASA’s acquisition management 

as one of only seven high-risk areas throughout the entire federal government that showed progress 

toward meeting criteria for removal from the High-Risk List over the past 2 years.23 Progress toward 

improving NASA’s acquisition management is demonstrated by the Agency’s commitment to implement 

its 2018 Corrective Action Plan, which was designed to address the causes of cost and schedule concerns 

highlighted in GAO’s High-Risk List.24 In August 2020, NASA updated the Plan and reported completing 

six of nine initiatives, closing and rewriting one initiative, and adding three new initiatives to expand 

data collection efforts, implement a schedule repository, and conduct financial evaluations of potential 

contractors prior to award. 

As a result of the Corrective Action Plan’s initiatives, NASA has developed best practices, added 

additional requirements, and implemented external monitoring related to cost and schedule of major 

projects. For example, NASA published a Technology Readiness Assessment Best Practices Guide that 

established standard definitions and best practices for critical technologies needed for exploration, 

science, and technology mission systems to meet operational performance requirements within defined 

cost and schedule parameters.25 In addition, NASA added requirements for all projects with life-cycle 

costs over $1 billion to conduct a Joint Cost and Schedule Confidence Level analysis at additional 

life-cycle phases to help reduce cost and schedule growth, improve transparency, and increase the 

likelihood of meeting project expectations.26 Further, NASA plans to broaden its use of Earned Value 

Management by delegating all applicable contracts to the Defense Contract Management Agency to 

integrate information on a project’s cost, schedule, and technical efforts for surveillance by 

21 NASA indicated that it expects the cost of the SLS and Orion to decrease over time as the designs stabilize and production 

processes mature.

22 Landsat 9, launched in September 2021, is the latest satellite in the Landsat series, which has provided a continuous spacebased record of the Earth’s land surface observations to study, predict, and understand the consequences of land surface 

dynamics, such as deforestation. Psyche, scheduled to launch in 2022, will be the first mission to visit a metal asteroid and 

aims to understand iron cores, a previously unexplored component of the early building blocks of planets. 

23 NASA now meets three of five criteria for removal from GAO’s High-Risk List (leadership commitment, action plan, and 

monitoring) and partially meets the other two (capacity and demonstrated progress). 

24 NASA, 2020 High Risk Corrective Action Plan (August 2020, last accessed June 24, 2021) is the Agency’s most recent update 

to the Corrective Action Plan. 

25 NASA Office of the Chief Technologist SP-20205003605, Technology Readiness Assessment Best Practices Guide

(June 30, 2020). 

26 A Joint Cost and Schedule Confidence Level analysis produces a point-in-time estimate that includes all cost and schedule 

elements in project life-cycle Phases A through D (i.e., concept and technology development through system assembly, 

integration and testing, and launch), incorporates and quantifies known risks, assesses the impacts of cost and schedule to 

date, and addresses available annual resources, among other things. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 97

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 14

management and decision makers.27 Prior to its 2020 update to the Corrective Action Plan, NASA only 

surveilled 37 percent of its contracts. NASA is also requiring that these same applicable contracts 

submit data to NASA’s new centralized schedule repository to improve access to historical data and 

include Earned Value Management data during project review. 

Work That Needs to Be Done 

We have consistently reported on NASA’s culture of optimism and the effects this has had on project 

management. NASA’s ability to overcome technological and scientific obstacles to accomplish its 

objectives has become part of the Agency’s culture and helped foster a belief that NASA can accomplish 

anything. However, many of the Agency’s planned missions are ambitious endeavors that need to be 

grounded in more realistic cost and schedule commitments, which NASA needs to remain cognizant of 

when establishing baselines for the newly announced Earth System Observatory and Venus missions.28 

NASA should carefully consider its commitment to Congress and other stakeholders and seek to 

establish sustainable budgets and realistic timelines that take into account the Agency’s overall goals 

and priorities. To put NASA’s budget into historical context, during the Apollo missions of the late 1960s 

the Agency’s budget reached a high of 4.4 percent of the overall federal budget, while NASA’s current 

funding amounts to 0.5 percent of the federal budget. Artemis is NASA’s most ambitious and costly 

mission to date, with a projected cost of $93 billion through FY 2025. Given that the Agency is 

27 Earned Value Management measures the value of work accomplished in a given period and compares it with the planned 

value of work scheduled for that period and the actual cost of work accomplished. At the Defense Contract Management 

Agency, surveillance is often a multifunctional insight effort to review and analyze contractor plans, schedules, policies, 

procedures, systems, processes, process outputs, and/or products to determine compliance to contractual, statutory, 

regulatory, or contractor requirements. 

28 The Earth System Observatory will provide key information to guide efforts related to climate change, disaster mitigation, 

fighting forest fires, and improving real-time agricultural processes. NASA recently selected two new missions to Venus, 

Earth’s nearest planetary neighbor, to understand how Venus became an inferno-like world when it has so many other 

characteristics similar to Earth, and how it may have been the first habitable world in the solar system, complete with an 

ocean and Earth-like climate. 

⚫ Key Implemented Recommendations

Ensure total development and production contract costs currently not reported

as part of the Agency Baseline Commitment are included in quarterly financial status

reporting to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Office of Management and

Budget, and Congress (IG-20-018).

Document and provide the Joint Cost and Schedule Confidence Level analysis approach

used by LBFD to the NASA Chief Knowledge Officer to serve as a reference for future

large-scale X-plane development projects (IG-20-015).

Establish a process to be used during source evaluation boards and source

selections that includes direct contact with the Center Earned Value Management

Working Group Representative and cognizant Defense Contract Management

Agency office to verify all contractor proposed information related to Earned Value

Management (IG-20-015).

Direct Boeing to complete delivery of the two Core Stages and the Exploration

Upper Stage using an Earned Value Management System with realistic schedule

assumptions and appropriate cost estimates through the end

of the contract in 2021 (IG-19-001).
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 98

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 15

anticipated to operate with an annual budget of approximately $25 billion for the next several years, 

absent transparent and accurate reporting of cost and schedule commitments, it will be difficult for 

NASA, Congress, and external stakeholders to make informed decisions that will ensure the success of 

current and future programs and projects. To this end, NASA must redouble its efforts to ensure that its 

science and space exploration projects are grounded in accurate estimates and meet cost, schedule, and 

performance goals. Given a limited budget to fund multiple ambitious projects, it is critical that NASA 

implement planned changes to its Joint Cost and Schedule Confidence Level policy, as well as 

demonstrate sustained progress completing initiatives in its 2020 Corrective Action Plan. 

Furthermore, when taking on a mission, requirements should be clearly defined, affordable, captured, 

and communicated early in the development effort to reduce the risk of costly design changes.29 NASA 

has begun to acquire major Artemis systems such as the Gateway and HLS through public-private 

partnerships, but it has still not fully defined the lunar system architecture or established requirements 

for its lunar missions. Consequently, NASA will need to address potential requirements and technology 

development knowledge gaps in Artemis projects due to a lack of firm requirements before entering 

implementation.

Ongoing and Anticipated Future Audit Work 

NASA’s Multi-Mission Program Cost Estimating and Reporting Practices 

This audit will assess the effectiveness of the Agency’s cost estimating and reporting practices for large, 

multi-mission programs such as those supporting the Artemis program.

Audit of the Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover (VIPER) Mission 

This audit will assess NASA’s management of VIPER relative to achieving technical objectives, meeting 

established milestones, and controlling costs.

29 GAO, Best Practices: Capturing Design and Manufacturing Knowledge Early Improves Acquisition Outcomes (GAO-02-701, 

July 15, 2002). 

 Key Unimplemented Recommendations

Implement the National Academies recommendation to establish a common

interface for Commercial Lunar Payload Services contractors between instrument

and spacecraft or to require that each commercial provider supply a document

that describes provider and payload capabilities (IG-20-023).

Evaluate whether the monetary threshold for performing internal Earned Value

Management is sufficient or additional criteria would be beneficial regarding the

dollar-value of tasks related to providing government furnished equipment and

performing in-house development work (discrete work) compared to NASA personnel

performing integration, review, and management functions (level-of-effort work)

(IG-20-015).

Review Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate and NASA program

management policies, procedures, and Agency Baseline Commitment reporting

processes to provide greater visibility into current, future, and overall cost and

schedule estimates for the SLS Program and other human space flight programs

(IG-20-012).
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 99

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 16

Review of Astrophysics Portfolio 

This audit will evaluate the current state of the Agency’s Astrophysics portfolio, identify and assess risks 

to future missions, and provide recommendations in support of the next decadal survey.

Review of NASA’s Management of the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory Portfolio 

This audit will assess NASA’s processes and controls ensuring the effective management of the contracts 

and portfolio of Agency projects developed by the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 100

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 17

Challenge 3: Sustaining a Human 

Presence in Low Earth Orbit 

Why This Is a Challenge 

For more than 20 years, humans have continuously lived and worked in space, building the ISS, 

conducting microgravity research, and testing new technologies required for long-term deep space 

travel to the Moon and Mars including those needed for the Agency’s near-term Artemis missions. 

At a cost of approximately $3 billion annually to operate the ISS and transport astronauts to and from 

the Station, NASA’s activities in low Earth orbit—the region in space from 100 to 600 miles above the 

Earth’s surface—consume about one-third of the Agency’s annual human space flight budget.30 This 

expense is expected to continue through the Station’s anticipated retirement in 2030.

31

The continuous operation of research and technology demonstrations in low Earth orbit is critical to 

achieving NASA’s goals in science, technology, and human space flight. The unique microgravity 

laboratory offered by the ISS has delivered benefits in human health, Earth observations and disaster 

response, innovative technology, global education, and the economic development of space. Without 

the availability of a low Earth orbit platform to conduct critical health research and demonstrate key 

technologies, NASA would be faced with the difficult decision of accepting a higher level of risk or 

delaying human missions to the Moon and Mars. 

While the U.S. segment of the ISS is structurally certified to operate until 2028, recent events highlight 

some of the risks associated with the harsh space environment, which require continuous assessment 

of the Station’s operational performance.32 Since October 2020, astronauts have identified several 

cracks in the Russian-built Service Module Transfer Tunnel that are causing cabin air to leak at twice 

the normal rate.33 While the current amount of cabin air leakage does not pose an immediate risk to 

astronaut health and safety, and to date, ISS teams have not observed any indications that crack 

growth is continuing towards a catastrophic failure, cracks can grow over time increasing risk. NASA 

and Russia’s space agency continue to investigate the cause of the leaks and potential structural 

impacts. In addition, in February 2021 NASA identified a hole in the Station’s Canadarm2 caused by 

a micrometeoroid or orbital debris.34 On-orbit inspections revealed that the damage would have no 

30 The ISS orbits roughly 250 miles above the Earth’s surface. 

31 The United States Innovation and Competition Act of 2021 (S.1260), a bill approved by the Senate in June 2021, would 

extend ISS operations through September 30, 2030. 

32 Currently, the U.S. portions of the Station are certified to operate through 2028—30 years after the first segment of the ISS 

was launched. 

33 The Service Module—the structural and functional center of Russia’s ISS segment and the third oldest segment of the 

Station—is currently the source of multiple cabin air leaks of unknown cause, some of which have yet to be located. 

34 Orbital debris consists of human-made objects in space that no longer serve a useful purpose. With the rapid increase of 

space activity and the state of orbital debris in low Earth orbit, we reported in January 2021 that the Agency’s mitigation-only 

activities focused solely on prevention were insufficient to stabilize the orbital debris environment. NASA OIG, NASA’s Efforts 

to Mitigate the Risks Posed by Orbital Debris (IG-21-011, January 27, 2021). Canadarm2—part of Canada’s contribution to 

the ISS—is used to conduct regular maintenance checks and operations on the outside of the Station; move supplies, 

equipment, and astronauts conducting spacewalks; and capture visiting vehicles to connect them to the Station. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 101

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 18

impact on the arm’s operations through the end of the Station’s certified life. In July 2021 the ISS also 

experienced a loss of attitude control after Russia docked its new Multi-Purpose Laboratory Module.35 

The new module inadvertently fired its thrusters, resulting in the vehicle becoming inverted and losing 

satellite communications for several minutes on two separate occasions. After the event, NASA 

assessed the inadvertent thruster firing anomaly data and determined there was no structural damage 

or long-term concerns as a result of structural loading. While NASA determined that these events do 

not pose an immediate threat to the Station’s operational longevity, either in response to an emergency 

event or at the end of the Station’s useful service life, NASA and its partners will eventually have to 

come to a decision to initiate its decommissioning and deorbit. 

Looking forward, NASA plans to maintain a human presence in low Earth orbit after the ISS is retired 

by becoming a customer of commercially owned and operated space destinations, which will require 

a sustained but largely undetermined financial investment by the federal government and private 

companies. To further its goal to become one of many customers in a commercial low Earth orbit 

economy, NASA has made several attempts over the past decade to commercialize space. The Agency’s 

initial efforts to commercialize low Earth orbit were unsuccessful after 10 years of trying to develop a 

commercial market and relying on the Center for the Advancement of Science in Space, Inc. (CASIS) 

to advance research endeavors for the commercial sector.36 In response, NASA released a plan in 2019 

focused on near-term actions to expand commercial opportunities in space beyond what was initially 

allowed under CASIS, including private astronaut missions to the ISS. However, Congress authorized 

NASA to spend only $17 million to support commercial low Earth orbit development in FY 2021—just 

over 10 percent of the Agency’s requested $150 million.

Key to maintaining a presence in low Earth orbit is reliable and cost-effective transportation of cargo 

and crew. Between the end of the U.S. Space Shuttle Program in 2011 and the first commercial crew 

mission in November 2020, NASA faced a 9-year transportation gap where it was forced to pay Russia 

for crew transportation to the Station. In the intervening years, NASA’s Commercial Cargo and Crew 

Programs have enabled commercial partners to successfully transport cargo to and from the ISS since 

2012 and crew since 2020. However, the road to developing a commercial crew transportation 

capability has been long. While SpaceX has successfully launched three commercial crew missions to 

the ISS, as of November 2021 the Boeing Corporation (Boeing), the other of the Agency’s two 

commercial crew partners, has encountered numerous delays and technical issues that have to date 

thwarted its first crewed flight. Crew transportation is crucial, not just for fully utilizing the ISS, but also 

for developing and utilizing future commercial destinations to maintain a continuous human presence 

in low Earth orbit. 

NASA continues to face challenges with low Earth orbit transportation and commercialization, as we 

have reported in previous audits and prior top management and performance challenges reports. 

Addressing these challenges is more urgent as NASA works to avoid the possibility of a gap in 

maintaining a human presence in low Earth orbit without the ISS or a commercial destination. 

35 Attitude is the orientation of the ISS with respect to the Earth and Sun, which is important for maintaining communications, 

microgravity, power, and thermal levels on the Station. 

36 CASIS is a non-profit organization that manages the ISS U.S. National Laboratory, a U.S. government-funded laboratory 

with principal research facilities located in the U.S. Orbital Segment of the ISS. In August 2011, NASA signed a 10-year, 

$136 million cooperative agreement with CASIS to manage all non-NASA research on the ISS. In July 2017, NASA extended 

the cooperative agreement to September 2024 and added another $60 million to the agreement. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 102

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 19

Progress in Addressing the Challenge 

To its credit, during a pandemic that closed NASA’s facilities and forced 90 percent of its workforce to 

operate from home, the first certified commercial flight of astronauts was launched into space in 

November 2020 from Crew Dragon, SpaceX’s commercial crew transportation vehicle. This flight 

represents the first time in 9 years that American astronauts were able to launch on a U.S. vehicle since 

the end of the Space Shuttle Program. 

In June 2021, NASA also completed installation of its new Roll-Out Solar Array to increase the Station’s 

power production and ensure its future power requirements are met through the life of the ISS including 

power needed for new commercial modules. Astronauts also replaced the Station’s aging batteries with 

more efficient lithium-ion batteries. In addition, NASA installed the first privately-funded commercial 

airlock on the ISS in late 2020—the NanoRacks Bishop Airlock increased the Station’s capability for 

transferring equipment, payloads, and deployable satellites to meet growing customer demands. 

In FY 2021, NASA invested more than $13 million in 

seed money for seven companies to develop 

in-space production applications in what industry 

studies indicate are the most promising areas for 

profitable manufacturing in space, such as advanced 

fiber optics, crystals, and regenerative medicine. 

Most of these in-space production applications are 

sponsored by CASIS, which in response to longstanding issues with oversight, its organizational 

structure, and its integration with the scientific 

community, is working with NASA to implement a 

six-point plan to ensure they maximize the benefit 

of the ISS National Laboratory for the remainder of 

its time in orbit. 

In addition, NASA is expanding commercial access to low Earth orbit beyond the scientific research and 

development allowed in the National Laboratory by enabling commercial and marketing activities 

onboard the ISS, such as shooting photographs and videos of an Estēe Lauder skin serum using the 

backdrop of space, and allowing private astronaut missions, such as the first Axiom Space mission 

expected to launch to the ISS in February 2022. In fact, due to the level of demand for private astronaut 

missions to the Station, in June 2021 NASA moved to an annual competitive process for selecting up to 

two private astronaut missions per year based on availability. 

Finally, NASA is contributing to the development of low Earth orbit commercial destinations. In 2020, 

the Agency awarded Axiom Space a firm-fixed-price contract of $140 million to provide at least one 

habitable commercial module attached to the ISS, which will detach and become a free-flying 

destination prior to deorbiting the Station. In July 2021, NASA announced its Commercial Low Earth 

Orbit Destinations initiative to encourage development of a commercial successor to the ISS through 

public-private partnerships. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 103

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 20

Work That Needs to Be Done 

Reliable transportation to low Earth orbit continues to be a priority for the Agency. Despite recent 

progress, the Commercial Crew Program continues to be challenged by Boeing’s CST-100 Starliner 

vehicle, which encountered numerous delays and technical issues that precluded a second uncrewed 

test flight planned for July 2021. This second test flight was necessary because Boeing’s first flight in 

December 2019 encountered significant software glitches that prevented the capsule from reaching the 

ISS.

37 Given the ongoing root cause analysis and technical issues facing the Boeing vehicle, it is not clear 

when the Starliner will conduct its first crewed flight. Until that time, NASA will be required to rely on 

SpaceX for commercial transportation to the ISS. 

Whether on the ISS or a future commercial low Earth orbit destination, NASA is counting on the 

availability of a continuously crewed laboratory well beyond 2030 to conduct research and technology 

demonstrations required for deeper and longer-term space travel. Eleven of 27 technology gaps that 

require microgravity testing and 8 out of 12 critical human health risks that require mitigation using a 

microgravity environment will not be completed by the Station’s proposed end-of-life in 2030.38 

NASA intends for one or more commercial low Earth orbit destinations to be operational by 2028, 

allowing a 2-year overlap with the ISS before its anticipated retirement in 2030. The Agency’s plan to 

develop a commercial economy continues to be an urgent priority so that it can avoid a gap in its ability 

to sustain a human presence in low Earth orbit. 

37 NASA and Boeing cooperated to form a joint Independent Review Team in December 2019 following the Starliner’s first test 

flight. The assessment examined the three primary anomalies experienced during the initial test. NASA officially closed all 

actions recommended by the Independent Review Team which included additional dress rehearsals, refurbishing of the first 

Orbital Flight Test crew module, and outfitting a new service module. 

38 Eight of the 11 technology gaps that require microgravity testing are individual components of the Environmental Control 

and Life Support System, which will be integrated into a single system on the ISS by 2029. 

⚫ Key Implemented Recommendations

Continue to ensure the purchase of future commercial space services complies with

government contracting regulations (IG-20-005).

Complete all end-of-mission critical systems and open work related to nominal and

contingency deorbit operations (IG-18-021).

 Key Unimplemented Recommendations

Lead national and international collaborative efforts to mitigate orbital debris

including activities to encourage active debris removal and the timely end-of-mission

disposal of spacecraft (IG-21-011).

Explore alternative orbital debris radar assets to fill the data gaps caused by the

increased costs of utilizing existing radars and the loss of legacy assets (IG-21-011).

Correct identified safety-critical technical issues before the crewed test flights,

including parachute, propulsion, and launch abort systems, to ensure sufficient

safety margins exist (IG-20-005).
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 104

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 21

Ongoing and Anticipated Future Audit Work 

NASA’s Management and Utilization of Low Earth Orbit 

This audit will examine NASA’s utilization and management of the ISS and its plans and progress toward 

developing a commercial market in low Earth orbit.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 105

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 22

Challenge 4: Managing and 

Mitigating Cybersecurity Risk 

Why This Is a Challenge 

Cybersecurity is profoundly difficult and complex to manage, especially in an ever-changing threat 

environment where mitigation is a marathon, not a sprint. Over the past 20 years, we identified 

securing NASA’s information technology (IT) systems and data as a top management challenge due, 

in large part, to the Agency’s deficient IT management practices.39 Given its more than 500 IT systems, 

high-profile mission, and broad connectivity with the public, educational institutions, research facilities, 

and other outside organizations, NASA is a larger and more attractive potential target for cybercriminals 

than most government agencies (see Figure 4). 

Figure 4: NASA IT by the Numbers

Source: NASA OIG representation of Agency data.

With more than 72,000 applications and devices connecting to NASA’s networks, effectively managing 

and mitigating cybersecurity risk is key to ensuring mission success—a fact underscored by mandatory 

telework as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2020 SolarWinds cyberattack.40 To this end, 

39 NASA’s IT systems include institutional systems that support the day-to-day work of Agency employees, such as laptop and 

desktop computers, and mission-specific systems that support the Agency’s aeronautics, science, and space exploration 

programs, such as the Deep Space Network, which supports interplanetary spacecraft missions. 

40 Hackers believed to be operating on behalf of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service breached software provider 

SolarWinds and deployed a malware‐laced update to infect the networks of multiple U.S. companies and government 

networks, including NASA. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 106

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 23

the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) allocated approximately $69 million during FY 2021 to 

implement institutional cybersecurity measures because challenges and threats continue to evolve as 

adversaries routinely attempt to compromise NASA’s IT assets.41 For instance, in 2019 two Chinese 

nationals, members of a hacking group operating in China, were indicted on criminal charges for gaining 

unauthorized access to a NASA computer to steal data. Separately, in April 2020 we issued a 

Management Referral detailing the unauthorized access and deletion of data from an Agency IT system 

following an employee’s separation. The investigation found that a contractor was permitted access to 

a NASA system following termination in which artifacts were deleted in violation of Agency policy and 

best practices. In addition, our investigation found that mission IT personnel did not follow established 

NASA incident response procedures that precluded the possibility of pursuing criminal charges against 

the former employee related to the potential intentional destruction of Agency data. 

To help frame the scope and urgency of cybersecurity, the Federal Information Security Modernization 

Act (FISMA) and Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA) ratings provide broad 

insight into NASA’s cyber health.42 During the 2021 FISMA evaluation, NASA’s information security 

program showed some improvement but still fell short of the Office of Management and Budget’s 

watermark for a program to be considered effective.43 Similarly, in July 2021 NASA received an overall 

FITARA grade of C+ given its challenges in managing cyber risks. 

Strengthening foundational cybersecurity efforts, such as Enterprise Architecture and Enterprise 

Security Architecture—the blueprints for how an organization analyzes and operates its IT and 

cybersecurity—continues to be challenging as the Agency struggles to balance two competing priorities: 

protecting against cyber threats and fulfilling its mission. As we reported in May 2021, the Agency’s 

cybersecurity preparedness is strained due to ambiguity surrounding the requisite technical integration 

between Enterprise Architecture and Enterprise Security Architecture as well as disjointed internal 

management structures and funding authorities.44

The Agency’s organizational structure has three primary levels with varying responsibilities—and 

numerous lines of funding control—for cybersecurity management. Typically, missions fund their 

own computer networks and IT personnel; therefore, in most cases the mission directorate personnel 

rather than OCIO have visibility over the operational and security aspects of mission networks. This 

long‐standing practice of having missions with independent budgets and sometimes competing interests 

impedes the Agency’s ability to build a comprehensive Enterprise Architecture.

While the OCIO has responsibility for institutional governed IT that support the day‐to‐day work of 

NASA employees, missions are left to their own discretion to interpret and implement requirements 

and, importantly, absorb costs associated with cybersecurity. Smaller missions lack assets (people, 

tools, and funding) to devote to cyber efforts and tend to prioritize gathering science while putting 

cybersecurity low on their “to‐do” lists. 

41 OCIO personnel oversee the systems and security capabilities that comprise NASA’s institutional networks, data centers, 

web services, and computers. 

42 FISMA, as amended in 2014 (Pub. L. No. 113‐283), requires agencies to develop, implement, and document an 

agency‐wide information security program. FITARA puts federal agency Chief Information Officers in control of their 

agency’s IT investments.

43 NASA OIG, Evaluation of NASA’s Information Security Program under the Federal Information Security

Modernization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (ML‐22‐001, November 9, 2021). 

44 NASA OIG, NASA’s Cybersecurity Readiness (IG‐21‐019, May 18, 2021). 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 107

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 24

Adopting an integrated Enterprise Architecture and Enterprise Security Architecture would not only 

dramatically improve situational awareness but would also enable NASA’s decision makers to effect 

positive change on the Agency’s cybersecurity posture. However, these efforts take time to implement 

and require sustained leadership commitment. This year, we focused on three specific cybersecurity 

challenges the Agency is facing with an emphasis on practical issues where meaningful improvement 

and near-term progress is achievable: (1) improper use incidents, (2) mobile device security, and 

(3) assessment and authorization (A&A) process.45

• Improper Use Incidents. Improper use incidents result from a violation of an organization’s

acceptable use policies. In a May 2021 audit, we found that improper use incidents increased

from 249 in 2017 to 1,103 in 2020—a 343 percent growth—with failing to protect Sensitive

But Unclassified information the most prevalent abuse.46 For instance, unencrypted

email containing Sensitive But Unclassified data, Personally Identifiable Information, and

International Traffic in Arms Regulations data continues to expose the Agency to unnecessary

cyber risk that can affect national security, loss of intellectual property, and compromise of

employee and contractor data.47

• Mobile Device Security. The OCIO manages over 15,000 mobile devices that store, process, and

transmit Agency information, thereby requiring continuous protection. In an August 2020 audit,

we found that the OCIO is not adequately monitoring and enforcing the business rules

established for mobile devices, potentially exposing the email system and data to viruses,

malware, or hacking through connected mobile devices.48 Moreover, since the outbreak of

COVID-19, exposure to cyber threats has increased because NASA’s workforce has shifted to a

work-from-home environment, increasing the usage of mobile devices.

• Assessment and Authorization Process. To ensure its IT systems meet cybersecurity

requirements, NASA is required to perform a thorough A&A review process for newly

introduced systems and annually for all other systems. In May 2021, we reported that NASA

is inconsistent and ineffective with its A&A process because of its decades-long decentralized

approach to cybersecurity.49 Over the past 6 years, we have reported that certain types of

assessment data have been ignored or discarded as irrelevant during the A&A process, leaving

systems incorrectly categorized at lower risk impact levels than their criticality requires and

resulting in increased vulnerability to cyber risks.

45 A&A consists of a review of security policies and procedures (management controls); physical facility infrastructure 

(operational controls); and network testing, server testing, application security testing, penetration testing, and scanning 

(technical controls). End products of A&A include an authorization to operate the IT system, risk-based decisions on the 

application of individual controls, and a plan of action and milestones to address identified deficiencies. 

46 IG-21-019. Sensitive But Unclassified has been replaced by a newly mandated government-wide initiative and renamed as 

Controlled Unclassified Information. NASA was issued a waiver that permitted both information classifications to coexist 

until October 1, 2021. 

47 Personally Identifiable Information is any data, such as a social security number or date of birth, that could potentially 

identify a specific individual. International Traffic in Arms Regulations control the export and import of defense-related 

articles and services on the United States Munitions List and affects the manufacture, sale, and distribution of technology. 

48 NASA OIG, Audit of NASA’s Policy and Practices Regarding the Use of Non-Agency Information Technology Devices

(IG-20-021, August 27, 2020). 

49 IG-21-019. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 108

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 25

Progress in Addressing the Challenge 

The Agency has taken steps to improve its management and mitigation of cybersecurity risks over the 

last several years. Most important has been the stability of having a tenured Senior Agency Information 

Security Officer in place for more than 4 years—longer than any other in NASA history. The continuity 

of leadership has been critical for the OCIO, and the Agency as a whole, to advance cybersecurity 

readiness. Additionally, NASA senior management has made a combination of strategic, risk 

management, and collaboration decisions that have begun to strengthen the Agency’s cybersecurity 

posture. 

• Strategic Decisions. Agency officials formed a Cybersecurity Program Management Board with

key senior team members to broaden visibility and provide input into programmatic

decision-making to better manage cyber risk for programs, projects, and initiatives. In addition,

NASA implemented security enforcements requiring End-of-Life/End-of-Support systems to be

upgraded in order to remotely connect to NASA’s Virtual Private Network (VPN).

• Risk Management Decisions. NASA replaced and expanded the Agency’s secure VPN

infrastructure in the fall of 2019, an action that proved critical for supporting the unanticipated

move in March 2020 to mandatory telework for approximately 90 percent of the Agency’s

workforce during the COVID-19 pandemic. Likewise, NASA has deployed Agency Endpoint

Threat Detection and Response software across more than 50,000 systems.50 The Agency is also

creating a mobile VPN for government furnished iOS phones and tablets that utilize Mobile

Device Management, allowing secure access over the internet to files stored on shared drives.51

• Collaboration Decisions. In 2020, NASA embedded a cybersecurity executive within the Artemis

program to provide coordination and codify a tailored cross-Center enterprise cybersecurity risk

approach for the program. The Agency also established the Cybersecurity Integration Team—

comprised of stakeholders across the Agency including all mission organizations—which issued

guidance to improve High Value Asset identification and management.52

Lastly, the OCIO is in the process of implementing two important cyber-related initiatives. In 

January 2022, under the Mission Support Future Architecture Program, Center Chief Information 

Security Officers and cybersecurity staff will be realigned from the Center OCIO to the Senior Agency 

Information Security Officer, moving the Agency towards an enterprise computing model that would 

centralize and consolidate IT capabilities, such as software management and cybersecurity. Additionally, 

in February 2022 the OCIO anticipates it will award the Cybersecurity and Privacy Enterprise Solutions 

and Services contract that expects to eliminate duplicative cyber services and the need for Center-based 

IT security contracts.

50 Endpoint detection and response software is used to gather and analyze security threat-related information from computer 

workstations and other endpoints with the goal of finding security breaches as they happen and facilitating a quick response 

to discovered or potential threats. 

51 iOS is a mobile operating system for Apple-manufactured devices such as the iPhone and iPad. 

52 A High Value Asset is information or an information system that is so critical to an organization that the loss or corruption of 

this information or loss of access to the system would have serious impact to the organization’s ability to perform its mission 

or conduct business. These sensitivities make High Value Assessments of particular interest to criminal, politically-motivated, 

or state-sponsored actors for either direct exploitation of the data or to cause a loss of confidence by the public. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 109

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 26

⚫ Key Implemented Recommendations

Require the Jet Propulsion Laboratory Cybersecurity/Identity Technologies and

Operations Group to identify and remediate weaknesses in the security problem log

ticket process and provide periodic aging reports to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory

Chief Information Officer detailing the status of open security problem log tickets,

pending patches, and outdated security waivers (IG-19-022).

Ensure OCIO and Office of Strategic Infrastructure representatives are included

in functional reviews of NASA's critical infrastructure assets and facility security

assessments so that cyber and facility interdependencies are addressed appropriately

(IG-17-011).

Work That Needs to Be Done 

As cyber threats continue to evolve and become more sophisticated, they pose ongoing challenges for 

NASA to fortify and safeguard its IT systems. Space is both a collaborative and competitive business; 

NASA’s potential cyber threats are as varied as its missions. The ongoing tension between collaboration 

and competition will continue to define space activities in the coming years requiring the Agency to 

combat threats in order to maximize the utility of space partnerships while protecting intellectual 

property against theft.

While NASA has implemented countermeasures to reduce the likelihood and overall risk associated 

with cyber threats, it continues to face challenges in improving its defenses to protect mission data 

and thwart vulnerabilities. The Agency’s cybersecurity preparedness continues to be strained due 

to ambiguity surrounding the technical integration between Enterprise Architecture and Enterprise 

Security Architecture and gaps in visibility of the mission networks. To counter a broad range of 

exploitation techniques and to continue forward progress, the OCIO needs to (1) reduce improper 

use incidents, (2) ensure that mobile device security is addressed, and (3) implement a consistent 

A&A process. Additionally, as the Mission Support Future Architecture Program and Cybersecurity 

and Privacy Enterprise Solutions and Services contract come to fruition, sustained focus by Agency 

leadership is critical to integrating these dual initiatives into its enterprise-wide cyber portfolio to 

avoid implementation gridlock. 

Furthermore, previous concerns such as the large size of the Agency’s web footprint and emerging 

concerns related to the supply chain warrant continued action by NASA officials. Activities to streamline 

websites, revamp the main website, create an Agency web-archiving program, and implement a new 

Agency web governance structure are ongoing. As of July 2021, NASA has completed a comprehensive 

internal review of 2,867 websites and is working toward implementing a new nasa.gov information 

architecture to streamline the Agency web space. Finally, like many other agencies, NASA is dependent 

on a supply chain that is vulnerable to disruption and cyber threats, and the impact on NASA IT systems 

must be monitored with a sense of urgency because much of the supply chain issues stem from the 

dependence on single and sole-source nations, primarily China. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 110

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 27

 Key Unimplemented Recommendations

Improve the patch and vulnerability management program (IG-21-005).

Assign the personnel resources necessary to ensure the Agency’s security plans for

systems that inherit the controls within the Agency’s new hybrid common controls

system are updated and that those hybrid controls are removed from the Agency

Common System security plan (IG-21-010).

Integrate Enterprise Architecture and Enterprise Security Architecture and develop

metrics to track the overall progress and effectiveness of Enterprise Architecture

(IG-21-019).

Collaborate with the Chief Engineer on strategies to identify and strengthen Enterprise

Architecture gaps across mission and institutional IT boundaries (IG-21-019).

Ongoing and Anticipated Future Audit Work 

Review of NASA’s Information Security Program under the Federal Information Security 

Modernization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 

As required by FISMA, this annual review will evaluate NASA’s information security program for FY 2021. 

Audit of NASA’s Insider Threat Program 

This audit will examine whether the Agency has established and implemented an effective insider threat 

program in accordance with federal policies, NASA policies, and best practices. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 111

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 28

Challenge 5: Improving Oversight 

of Contracts, Grants, and 

Cooperative Agreements 

Why This Is a Challenge 

NASA uses contracts, grants, and cooperative 

agreements to fund research and development 

activities and purchase services, supplies, and 

equipment to support every facet of its operations. 

In FY 2020, NASA spent approximately $19.7 billion 

of its $27.7 billion in available resources on 

contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements 

awarded primarily to businesses, educational 

institutions, and nonprofit organizations. The 

breadth and scale of these acquisitions underlie 

the significant challenge NASA faces to ensure the 

Agency receives good value for its investments and 

that recipients spend NASA funds appropriately to 

accomplish agreed-upon goals.53 Moreover, the 

Agency is also increasingly relying on public-private 

partnerships and alternative acquisition 

approaches in an attempt to achieve cost savings 

and accelerate development of new technologies, including several key systems for its Artemis mission 

to return humans to the Moon. 

NASA has faced long-standing challenges with oversight of its contracts, grants, and cooperative 

agreements. GAO first designated the Agency’s acquisition management as a high risk in 1990, and it 

has remained a high-risk area for three decades due to persistent cost growth and schedule delays in 

many of NASA’s major projects.54 Similarly, we have highlighted acquisition as an Agency management 

challenge for the past 15 years with identified weaknesses in both oversight of the acquisition process 

and the readiness of its acquisition workforce. 

NASA also continues to be challenged with oversight of its acquisition process. Most recently, in a 

July 2021 audit of NASA’s cooperative agreements with the Universities Space Research Association, 

we reported that the Agency needed to take additional steps to improve its management and financial 

oversight of cooperative agreements, especially with regard to significant extensions and augmentations 

to those agreements.55 Furthermore, our financial statement audits over the past decade have 

53 NASA’s contracts are managed by the Office of Procurement, while grants and cooperative agreements are issued by the 

NASA Shared Services Center and managed by the Office of the Chief Financial Officer. 

54 This issue is discussed in Challenge 2, Improving Management of Major Projects. 

55 NASA OIG, NASA’s Management of Universities Space Research Association’s Cooperative Agreements (IG-21-022, 

July 14, 2021). Funded extensions are supplements used to extend grants that require additional funding beyond 

their expiration dates. Augmentations are supplements that can be used at any time for work outside the scope of the 

approved proposal. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 112

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 29

identified challenges in timely closing out of contracts to ensure the government received what it 

contracted for, detected and recovered erroneous payments, made final payments to the contractors, 

and deobligated excess funds. Our FY 2020 financial statement audit also revealed oversight issues with 

the Agency’s internal controls related to the grant management process that we found were not 

designed to effectively monitor grantees and the federal awards they received.56 Also, over the past 

3 years our Office of Investigations conducted 40 criminal investigations involving grant fraud and abuse. 

The investigations resulted in 4 indictments, 2 prosecutions, and 4 suspensions with NASA receiving

$341,266 in restitution, $731,131 in recoveries, and $3,272,790 in civil settlements. 

More broadly, NASA is challenged with Agency-wide oversight of its acquisition workforce. In an 

October 2020 audit, we found that NASA does not collect Agency-wide acquisition workforce workload 

or performance data, which limits its ability to have an accurate picture of who comprises the 

acquisition workforce, determine whether they are certified as required, and measure workforce 

performance consistently across the entire Agency.57 Further, the practice of Center procurement 

offices functioning autonomously resulted in institutionalized inefficiencies such as redundant 

capabilities and contracts, legal and policy offices reviewing inconsistent monetary thresholds across 

Centers, and lack of workforce flexibility. 

In our judgment, these challenges expose NASA’s contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements to an 

increased risk of fraud, waste, and abuse. In particular, fraud and misconduct with the Agency’s Small 

Business Innovation Research (SBIR) and Small Business Technology Transfer programs are a longstanding OIG concern. Recent examples include: 

• A Kansas engineering company agreed to a civil settlement of $672,352 to resolve allegations

that it submitted false claims to obtain grant funds from the SBIR and Small Business Technology

Transfer programs. The investigation determined that the company received small business

funding for which it was ineligible.

• A New York company agreed to a settlement of $490,000 to resolve allegations under the civil

False Claims Act that it did not satisfy ownership and control requirements under the SBIR

program. The company was ineligible for SBIR awards from NASA and the U.S. Department of

Defense due to the involvement of Canadian investors.

• A Wyoming small business agreed to pay damages of $557,684 in a civil settlement to resolve

allegations that it accepted SBIR funding to which it was not entitled from NASA, the

U.S. Department of Energy, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

In addition, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has impacted NASA’s management of its contracts. Under 

Section 3610 of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act—the pandemic relief legislation 

known as the CARES Act—agencies are permitted to reimburse contractors for work stoppages caused 

by the pandemic to keep employees and subcontractors in a ready state given the closure of NASA 

Centers.58 This provision is particularly relevant to an agency like NASA that relies so heavily on private 

contractors for its science and space exploration projects. The CARES Act provided NASA with 

$60 million for safety, security, and mission support to prevent, prepare for, and respond to the 

56 NASA OIG, Fiscal Year 2020 Financial Accounting Management Letter (IG-21-008, December 14, 2020). 

57 NASA OIG, NASA’s Management of Its Acquisition Workforce (IG-21-002, October 27, 2020). 

58 Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, Pub. L. No. 116-136 (2020). 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 113

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 30

coronavirus. However, the Agency is planning to pay for subsequent adjustments using non-CARES Act 

appropriated funds and we anticipate additional significant costs to NASA in the future. 

Progress in Addressing the Challenge 

NASA has taken numerous steps to address its contract management challenges. The Office of 

Procurement continues to implement the ongoing Mission Support Future Architecture Program, NASA’s 

transition to an enterprise-wide workforce that leverages employees’ skills for use across the Agency; 

developed a Strategic Workforce Plan to maintain a workforce capable of responding to current and 

future contracting needs; and developed an Acquisition Portfolio Assessment Team to assess all Agency 

contracts and identify redundant contracts managed at the Center level. 

In the past year, NASA has also made several enterprise-wide changes to address acquisition 

management and oversight concerns. The Agency has consolidated the award and administration of 

grants and cooperative agreements through the NASA Shared Services Center. This consolidation is 

designed to improve service and data quality, standardize processes, leverage skills and investments, 

and provide economies of scale. NASA has also developed and implemented a new pre-award risk 

assessment policy and the Pre-Award Risk Assessment Tool to help standardize reviews across Centers. 

This tool has been in use by the NASA Shared Services Center for all recipients of new grants and 

cooperative agreements since October 1, 2020. In addition, NASA has made efforts to increase its 

efficiency in closing expired grants by incentivizing closeout contractors to complete timely and proper 

grant closeout. 

In an August 2021 report, we found that NASA appropriately managed $60 million provided by the 

CARES Act. For the Section 3610 transactions, NASA developed advanced agreements, a vehicle 

contracting officers and contractors use for special or unusual costs, specifically designed for the unique 

circumstances presented by the pandemic. We found that the advanced agreements and supporting 

documentation for the 27 Section 3610 transactions in our sample were all pandemic-related, and the 

advanced agreements adequately described the conditions such as facility closures and listed the 

contractor employees and the job functions that could not be performed remotely.59

59 NASA OIG, Review of Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act Funding (IG-21-024, August 9, 2021).
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 114

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 31

Work That Needs to Be Done 

Collectively, our audit and investigative work has shown that NASA’s inadequate management and 

oversight of contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements has, at times, resulted in inappropriate 

expenditures and wasted taxpayer dollars that negatively impacted the Agency’s mission.

Successful implementation of NASA enterprise-wide initiatives—such as the Mission Support Future 

Architecture Program—should provide more consistency in oversight and management of contracts, 

grants, and cooperative agreements, as well as sharing of lessons learned. However, as we have seen 

in past enterprise-wide initiatives, progress can be slow and halting due largely to the Agency’s 

decentralized management structure, lack of insight into Agency-wide operations, and the limited 

authority of Headquarters officials to control budgets and implement change at the Center level. 

We have similar concerns with the Agency’s ability to reorganize procurement management authority, 

operations, and oversight into a headquarters-based, enterprise-level function. A recent 

recommendation made as part of our audit of NASA’s acquisition workforce to link program and project 

managers to their contract assignments remains unresolved because the Office of Procurement lacks an 

existing source that contains this data. In our view, the ability to link contract assignments to acquisition 

workforce personnel is essential to the Office of Procurement’s efforts to monitor and measure 

workforce performance and establish a baseline for operations at an enterprise level as part of the 

Agency’s Mission Support Future Architecture Program.

NASA also needs to continue its work towards improving the timely closeout of contracts. In FY 2020, 

the Office of Procurement implemented several corrective action plans regarding timely closing out of 

contracts, especially the controls over the deobligation of any funds remaining on such contracts. The 

plans included establishing a Closeout Capability Group, Contract Closeout Guidebook, and a closeout 

repository to strengthen communication about closeout duties and store closeout documentation in a 

centralized location to expedite the closeout process. In November 2020, the Contract Closeout 

⚫ Key Implemented Recommendations

Establish a process to be used during source evaluation boards and source

selections that includes direct contact with the Center Earned Value Management

Working Group Representative and cognizant Defense Contract Management

Agency office to verify all contractor proposed information related to Earned

Value Management (IG-20-015).

Provide information and training to contracting officers and source evaluation

board members on the availability, use, and responsibilities of the Defense

Contract Management Agency during source evaluation boards and source

selections. Specifically, the NASA Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement and

NASA-Defense Contract Management Agency Memorandum of Understanding for

Earned Value Management (IG-20-015).

Establish policies and procedures as part of the NASA Grant and Cooperative

Agreement Manual to periodically review a recipient’s actual cost match and

document award requirements are met prior to obligating the next increment

of funding (IG-16-013).
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 115

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 32

Guidebook was incorporated into the NASA FAR Supplement. The Office of Procurement also 

continuously monitors closeout performance at each Center and collects quarterly and annual metrics 

for review. 

Additionally, NASA needs to improve its oversight of the grants process to include strengthening 

documentation requirements and developing a process for tracking questioned costs. Moving forward, 

ensuring proper use of NASA’s resources remains a top priority and Agency contracting personnel need 

to be proactive in their efforts to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse. 

Finally, with regard to COVID-19 contracting challenges, Agency officials have reported as much as 

$89 million in potential Section 3610 reimbursements as of June 2021, and they expect that amount will 

increase as they receive additional requests from contractors. NASA officials said they intend to follow 

their established contracting practices for future pandemic-related adjustments, with contracting 

officers responsible for ensuring invoices and claims are in line with the contracts, advanced 

agreements, and NASA policies. Given the significant costs and efforts that will likely be associated with 

these adjustments, we plan to continue our oversight work in this area. 

 Key Unimplemented Recommendations

Finalize and fully implement the performance metrics dashboard to measure

acquisition performance (IG-21-002).

Document contract assignments to contracting officers, contracting officer’s

representatives, and program and project managers in a centralized system

for inclusion in the performance metrics dashboard (IG-21-002).

In coordination with the NASA Shared Services Center, comply with the Federal

Grant and Cooperative Agreements Act of 1977 on the proper use of grants and

contracts to allow Center and Program personnel greater visibility into partner

operations and to ensure that funding levels and performance are commensurate

with requirements (IG-20-023).

Ongoing and Anticipated Future Audit Work 

The OIG’s Offices of Audits and Investigations, in conjunction with our Advanced Data Analytics 

Program, will continue to assist NASA in strengthening its acquisition oversight efforts by examining 

Agency-wide procurement and grant-making processes.60 These efforts will include assessing actions 

NASA is taking to identify and mitigate grant fraud risks; auditing individual contracts, grants, and 

cooperative agreements; and investigating potential misuse of contract and grant funds. Additionally, 

we plan a second round of contracts with several external entities to perform incurred cost audits of 

NASA contractors. 

Review of NASA’s Management of the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory Portfolio

This audit will assess NASA’s processes and controls ensuring the effective management of the contracts 

and portfolio of Agency projects developed by the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory. 

60 Since 2015, our Advanced Data Analytics Program has provided analytic products to our audit and investigative teams that 

show indicators of and help identify potential contract, grant, and procurement fraud. We continue to use a variety of 

statistical and mathematical techniques to gather, analyze, and interpret Agency and open-source data to identify fraud 

indicators and help target OIG audit and investigative resources. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 116

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 33

Science Mission Directorate’s Management of Research and Analysis Grants

This audit will evaluate whether the Science Mission Directorate and NASA Shared Services Center have 

sufficient controls in place to adequately oversee its Research and Analysis grants. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 117

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 34

Challenge 6: Attracting and 

Retaining a Highly Skilled and 

Diverse Workforce 

Why This Is a Challenge 

The success of NASA’s missions, programs, and projects relies on the Agency attracting and retaining 

a highly skilled and diverse workforce with varied technical and management skills. As of May 2021, 

NASA had approximately 18,000 civil service employees working at its facilities nationwide, most in 

science and engineering fields. Our prior work has shown that NASA faces interrelated workforce 

challenges including not having enough employees with the right skills in technical areas; 

implementation shortfalls; an aging workforce; and Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics 

(STEM) pipeline risks. Workforce challenges are not unique to NASA but are a government-wide 

concern. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management’s 2018 Federal Workforce Priorities Report 

observed that human capital challenges appeared in at least 10 percent of 221 Inspectors’ General 

management challenges and at least 25 percent of GAO’s 32 High-Risk List areas.61 In GAO’s 2021 

High-Risk List, federal strategic human capital management—a high risk since at least 2001—was 

downgraded from “met” to “partially met,” with GAO noting that persistent mission-critical skills gaps 

within federal agencies reduce their effectiveness.62

NASA OIG and GAO have reported on multiple NASA projects—Low-Boom Flight Demonstrator, 

Europa Clipper, and Mars 2020 to name a few—that have experienced workforce challenges, including 

not having enough staff at the right times or staff with the right skills.63 Last year we reported that 

NASA’s engineering technical disciplines faced significant risks to their specialized workforces, with 

particular concern to the loss of unique skillsets from retiring employees before their knowledge could 

be passed on to others within the Agency. More recently, we reported on NASA’s challenges to develop 

an agile and mission-driven acquisition workforce as it continues to implement an enterprise-wide 

approach to procurement under the Mission Support Future Architecture Program. Our audits have 

shown that despite establishing strategic frameworks for change, NASA has had limited success 

implementing these efforts to reorganize Agency-wide operations.64 Furthermore, the Aerospace Safety 

Advisory Panel noted in its 2020 Annual Report that NASA was not addressing certain workforce issues 

at the strategic level, risking an “erosion of expertise and experience in the NASA workforce, thereby 

61 U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 2018 Federal Workforce Priorities Report (February 2018). 

62 GAO-21-119SP. 

63 NASA OIG, Management of the Low-Boom Flight Demonstrator Project (IG-20-015, May 6, 2020), Management of NASA’s 

Europa Mission (IG-19-019, May 29, 2019), and NASA’s Mars 2020 Project (IG-17-009, January 30, 2017). GAO, NASA: 

Assessments of Major Projects (GAO-18-280SP, May 1, 2018). The Europa Clipper plans to launch in October 2024 to 

Jupiter’s moon Europa and over a 4-year period investigate whether conditions on the moon are potentially suitable for life. 

The Mars 2020 Perseverance Rover, which launched in July 2020 and landed in February 2021, seeks to better understand 

the geology of Mars, identify evidence of ancient life, collect Martian surface samples, and test new technologies. 

64 NASA OIG, NASA’s Planetary Science Portfolio (IG-20-023, September 16, 2020) and IG-21-002. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 118

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 35

undermining NASA’s ability to effectively manage the highly complex risk problems of future exploration 

programs, including those envisioned for the Artemis campaign.”65

Our prior top management and performance challenges reports have also highlighted that NASA’s 

workforce age distribution should raise additional human capital concerns. Nearly 12,000 of NASA’s 

18,000 civil service employees (65 percent) fall under the occupation category “science and 

engineering”—the portion of the workforce that provides technical capabilities to enable space flight 

and science missions. Within this category, 6,000 are more than 50 years old, and of those employees 

approximately 3,000 are eligible to retire in 2021. These potential impending retirements, shown in 

Figure 5, could result in a significant loss of institutional knowledge and skills. 

Figure 5: Science and Engineering Workforce Trend

Source: NASA OIG presentation of Agency workforce data.

The Partnership for Public Service recently reported that agencies struggle with staffing shortages and 

report gaps in knowledge and skills. These issues are compounded by an aging federal workforce with 

a wave of retirements threatening to further stretch staffing capabilities as roughly one-third of 

employees onboard at the beginning of FY 2019 were eligible to retire by the end of FY 2023.66 

The Office of Personnel Management reported for June 2021 that there were six times more federal 

employees older than 50 than under 30 (44.1 percent compared to 6.9 percent).

67 It is noteworthy that 

NASA has a significantly larger percentage of its workforce in the 55 to 64 year age range than the 

federal average (see Figure 6).

65 Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel, Annual Report for 2020 (January 2020). The Panel evaluates NASA’s safety performance, 

advises the Agency on ways to improve that performance, and reports to both NASA and Congress. 

66 Partnership for Public Service, A Time for Talent—Improving Federal Recruiting and Hiring (August 2020). Partnership for 

Public Service is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that works to make the government more effective and efficient. 

67 The Office of Personnel Management serves as the chief human resources agency and personnel policy manager for the 

federal government. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 119

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 36

Figure 6: Workforce Distribution by Age in May 2021

Source: NASA OIG presentation of U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Personnel Management, and NASA data.

Additionally, as an agency highly dependent on skilled STEM workers to accomplish its mission, NASA 

remains at risk from a shortage of such staff. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported the STEM 

labor market is highly segmented into different disciplines, sectors, and skill levels with varying degrees 

of supply and demand.68 In 2018, the Executive Director of the American Institute of Aeronautics and 

Astronautics testified before Congress about a STEM worker shortage in the aerospace community.69 

The Institute also highlighted in its work the need to increase diversity and foster inclusion by 

encouraging women and underrepresented minorities to pursue careers in the aerospace industry and 

emphasized that STEM school curriculums should be aligned to current workforce needs.70

Progress in Addressing the Challenge 

For the past 9 years, NASA has been voted the best large agency to work for in the federal government 

and again held the top rank in 2020 according to the Partnership for Public Service.71 NASA is 

attempting to cultivate a diverse and innovative workforce with the right balance of skills and 

experience to provide an inclusive work environment. Moreover, NASA added “inclusion” as an Agency 

core value in FY 2020.72 To this end, NASA is rolling out at least two initiatives—“Agency Unity 

Campaign” for employees emphasizing mission success through increased collaboration, connection, 

68 Yi Xue and Richard C. Larson, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Monthly Labor Review, “STEM crisis or STEM surplus? 

Yes and yes” (May 2015). 

69 NASA’s Cost and Schedule Overruns: Acquisitions and Program Management Challenges. Before the Subcommittee on 

Space, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, 115th Congress (2018) (statement of Executive Director Daniel L. 

Dumbacher). The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics’ membership includes nearly 30,000 engineers and 

scientists from 88 countries involved in global aerospace. 

70 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, A&D Workforce: Industry Overview, Industry Challenges, and Industry 

Needs (February 2021). 

71 The Partnership for Public Service’s results were calculated based on responses to the Office of Personnel Management’s 

annual Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey. 

72 NASA core values are safety, integrity, teamwork, excellence, and inclusion. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 120

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 37

and communication, and “Mission Equity,” a comprehensive effort to assess expansion and modification 

of NASA programs, procurements, grants, and policies, and examine potential barriers and challenges 

for communities that are historically underrepresented and underserved. 

Furthering its efforts to strategically hire staff with the right skills, NASA’s Office of the Chief Human 

Capital Officer (OCHCO) is undertaking activities to better align the Agency’s workforce to its current 

and future missions. This includes aligning specific OCHCO goals to NASA’s strategic objectives. Other 

initiatives include implementing a flexible and agile workforce approach through the Strategic 

Workforce Plan and replacing NASA’s aging talent acquisition system with one that will enable the 

Agency to more strategically hire, develop, and manage its workforce. OCHCO has also made efforts to 

reduce the hiring cycle time, leverage special hiring authorities, clear the hiring backlog from prior years, 

and work with Centers and Mission Directorates to develop plans to lessen the impact of a future 

retirement wave. 

As the Agency plans to improve the pipeline of candidates to fill current and future open positions, it is 

making efforts to attract and retain underserved and underrepresented students in engineering and 

other STEM fields in partnership with minority serving and other higher education institutions. One 

important change from previous years is that in its FY 2022 budget request NASA did not recommend 

eliminating its Office of STEM Engagement funding. Instead, the Agency requested $147 million for 

FY 2022 after receiving $127 million from Congress in FY 2021. The Minority University Research and 

Education Project, which is administered through NASA’s Office of STEM Engagement and provides 

financial assistance via competitive awards to minority serving institutions, is seeing the largest increase, 

with $10 million more requested for 2022 over what it received in 2021. Further, NASA is integrating 

metrics and using data to inform decisions on how to better reach the public, engage stakeholders, and 

evaluate outcomes. Critically, the STEM Engagement strategy is designed to enable relevant student 

contributions to NASA’s mission and work.

⚫ Key Implemented Recommendations

Develop procedures for periodic communication of the available hiring authorities

(IG-20-023).

Evaluate current and future critical technical staffing requirements by project over

the next 5 years (IG-19-019).

Create standardized guidance for performing annual capability assessments that

considers, at a minimum, the appropriate time and resources for performing the

assessments and the required data, analyses, and expected goals or results

(IG-17-015).

Work That Needs to Be Done 

To maintain a world-class workforce, NASA must fill current critical workforce gaps and prepare for 

those on the horizon by planning how to mitigate a forthcoming wave of retirements. Furthermore, the 

ability to successfully address that risk will require the Agency to have detailed visibility into workforce 

skill types—data that the Agency currently does not collect. The Center for Space Policy and Strategy 

recently emphasized the need for agencies to use data to measure their success in investing in their 

STEM workforce, stating “there should be a continuous evaluation of what works and what does not 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 121

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 38

work.”73 Having the right data will also help NASA meet the Succession Planning and Knowledge 

Transfer priority outlined in the 2018 Federal Workforce Priorities Report, which notes that agencies 

should maintain “a multi-faceted succession plan that is designed to capture the valuable knowledge 

and insights of current employees, convey captured knowledge to new and retained employees, and 

create and utilize a multi-generational pipeline.”

NASA management knows it will need a significant number of well-trained engineers, scientists, 

statisticians, accountants, human resources and procurement professionals, IT developers, and support 

specialists into the next decade. They must continue to work to ensure that their ongoing investments 

develop a continuous stream of candidates with the passion and skills to study the Earth, the Sun, and 

solar system; conduct aeronautics research, testing, and development; and lead crewed and uncrewed 

space exploration efforts. Looking forward to a post-pandemic environment, NASA will need to confront 

head-on the challenges and opportunities in managing a workforce using much greater telework and 

remote work flexibilities. 

 Key Unimplemented Recommendations

Finalize and fully implement the performance metrics dashboard to measure

acquisition performance (IG-21-002).

Engage relevant Centers and technical capability leaders to identify budgetary and

accounting system solutions within the current budgetary and full cost accounting

system to adequately fund and sustain critical technical discipline capabilities

needed to support current and future projects (IG-20-023).

Review and identify opportunities based on existing NASA leading practices to

foster and monitor mentoring to ensure a robust pipeline for Planetary Science

Division-related disciplines (IG-20-023).

Ongoing and Anticipated Future Audit Work 

We will continue to monitor progress on the Agency’s workforce master plan and examine specific 

workforce issues as part of broader OIG audits and reviews. 

Review of Astrophysics Portfolio 

This audit will evaluate the current state of the Agency’s Astrophysics portfolio, identify and assess risks 

to future missions, and provide recommendations in support of the next decadal survey.

NASA’s Management of Its Astronaut Corps

This audit will assess to what extent NASA’s processes for sizing, training, and assigning its astronaut 

corps align with the Agency’s current and future mission needs. 

NASA’s Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Efforts 

This audit will evaluate NASA’s efforts to advance diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility 

throughout the Agency. 

73 The Center for Space Policy and Strategy provides nonpartisan research and strategic analysis in support of the development 

of well-informed, technically defensible, and forward-looking space and technology policy. The Center is part of The 

Aerospace Corporation, a nonprofit organization that advises the government on complex space enterprise and systems 

engineering problems. Colleen Stover, Developing Future Space Workers: Leadership Needed Today (April 2021). 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 122

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 39

Challenge 7: Managing NASA’s 

Outdated Infrastructure 

and Facilities 

Why This Is a Challenge 

Over the past 60 years, NASA and its commercial partners have relied on the Agency’s facilities and 

infrastructure, including laboratories, launch complexes, test stands, and wind tunnels, to develop new 

and innovative technologies to advance space exploration missions, scientific research, and aeronautics. 

NASA is one of the largest property holders in the federal government with $40 billion in physical assets 

and an inventory of more than 5,000 buildings and structures across 12 states and at its headquarters in 

Washington, D.C. However, over 75 percent of its facilities are beyond their original design life and 

require a significant investment in maintenance, including 166 abandoned properties worth $291 million 

that present a safety and maintenance liability due to their structural or interior deficiencies. To achieve 

its current exploration and research goals, the Agency needs to be smart about what facilities to invest, 

divest, or consolidate and maintain in a safe condition. 

While it strives to keep its facilities operational, NASA faces a deferred maintenance backlog estimated 

at $2.8 billion as of 2021, which has resulted in unscheduled maintenance costing up to three times 

more to repair or replace equipment after it has failed than if NASA conducted regular scheduled 

maintenance. Further compounding this issue, in March 2020 the Agency implemented its emergency 

pandemic response plan that closed facilities across the country except those necessary to protect 

critical infrastructure and ongoing missions. Consequently, NASA was forced to scale back work on 

construction and maintenance projects, resulting in increased costs and schedule delays. In a 

September 2021 audit, we found that 101 construction projects across the Agency reported nearly 

$11 million in contractor requests for equitable adjustment, and facility closures delayed project 

schedules by 5 months on average.74

For facilities the Agency is not currently utilizing but may need to meet future mission needs, NASA has 

several options. The Agency may retain the property in its present state, demolish the property, 

transfer the property to the General Services Administration for sale, or make the property available for 

lease. Leasing has several benefits including generating revenue that the Agency can use to help reduce 

expenses and defray the costs of maintaining and improving facilities. In addition, leasing enables NASA 

to keep facilities in its inventory that although may be underutilized currently, may be needed for future 

projects. The challenge is ensuring that leasing does not replace disposing of property that is no longer 

needed now or in the foreseeable future. 

In addition, we found in a December 2020 audit that hazardous materials pose a safety risk to NASA 

installations. Hazardous materials are used on a daily basis, including acids, bases, and oxidizers in 

research laboratories; propellants and fuels in engine testing; ethanol-based solvents in engineering 

laboratories; ammonia, acetone, and glycols in flight equipment operations; and chemicals in simulated 

74 NASA OIG, NASA’s Construction of Facilities (IG-21-027, September 8, 2021). A contractor may submit a request for equitable 

adjustment to the government for payment when unforeseen or unintended changes occur within the contract causing an 

increase in contract costs such as government modification of the contract, differing site conditions, defective or latedelivered government property, or issuance of a stop work order. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 123

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 40

planetary environmental testing. These materials can be toxic, reactive, flammable, or explosive and, 

if poorly managed, can result in costly cleanup efforts, damage to facilities and equipment, personal 

injury, and loss of mission capabilities. Our review found that hazardous materials are not managed 

uniformly across NASA and the Agency lacks adequate internal controls for managing its hazardous 

materials inventory.75 

Overall, NASA remains challenged to make the difficult decisions to invest, divest, or consolidate 

unneeded infrastructure; effectively communicate those decisions to stakeholders; and withstand the 

inevitable political pressure to retain unnecessary capabilities and facilities at Centers throughout the 

country—all long-standing issues that we have discussed in previous top management and performance 

challenges reports. These decisions will become even more essential following the COVID-19 pandemic, 

which has resulted in widespread telework and highlighted issues about the number and size of facilities 

the Agency will need in the future. 

Progress in Addressing the Challenge 

One key goal of NASA’s Construction of Facilities (CoF) 

program is to modernize the Agency’s infrastructure 

into fewer, more sustainable facilities and repair failing 

infrastructure to reduce overall maintenance costs. 

Between FYs 2016 and 2020, NASA received nearly 

$1.8 billion in CoF funding that has resulted in an 

increasing number of projects to construct and facilities 

to upgrade. For example, the Exploration Ground 

Systems Program at Kennedy Space Center is upgrading 

infrastructure and facilities required for the Artemis 

program, including modernization of Launch Pad 39B 

and modification of the Vehicle Assembly Building to 

accommodate the SLS rocket and Orion capsule. 

Langley Research Center utilized a large portion of its 

CoF funds to construct the Measurement Systems 

Laboratory, a 175,000 square foot facility for research and development of new measurement concepts, 

technologies, and systems. In addition, the Center plans to begin construction on its Flight Dynamics 

Research Facility, a wind tunnel the Center will utilize for enhanced vertical spin testing of aircraft and 

spacecraft. The Jet Propulsion Laboratory continued construction on an array of antennas known as the 

Deep Space Network and also began construction of a 5-story, 85,000 square foot laboratory known as 

the Flight Electronics Integration Facility that will support spacecraft avionics and electronic hardware 

fabrication and testing. Glenn Research Center constructed a 64,000 square foot multi-use office 

building known as the Research Support Building along with a 55,000 square foot Aerospace 

Communications Facility that will be utilized for radio frequency communications technology research 

and development. Other significant projects included construction of a 41,000 square foot facility at 

Ames Research Center known as the Biosciences Collaborative Facility that houses laboratories for space 

biology, astrobiology, and synthetic biology and construction of the Goddard Space Flight Center’s 

Instrument Development Facility, a 54,200 square foot multi-story laboratory and office facility. 

75 NASA OIG, NASA’s Management of Hazardous Materials (IG-21-006, December 3, 2020). 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 124

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 41

In relation to hazardous materials, NASA is updating policies and procedures to designate appropriate 

officials to approve hazardous materials purchases, track and report hazardous material inventories, 

and inspect and evaluate storage sites. 

⚫ Key Implemented Recommendations

Establish a unified purchase card policy and designate an appropriate official at

each Center to ensure hazardous material acquisitions made via purchase cards

are appropriately approved, received, and tracked (IG-21-006).

Inspect and evaluate Centers’ 90-day storage facilities and processes and make

improvements as warranted (IG-21-006).

Work That Needs to Be Done 

Over the past few years, we have assessed a variety of infrastructure issues including the Agency’s 

environmental remediation efforts; management of NASA’s historic real and personal property; efforts 

to “rightsize” NASA’s workforce, facilities, and other supporting assets; construction of new assets such 

as test stands; NASA’s efforts to reduce unneeded infrastructure and facilities; and the process to select, 

prioritize, and fund CoF projects. Common themes from these reviews are NASA’s slow implementation 

of corrective actions, inconsistent implementation of Agency policies, the need for stronger life-cycle 

cost considerations in facility construction decisions, and a decentralized strategy and decision-making 

process. 

For example, in September 2021 we reported that NASA’s process for selecting and prioritizing 

CoF projects is largely driven by Centers regardless of Agency goals, mission needs, or economic 

efficiencies.76 Further, at the time NASA lacked an Agency-wide facility master plan that considered 

consolidation of activities between Centers. Instead, the Agency has relied primarily on Center-based 

planning and may not be constructing the highest priority projects to meet future mission needs while 

diluting funds needed for repairs. We also reported that CoF projects incurred significant cost overruns 

ranging from $2.2 million to $36.6 million and took longer to complete than initially planned with 

projects running 3 months to more than 3 years behind schedule. 

In December 2020 we reported that hazardous materials were not managed uniformly across the 

Agency, the Centers we visited did not consistently implement adequate controls, and employees and 

contractors at times circumvented existing controls to acquire hazardous materials.77 Also, some 

storage facilities were in need of improvements and repairs, and one hazardous waste facility required 

physical improvements. As a result, NASA has accepted increased risks associated with the acquisition 

of hazardous materials that could result in personal injury or property and environmental damage. 

76 IG-21-027. 

77 IG-21-006. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 125

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 42

 Key Unimplemented Recommendations

Develop and institute an Agency-wide process to prioritize and fund institutional

and programmatic CoF projects that align with Agency-level missions and require

business case analyses to be completed and considered as part of the process prior

to the projects’ approval (IG-21-027).

Reexamine policies regarding oversight of the CoF program to identify alternative

approaches to more effectively oversee the program (IG-21-027).

Require Center Directors to inspect and replace, as required, laboratory hazardous

material storage structures and improve shelters that do not follow Centers for

Disease Control and Prevention guidelines or comply with Agency requirements

(IG-21-006).

Ongoing and Anticipated Future Audit Work 

Audit of Ames Research Center’s Lease Management Practices

This audit will examine Ames Research Center’s implementation and management of its lease 

agreements.

NASA’s Efforts to Upgrade Its Space Communications Infrastructure 

This audit will assess NASA’s progress towards upgrading the Agency’s Space Network and Deep Space 

Network and the ability of the networks to support current and future mission requirements. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 126

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 43

Challenge 8: Managing the

Impacts of COVID-19 on NASA’s

Mission and Workforce 

Why This Is a Challenge 

Since March 2020, NASA and the entire federal workforce has faced unprecedented challenges due to 

the COVID-19 pandemic. In an effort to protect public health and safety, many businesses and 

government agencies—including NASA—changed the way they operate to restrict physical access to 

facilities, resulting in disruptions to the Agency’s tens of thousands of civilian and contractor employees, 

materials, and supply chain that have increased costs, delayed launch readiness dates, and impacted 

operational activities. 

During the first 6 months of the pandemic, we found that 56 of NASA’s programs and projects were 

impacted and could potentially incur a total lifetime cost growth of $3 billion.78 In addition, we 

estimated that the pandemic would continue to affect 35 programs and projects into FY 2022 and 

beyond. As of July 2021, the top-line estimate of the total lifetime cost for these delays and challenges 

decreased to approximately $2.75 billion. After more than 19 months in a mandatory telework mode 

for the bulk of its workforce, NASA continues to face 

similar challenges as it did during the onset of the 

pandemic, such as an inability to conduct on-site 

activities, workforce startup inefficiencies, and 

delivery delays of government furnished equipment. 

For example, the estimated cost impact to the 

Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope for FY 2021 

and beyond increased from $400 million in 

October 2020 to $502 million in April 2021 due to 

continued loss of efficiency, reduced availability of 

supply chain vendors, and limited on-site work 

access at Goddard Space Flight Center and the Jet 

Propulsion Laboratory.79

In addition, the dramatic shift in NASA’s operations during which the Agency closed 12 of its 18 major 

facilities and required 90 percent of its workforce to work from home for an extended period of time 

has raised fundamental questions about how the workforce will “return to on-site work” after it is 

deemed safe to do so. As of September 2021, over 85 percent of NASA’s workforce was still teleworking 

full-time, and many will continue to work from home until further guidance from the Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention and Office of Management and Budget advise otherwise. Also, in 

September 2021 the Administration released a pair of Executive Orders requiring COVID-19 vaccinations 

78 NASA OIG, COVID-19 Impacts on NASA’s Major Programs and Projects (IG-21-016, March 31, 2021). 

79 Scheduled to launch no earlier than 2026, the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope (formerly known as the Wide Field 

Infrared Survey Telescope) is a NASA observatory designed to study dark energy and dark matter, search for and image 

exoplanets, and explore topics in infrared astrophysics. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 127

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 44

for federal employees and contractors.80 While last year we discussed the effects of COVID-19 in each of 

the top management and performance challenges sections of this report, this year we added it as a 

stand-alone challenge because it is clear that the impact of the pandemic on NASA’s operations will cost 

billions of dollars, lead to significant schedule delays in multiple projects, and affect how the Agency 

conducts business for years to come. 

Progress in Addressing the Challenge 

Despite the ongoing challenges NASA continues to face due to COVID-19, the Agency has demonstrated 

flexibility and adaptability in its operations. The Office of the Chief Financial Officer began categorizing 

and tracking COVID-19’s impact on NASA programs and projects beginning in April 2020. Officials from 

NASA’s Mission Support Directorate as well as the Agency’s four Mission Directorates—Aeronautics 

Research, Human Exploration and Operations, Science, and Space Technology—provided the Office of 

the Chief Financial Officer monthly updates initially (and quarterly updates starting in October 2020) 

highlighting issues and impact levels. This regular communication across the organization allowed the 

Agency to be responsive and agile in order to continue critical operations. 

Work on NASA programs and projects in formulation and development continues, as do operations 

on other missions. For example, in addition to maintaining ISS operations, NASA successfully launched 

the first astronauts on a Commercial Crew Program mission to the ISS, launched and landed the 

Mars 2020 Perseverance Rover on the Red Planet, and launched the Sentinel-6 Michael Freilich 

spacecraft.81 To accommodate new work-life dynamics resulting from COVID-19, NASA successfully 

expanded its telework capabilities and continued software development remotely. In addition, NASA 

used about 35 percent of its $60 million CARES Act appropriation to pay for contractor leave authorized 

under Section 3610. Our August 2021 review of the Agency’s CARES Act spending found that NASA 

appropriately managed these funds to meet congressional mandates as well as Agency and federal 

guidance.82

⚫ Key Implemented Recommendations

There are no key implemented recommendations related to COVID-19.

Work That Needs to Be Done 

Since uncertainties surrounding the pandemic likely will remain well into 2022, NASA must continue to 

address and anticipate impacts to its programs, projects, and workforce. Agency managers will need to 

continuously monitor workforce and supply chain readiness, and update program and project cost and 

schedule estimates. While NASA will be unable to quantify the complete impact of the pandemic until 

80 Requiring Coronavirus Disease 2019 Vaccination for Federal Employees, Exec. Order No. 14043, 86 Fed. Reg. 175 

(September 9, 2021) and Ensuring Adequate COVID Safety Protocols for Federal Contractors, Exec. Order No. 14042, 

86 Fed. Reg. 175 (September 9, 2021). 

81 The Sentinel-6 Michael Freilich spacecraft launched in November 2020 to collect data on global sea level, atmospheric 

temperature and humidity, and how oceans are rising in response to climate change. 

82 IG-21-024. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 128

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 45

after the COVID-19 emergency has subsided, the Agency has established a long-term baseline for normal 

operations. Looking forward, the Agency faces new challenges in implementing a far-reaching return-toonsite-work plan for large swaths of its workforce that likely will embrace significantly expanded 

telework and remote work flexibilities. We plan to continue monitoring the impact of COVID-19 on 

NASA’s programs and projects as well as NASA’s return to on-site work efforts. 

 Key Unimplemented Recommendations

There are no key unimplemented recommendations related to COVID-19.

Ongoing and Anticipated Future Audit Work 

We will continue to monitor COVID-19 impacts as part of a series of broader OIG audits and reviews. 

Also, when appropriate, we will conduct a review of NASA’s return-to-work efforts.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 129

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

Appendix A

2021 Top Challenges 46 

APPENDIX A:		STRATEGIC GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The figure below shows the eight challenges we identified for 2021 and the related NASA strategic goals

and objectives.

Figure 7:		2021Top Management and Performance Challenges Linked to NASA Strategic Goals

and Objectives

Source:  NASA OIG analysis of the Agency’s 2018 Strategic Plan.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 130

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 47

APPENDIX B: ACRONYMS

A&A assessment and authorization 

CARES Act Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act 

CASIS Center for the Advancement of Science in Space, Inc. 

CoF Construction of Facilities 

COVID-19 Coronavirus Disease 2019

ESD Exploration Systems Development 

FISMA Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014 

FITARA Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act 

FY fiscal year 

GAO Government Accountability Office 

HLS Human Landing System

ISRO Indian Space Research Organisation 

ISS International Space Station 

IT information technology

JWST James Webb Space Telescope 

LBFD Low-Boom Flight Demonstrator

LCRD Laser Communications Relay Demonstration 

NISAR NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar 

OCHCO Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer

OCIO Office of the Chief Information Officer 

OIG Office of Inspector General 

SBIR Small Business Innovation Research 

SLS Space Launch System 

STEM Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics 

SWOT Surface Water and Ocean Topography 

VIPER Volatiles Investigating Polar Exploration Rover

VPN Virtual Private Network 

Appendix B
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 131

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 48

APPENDIX C: RELEVANT OIG REPORTS

Returning Humans to the Moon 

NASA’s Strategy for the Artemis Missions (IG-22-003, November 15, 2021)

NASA’s Development of Next-Generation Spacesuits (IG-21-025, August 10, 2021) 

Artemis Status Update (IG-21-018, April 19, 2021) 

NASA’s Management of the Gateway Program for Artemis Missions (IG-21-004, November 10, 2020) 

NASA’s Management of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle Program (IG-20-018, July 16, 2020) 

Audit of NASA’s Development of Its Mobile Launchers (IG-20-013, March 17, 2020)

NASA’s Management of Space Launch System Program Costs and Contracts (IG-20-012, March 10, 2020) 

NASA’s Management of the Space Launch System Stages Contract (IG-19-001, October 10, 2018)

NASA’s Plans for Human Exploration Beyond Low Earth Orbit (IG-17-017, April 13, 2017) 

Improving Management of Major Projects 

Artemis Status Update (IG-21-018, April 19, 2021) 

COVID-19 Impacts on NASA’s Major Programs and Projects (IG-21-016, March 31, 2021) 

NASA’s Management of the Gateway Program for Artemis Missions (IG-21-004, November 10, 2020) 

NASA’s Planetary Science Portfolio (IG-20-023, September 16, 2020) 

NASA’s Management of the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy Program (IG-20-022, 

September 14, 2020) 

NASA’s Management of the Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle Program (IG-20-018, July 16, 2020) 

Management of the Low-Boom Flight Demonstrator Project (IG-20-015, May 6, 2020) 

NASA’s Management of Space Launch System Program Costs and Contracts (IG-20-012, March 10, 2020) 

NASA’s Management of the Space Launch System Stages Contract (IG-19-001, October 10, 2018) 

NASA’s Surface Water and Ocean Topography Mission (IG-18-011, January 17, 2018) 

NASA’s Plans for Human Exploration Beyond Low Earth Orbit (IG-17-017, April 13, 2017) 

NASA’s Mars 2020 Project (IG-17-009, January 30, 2017) 

Appendix C
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 132

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 49

Sustaining a Human Presence in Low Earth Orbit 

NASA’s Efforts to Mitigate the Risks Posed by Orbital Debris (IG-21-011, January 27, 2021) 

NASA’s Management of Crew Transportation to the International Space Station (IG-20-005, 

November 14, 2019) 

NASA’s Management and Utilization of the International Space Station (IG-18-021, July 30, 2018)

NASA’s Management of the Center for the Advancement of Science in Space (IG-18-010, 

January 11, 2018) 

Managing and Mitigating Cybersecurity Risk 

Evaluation of NASA’s Information Security Program under the Federal Information Security 

Modernization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (ML-22-001, November 9, 2021)

NASA’s Cybersecurity Readiness (IG-21-019, May 18, 2021) 

Fiscal Year 2020 Federal Information Security Modernization Act Evaluation—A Contractor-Operated 

Communications System (IG-21-015, March 24, 2021) 

Fiscal Year 2020 Federal Information Security Modernization Act Evaluation—A Center Command and 

Control System (IG-21-014, March 2, 2021) 

Fiscal Year 2020 Federal Information Security Modernization Act Evaluation—A Center Communications 

System (IG-21-013, February 16, 2021) 

Fiscal Year 2020 Federal Information Security Modernization Act Evaluation—An Agency Common 

System (IG-21-010, December 22, 2020) 

Audit of NASA's Fiscal Year 2020 Financial Statements (IG-21-005, November 16, 2020) 

Cybersecurity at NASA: Ongoing Challenges and Emerging Issues for Increased Telework during 

COVID-19. Before the House of Representatives Subcommittee on Space and Aeronautics, Committee 

on Science, Space, and Technology, 116th Congress (2020) (statement of NASA Inspector General 

Paul Martin) 

Audit of NASA’s Policy and Practices Regarding the Use of Non-Agency Information Technology Devices 

(IG-20-021, August 27, 2020) 

Evaluation of NASA’s Information Security Program under the Federal Information Security 

Modernization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (IG-20-017, June 25, 2020) 

NASA’s Management of Distributed Active Archive Centers (IG-20-011, March 3, 2020) 

Cybersecurity Management and Oversight at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (IG-19-022, June 18, 2019) 

Audit of NASA’s Security Operations Center (IG-18-020, May 23, 2018) 

NASA’s Efforts to Improve the Agency’s Information Technology Governance (IG-18-002, 

October 19, 2017) 

Appendix C
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 133

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 50

Industrial Control System Security within NASA's Critical and Supporting Infrastructure (IG 17-011, 

February 8, 2017) 

Improving Oversight of Contracts, Grants, and Cooperative 

Agreements 

Review of Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act Funding (IG-21-024, 

August 9, 2021)

NASA’s Management of Universities Space Research Association’s Cooperative Agreements (IG-21-022, 

July 14, 2021)

Fiscal Year 2020 Financial Accounting Management Letter, Prepared by CliftonLarsonAllen LLP 

(IG-21-008, December 14, 2020)

NASA’s Management of Its Acquisition Workforce (IG-21-002, October 27, 2020) 

NASA’s Management of the Stratospheric Observatory for Infrared Astronomy Program (IG-20-022, 

September 14, 2020) 

Management of the Low-Boom Flight Demonstrator Project (IG-20-015, May 6, 2020) 

Cybersecurity Management and Oversight at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (IG-19-022, June 18, 2019) 

Ames Research Center Protective Services Contract (IG-19-017, April 25, 2019) 

NASA’s Strategic Assessment Contract (IG-19-015, March 28, 2019) 

NASA’s Engineering and Technical Services Contracts (IG-19-014, March 26, 2019) 

NASA’s Management of the Space Launch System Stages Contract (IG-19-001, October 10, 2018) 

Audit of the National Space Biomedical Research Institute (IG-18-012, February 1, 2018) 

NASA’s Management of the Center for the Advancement of Science in Space (IG-18-010, 

January 11, 2018) 

Attracting and Retaining a Highly Skilled and Diverse 

Workforce 

NASA’s Management of Its Acquisition Workforce (IG-21-002, October 27, 2020) 

NASA’s Planetary Science Portfolio (IG-20-023, September 16, 2020) 

Management of the Low-Boom Flight Demonstrator Project (IG-20-015, May 6, 2020) 

Management of NASA’s Europa Mission (IG-19-019, May 29, 2019) 

NASA’s Surface Water and Ocean Topography Mission (IG-18-011, January 17, 2018) 

Appendix C
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 134

OTHER INFORMATION — OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2021 Top Challenges 51

NASA’s Efforts to “Rightsize” its Workforce, Facilities, and Other Supporting Assets (IG-17-015, 

March 21, 2017)

NASA’s Mars 2020 Project (IG-17-009, January 30, 2017) 

Managing NASA’s Outdated Infrastructure and Facilities

NASA’s Construction of Facilities (IG-21-027, September 8, 2021) 

NASA’s Management of Hazardous Materials (IG-21-006, December 3, 2020) 

Audit of NASA’s Development of Its Mobile Launchers (IG-20-013, March 17, 2020) 

NASA’s Progress with Environmental Remediation Activities at the Santa Susana Field Laboratory

(IG-19-013, March 19, 2019) 

Audit of NASA’s Historic Property (IG-19-002, October 22, 2018) 

NASA’s Efforts to “Rightsize” its Workforce, Facilities, and Other Supporting Assets (IG-17-015, 

March 21, 2017)

Managing the Impacts of COVID-19 on NASA’s Mission and 

Workforce 

Review of Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act Funding (IG-21-024, 

August 9, 2021) 

COVID-19 Impacts on NASA’s Major Programs and Projects (IG-21-016, March 31, 2021) 

Appendix C
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 135

OTHER INFORMATION OTHER INFORMATION — — Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

AGENCY RESPONSE TO OIG REPORT ON NASA’S TOP MANAGEMENT AND PERFORMANCE CHALLENGES

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Office of the Administrator 

Mary W. Jackson NASA Headquarters

Washington, DC 20546-0001

November 9, 2021

TO: Inspector General

FROM: Administrator

SUBJECT: Agency Response to Office of Inspector General Report, “2021 Report on 

NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges” 

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) appreciates the opportunity to 

review and comment on the Office of Inspector General (OIG) report entitled, “2021 Report 

on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges.” 

The audits and investigations conducted by your office provide NASA’s leadership and 

management with valuable contributions to the collective effort to provide oversight and gain 

insight into NASA’s broad portfolio of programs, projects, and mission support activities 

with which it is entrusted. The efforts expended by your office during this past year have 

furthered the cause of providing the taxpayer with maximum value for each dollar invested in 

NASA’s wide-ranging, ambitious, and challenging portfolio. As an Agency, NASA

continues to aggressively pursue the mitigation and remediation of findings related to the 

audit recommendations issued by your office, including those that underpin your 

observations as cited in your 2021 Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance 

Challenges.

While NASA fundamentally agrees that the eight areas outlined in your 2021 report 

constitute significant challenges for the Agency, this response highlights the following 

mitigation and remediation efforts relative to each challenge outlined in your report that have 

either been taken or are currently under way. These efforts substantively demonstrate 

NASA’s commitment to addressing its most significant management and performance 

challenges faced by the Agency:

Challenge 1: Returning Humans to the Moon by 2024 

NASA agrees that landing the first woman and the first person of color on the Moon by 2024 

is a significant challenge, but the Agency is still trying to develop this capability in a timely 

manner to ensure the safety of the crew and meet Artemis objectives. Despite challenges 

associated with the COVID-19 virus, an extended delay due to the Human Landing System 

(HLS) protest, and multiple storms severely affecting NASA facilities and workforce, NASA 

continues to make substantial progress towards the launch of Artemis missions. 

NASA continues its preparation for Artemis I, which will be the first test flight of the launch 

vehicle that will carry astronauts into space for the lunar missions. Simultaneously, the 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 136

OTHER INFORMATION — Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

2 

Agency has met numerous technical and programmatic milestones for Artemis II, which will 

be the first crewed mission in the Artemis sequence. After the successful completion of the 

Hot Fire test on the Space Launch System (SLS) Core Stage (CS) in March 2021, during 

which all four RS-25 engines were ignited to produce 1.6 million pounds of thrust, the CS 

was transported to Kennedy Space Center for final integration and testing activities. CS 

mating to the Mobile Launcher (ML) and Solid Rocket Boosters started on June 9, 2021. 

Since then, most of the remaining major hardware has been integrated in the Vehicle 

Assembly Building and the full system has been powered up. The Umbilical Release and 

Retract Test, which validated the ways by which connections between the rocket and the ML

will disengage at lift-off, was completed in September 2021. After the Orion Crew Vehicle 

is stacked, only four key milestone tests—the Integrated Vehicle Interface Verification Test, 

the Communications End-to-End Test, the Countdown Sequence Test, and the Wet Dress 

Rehearsal—will stand before the Artemis I launch. 

NASA has also made tremendous progress toward the Artemis II launch and forward 

development for Artemis III missions and beyond. The arrival of the Artemis II European 

Service Module in October 2021, now positions the Orion program to mate Service and Crew 

Modules together and complete qualification and testing before delivery to Kennedy Space 

Center. Work on Core Stages Two, Three, and Four has continued in spite of serious damage 

to the Michoud Assembly Facility caused by Hurricane Ida. Development on the SLS Block 

1B variant and the Mobile Launcher 2 has continued in preparation for a recurring cadence of 

missions with increasingly complex needs. 

While progress and schedules have been impacted due to contract award protests and 

ongoing litigation, NASA continues to make progress with the HLS program. NASA has 

awarded a contract for a design, development, and demonstration of a lunar lander which will 

deliver the first crew to the lunar surface on the Artemis III mission. HLS has also 

accelerated the HLS services acquisition approach, and in a standalone procurement (Broad 

Agency Announcement Appendix N), HLS has selected five companies to perform risk 

reduction activities to advance the industry’s proposed content for lunar landing services. 

The Gateway Program continues to make significant progress with the completion of 

Gateway Key Decision Point (KDP)-0. The Program has transitioned focus to the 

preliminary design and contractual updates across the Program. Element-level Preliminary 

Design Reviews (PDRs) are nearing completion, and a Program-level PDR-informed sync 

review is scheduled to occur in the first half of FY 2022. Contracts have been finalized for 

Gateway’s Habitation and Logistics Outpost (HALO), to include Power and Propulsion 

Element (PPE) integration and launch. Updates to PPE contracts have been made to 

synchronize requirements. NASA has developed a strategy for competitive procurement of 

EVA (Extra-Vehicular Activity) suits with the release of the xEVAS (Exploration 

Extravehicular Services) Request for Proposal (RFP) in September 2021. Meanwhile, NASA 

has completed in-house builds of xEMU (Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit) 

Development Verification Test (DVT) systems, and the test reports will be used by future 

partners to reduce development risk.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 137

OTHER INFORMATION — Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

3 

NASA has also implemented a number of the OIG’s key recommendations to improve cost,

schedule, and technical performance and is working to complete implementation of the 

remaining open OIG recommendations. 

Challenge 2: Improving Management of Major Projects

NASA sees program management excellence as a core capability, critical for enabling its

bold mission of exploration and discovery. NASA’s program management discipline 

includes rigorous processes, encompassing program formulation, approval, implementation, 

and evaluation. NASA also has guidelines for bringing together the people, resources, and 

processes necessary to execute the Agency’s most challenging and complex programs. 

NASA maintains an unwavering commitment to the continued growth of its program and 

project management disciplines. For example, NASA is focused on improving program 

planning and control, while increasing transparency for the Agency’s external stakeholders. 

NASA leadership continues to evaluate the considerable progress made to date implementing

the initiatives contained in the Agency’s High-Risk Corrective Action Plan (CAP). In July 

2020, NASA leadership determined that seven of nine CAP initiatives had been fully 

completed, including the creation of a technology readiness assessment best practices 

document, an update to the Agency’s probabilistic programmatic policy (i.e., Joint 

Confidence Level (JCL)), and increased transparency by inclusion of original Agency 

Baseline Commitments in external reporting for re-baselined projects, among other 

initiatives. 

NASA leadership also added four initiatives to a renewed CAP in July 2020. New initiatives

under way include a full implementation of a Schedule Repository, an Exploration Systems 

Development Mission Directorate (ESDMD)/Space Operations Missions Directorate 

(SOMD) Exploration Systems Development (ESD)/Advanced Exploration Systems(AES) 

cost and schedule transparency effort, enhancements to the Cost Analysis Data Requirement 

(CADRe) data collection for Category 3 Class D projects, and the adoption of a risk 

assessment and financial evaluation of contractors’ activity. The 2020 CAP is accessible via 

the NASA Reports and Transcripts Web page1

. NASA’s progress on and renewal of the 

CAP is evidence that the Agency is committed to pursuing the most critical changes to 

increase transparency, improve cost and schedule estimation, and maintain focus on 

accountability. Several of these changes can be found in the Agency’s most recent revision 

to its formal Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements document (NPR 

7120.5F), which was released in August 2021. 

NASA also continues to make substantial progress in the implementation of the Program 

Management Improvement and Accountability Act (PMIAA). As part of PMIAA

implementation, the Agency appointed a Program Management Improvement Officer 

(PMIO) within the Office of the NASA Associate Administrator (AA). The PMIO has 

convened an Agency stakeholder team to lead the implementation of PMIAA and has 

conducted three rounds of annual NASA portfolio reviews focused on the identification, 

1 https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/nasa_high_risk_corrective_action_plan_2020.pdf
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 138

OTHER INFORMATION — Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

4 

capture, and improvement of Project Management (PM) practices. Practices that have been 

addressed include improvements to schedule analyses, improvements to life-cycle reviews, 

and furthering implementation of tailoring approaches. The NASA PMIO is also 

implementing a program management integration function on behalf of the NASA AA with 

support from the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO), the Office of the Chief 

Engineer (OCE), and in partnership with the Mission Directorates and field Centers. This 

integration will promote overall synergy and integration of PM practices and capabilities 

across the Agency to further enhance PM performance and mission success. 

NASA’s missions will tackle activities that have never been done before, incorporating the 

leading edge of technology, as the Agency pursues the challenging goals that can only be 

accomplished in the hostile environment of space. This requires NASA to develop one-of-akind spacecraft and new technologies. The Agency cannot do this without taking on 

considerable risks. While doing so, NASA aggressively works to understand and manage 

those risks, while also communicating them to the Agency’s stakeholders. One of the key 

ways the Agency attempts to manage expectations with external stakeholders is by waiting 

until KDP-C to make cost and schedule commitments. Only by KDP-C are technical designs 

and risk assessments mature enough to make these important commitments. Two of the cost 

growth examples cited by the OIG (the Europa Clipper and the Nancy Grace Roman Space 

Telescope) are measured against early estimates of cost instead of cost commitments. The 

Science Mission Directorate (SMD) has made substantial investment in pre-formulation 

mission studies and technology development in order to address some of the concerns 

identified by the OIG and continues to study large missions to identify best practices for 

future flagships2

. Moreover, Independent Review Boards are being formed prior to KDP-B 

to identify cost risks and reduce “requirement creep,” leading to improved early cost 

estimation. When cost performance is assessed against KDP-C baselines established since 

the implementation of the 70 percent JCL requirement, major SMD missions have, on 

average, cost two percent less than the NASA commitment. Due to the nature of NASA’s 

mission, some projects will exceed cost or schedule commitments; however, by adopting the 

70 percent JCL methodology, NASA is able to effectively manage the overall portfolio, 

including the occasional large overruns. Agency missions will employ technologies that 

must be developed and tested on Earth but can only be demonstrated in space. Innovation 

must remain at the core of everything NASA does and, thus, cannot encourage innovation 

and discovery without accepting some risk and some uncertainty. 

NASA has institutionalized senior-level reviews to understand and address the ongoing risks 

that its portfolio of challenging missions faces. NASA’s ongoing monthly internal Baseline 

Performance Review (BPR), chaired by the NASA AA, has continued to evolve and refine to 

better reflect portfolio performance against external commitments, focusing discussion on 

issues requiring leadership awareness, and the identification of solutions to challenges as 

they arise. NASA also maintains a variety of additional formal councils to ensure the right 

people and resources are brought together on a regularly occurring basis. These include the 

2 The SMD Large Mission Study recommends ways of improving SMD’s cost and schedule performance on very large, 

multi-billion-dollar science missions. The study draws on the collected experiences of a diverse team of experts from the 

civil, commercial, and defense space communities. Recommendations are being applied to future large SMD missions such 

as Mars Sample Return and others.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 139

OTHER INFORMATION — Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

5 

recently formed NASA Acquisition Strategy Council, which addresses acquisition decisions 

holistically under a single Decision Authority. NASA’s renewed emphasis on strategic 

acquisitions will improve the Agency’s efficacy in intelligently moving forward on large 

acquisitions and making data-driven decisions, ensuring a universal view of the aerospace 

industrial base, international partners, and NASA in-house performance and capacity. 

As NASA strives to return humans to the surface of the Moon, and beyond, the Agency will 

continue to foster a culture where leaders and staff are incentivized to develop realistic cost 

and schedule estimates; take steps to recognize, mitigate, and communicate the risks that 

inform those estimates; and demonstrate progress in program management improvement 

efforts. As an example, NASA will establish production and operations cost reporting for 

SLS and Exploration Ground Systems (EGS) with a completion of a KDP-E milestone in 

early FY 2022. Additionally, the SLS Block 1B Exploration Upper Stage + capabilities and 

ML-2 Agency Baseline Commitments are also scheduled to be established by spring 2022.

Both the production and operations estimates, as well as baseline cost commitments, will be

reported to external stakeholders through established processes.

NASA takes its commitment to Congress and the American people seriously, and with 

stabilization of the Artemis manifest will be able to ensure exploration goals are achievable 

with better cost estimates, schedules, plans, and acquisition strategies that leverage 

public/private partnerships and international contributions. To this end, the EGS, SLS, and 

Orion programs are implementing a series of affordability initiatives that align with the 

ongoing transition from development to operations. 

Challenge 3: Sustaining a Human Presence in Low Earth Orbit

NASA agrees with this challenge. The International Space Station (ISS) is now entering its 

third and most productive decade of utilization, including research advancement, commercial 

value, and global partnership. The first decade of ISS was dedicated to assembly, and the 

second was devoted to research and technology development and learning how to conduct 

these activities most effectively in space. The third decade is one of results, in which 

exploration and human research technologies will be verified to support deep space 

exploration, medical and environmental benefits will continue to be returned to humanity, 

and the groundwork will be laid for a commercial future in space. ISS continues to support 

cutting-edge research that benefits humanity, including in-space manufacturing of novel 

materials; life-saving medical products; understanding Earth’s climate; and Science, 

Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) engagement. NASA’s leadership of 

ISS ensures it will remain the preeminent destination in low-Earth orbit (LEO) until 

commercially owned and operated platforms are available.

Today, with commercial crew and cargo transportation systems online, the ISS is busier than 

ever. The ISS National Laboratory (ISSNL), responsible for utilizing 50 percent of NASA’s 

resources aboard the ISS, hosts hundreds of experiments from other Government agencies, 

academia, and commercial users to return benefits to people and industry on the ground. 

Meanwhile, NASA’s research and development activities aboard are advancing the 

technologies and procedures that will be necessary to send the first woman and first person of 

color to the Moon and the first humans to Mars. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 140

OTHER INFORMATION — Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

6 

The ISS is also now entering an era of robust commercial use, taking advantage of the 

utilities it provides to develop the capabilities industry needs to move from being dependent 

on NASA for access to space to providing the access NASA will need to continue its mission 

in LEO after the lifetime of the ISS. Commercial crew and cargo transportation are well 

known examples, and today they provide the vital lifeline from Earth to the ISS. There are 

over 20 commercial facilities operating aboard ISS today–including a 3D printer, a 

bioprinter, external Earth observation and materials platforms, and an airlock–that are 

available for use by both NASA and other paying customers. NASA awarded the use of an 

ISS docking port to Axiom Space, which plans to attach a series of commercial modules that 

will eventually detach to become a LEO free-flying destination. In addition, NASA issued a 

solicitation for proposals that were due in August 2021, for the formulation and design of 

Commercial LEO Destinations (CLDs) project capabilities, which will stimulate U.S. private 

industry development of free-flying orbital destination capabilities and create a market 

environment in which commercial LEO destination services are available to both 

Government and private-sector customers. It is NASA’s goal to be one of many customers 

purchasing only the goods and services the Agency needs. CLDs, along with commercial 

crew and cargo transportation, will provide the backbone of the LEO economy after the ISS 

retires.

To give future commercial providers a business model to work toward, NASA is refining its 

white paper on “Forecasting Future NASA Demand in Low-Earth Orbit: Quantifying 

Demand,”3 which will define NASA’s anticipated service requirements for future CLD 

providers. These forecasts will include not only the anticipated NASA demand for crew 

accommodation, technology testing, human research, and science, but also capture the future 

needs of LEONL (Low-Earth Orbit National Laboratory) and potential international partner 

users. The intent of this activity is to allow future CLD and launch providers to scale their 

activities to meet the future needs of the U.S. Government, while also allowing them to 

design for private use of the capabilities. Given the unique barriers of access to space, 

NASA and the ISSNL are partnering to support and incubate promising commercial in-space 

manufacturing applications, such as advanced materials, regenerative medicine, and tissue 

engineering through the ISSNL, with the goal of creating sustained, self-sufficient demand 

for future CLD services. Other demand-enabling initiatives include allocating a portion of 

ISS resources for commercial-use activities and private astronaut missions on a reimbursable 

basis.

NASA’s Commercial Crew Program (CCP) is delivering its goal of safe, reliable, and costeffective transportation to and from the ISS from the U.S. through a partnership with 

American private industry. This partnership is changing the arc of human spaceflight history 

by opening access to LEO and the ISS to more people, more science, and more commercial 

opportunities. The space station remains the springboard to NASA’s next great leap in space 

exploration, including future astronaut missions to the Moon and, eventually, to Mars. 

3 https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/forecasting_future_nasa_demand_in_lowearth_orbit_revision_two_-_quantifying_demand.pdf
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 141

OTHER INFORMATION — Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

7 

In the time since NASA certified the SpaceX crew transportation system last year, the 

company has launched three operational missions to the ISS, Crew-1, Crew-2, and Crew-3. 

Also, SpaceX recently flew the Inspiration4 mission, a commercial mission consisting of a 

full crew of private astronauts. In addition, NASA has contracted with Axiom Space for a 

private astronaut mission to the ISS early next year. 

NASA’s other CCP partner, Boeing, is making good progress on characterizing and 

correcting the issue associated with the spacecraft valves that was identified prior to the 

Orbital Flight Test-2 (OFT-2) mission. Once that analysis and corrective action is in place, 

NASA and Boeing plan to launch OFT-2 and then the Crewed Flight Test (CFT). If those 

flights go well, NASA will be able to certify the Boeing system for operational crewed 

flights, and, for the first time in history, the U.S. will have independent, redundant human 

access to space.

NASA and its CCP partners need to remain vigilant moving forward, but all indications are 

that the U.S. commercial human space transportation capability envisioned by NASA a 

decade ago is coming to fruition.

ISSNL Status: 

NASA is pleased to report that the bulk of the actions from the 2020 ISSNL Independent 

Review Team (IRT) have been completed successfully. NASA and the Center for the 

Advancement of Science in Space (CASIS) are now in better alignment than ever and are 

prepared to lead new advances in space research and development and cutting-edge science 

on the ISS. The following is a list of the actions and a summary of the progress NASA and 

CASIS have made over the last year:

• Work with CASIS on the best roles and composition of the CASIS board of directors

and leadership. Progress: The CASIS board of directors has a majority of new

members, along with a new board chair, Dr. Elizabeth Cantwell. The current board

composition is well suited to manage the unique challenges and complexities

associated with CASIS.

• Support CASIS’ establishment of a User Advisory Committee to provide input to the

organization about how best to manage resources. Progress: The new CASIS User

Advisory Committee, along with five subcommittees, has been established, members

and chairs for each subcommittee have been selected, and the committee’s first

meeting was held on February 26, 2021.

• Create transparent project and program evaluation and prioritization

processes. Progress: Six new peer-reviewed CASIS solicitations have been

announced along with new project evaluation processes, based on NASA best

practices. CASIS will continue to refine its payload prioritization process for better

transparency.

• Identify an ISSNL program executive at NASA Headquarters as the primary liaison

to CASIS. Progress: Dr. Alex Macdonald, NASA Chief Economist in the Office of

the Administrator, served as the ISSNL program executive this last year and has

transitioned this role to Ms. Robyn Gatens, ISS Director at NASA Headquarters, who

will be the primary liaison going forward.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 142

OTHER INFORMATION — Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

8 

• Update strategic priorities for the ISSNL on an annual basis. Progress: NASA and

CASIS jointly agreed to and documented new CASIS annual performance goals for

2021 and are assessing those goals annually.

• Work with CASIS to optimize the allocation of ISSNL resources to meet strategic

priorities. Progress: New ISSNL programmatic goals and operating principles have

been agreed to with the CASIS board and will be incorporated into an update to the

CASIS Cooperative Agreement, which is in work. CASIS will continue to refine its

payload prioritization process.

Overall, the ISS Program is realizing its full potential in accomplishing NASA’s and the 

Nation’s goals in exploration, commercial development, international leadership, and 

extending human presence beyond LEO. 

Challenge 4: Managing and Mitigating Cybersecurity Risk

The Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) agrees that managing and mitigating 

cybersecurity risk is a profoundly difficult challenge and agrees with all of the reasoning in 

the summary paragraphs in the OIG report. The OCIO Cybersecurity and Privacy Division 

(CSPD) continues to improve NASA’s cybersecurity posture within all Information 

Technology (IT) domains of NASA’s infrastructure, including Corporate IT, Mission IT, and 

Physical IT. In addition to progress noted by the OIG, NASA has also accomplished the 

following to manage and mitigate specifically identified challenges:

1. Improper Use Incidents

• OCIO agrees that technical and policy enforcement to control Improper Use is an

ongoing challenge. However, OCIO does not agree that the referenced jump in

Improper Use metrics represents a true escalation in risk. The increase, primarily

comprised of a 301 percent jump in incident reports from FY 2018 to FY 2019,

reflects improved detection and reporting provided by automated Data Loss

Prevention (DLP) capabilities implemented by OCIO within the O365

environment. Additionally, increased awareness of Sensitive But Unclassified

(SBU) (now Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)) issues due to more

focused staff training is another contributing factor for increased Improper Use

metrics. The increase in Improper Use reporting represents improved OCIO

identification and data protection capabilities, not an increase in cybersecurity risk

to the Agency.

2. Mobile Device Security

• OCIO agrees that evolving technology and increased usage patterns contribute to

the challenge of managing the security of mobile devices and remote access.

OCIO projects and initiatives are under way to help mitigate this challenge.

• Network Access Control (NAC) enforcement on unauthorized devices has

improved since the referenced IG report (IG-20-021), and progress continues in

this area. NAC is now deployed at all NASA Centers, and closure of the

corresponding IG audit finding has been requested.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 143

OTHER INFORMATION — Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

9 

• OCIO believes that e-mail access via a Mobile Device Management (MDM)

solution on worker-owned mobile devices represents a greater benefit to NASA

than the relative risk accepted. Benefits include enhanced connectivity and

worker productivity at a low cost compared to alternative controls. The OIG’s

own assessment found the solution largely compliant except for three specific

criteria:

• Assertion of user need for the service, which is implied by the user request

and confirmed by annual user validation of need for the service

(E-mail is considered to be a Basic-Level Entitlement (BLE) for all NASA

workers with logical access).

• End-user device supply chain concerns, which are mitigated by

compartmentalization of NASA data on the device by the MDM software

as well as the ability to remotely wipe the device. Additionally, the NASA

Security Operations Center (SOC) proactively identifies mobile

connections from outside the United States and reports outside connections

to the responsible Agency incident response manager if the connection

source is an unauthorized traveler.

• The possibility of operation of the mobile device outside of the United

States, which is an edge case that is mitigated by instructing the user that

this is not permitted. Additionally, the NASA SOC is now performing

proactive monitoring for Government-Furnished Equipment (GFE) and

Personally Furnished Equipment (PFE) mobile devices connecting outside

the United States.

3. Assessment and Authorization Process

• The OCIO agrees that Assessment and Authorization (A&A) is a major challenge

within a diverse IT environment such as NASA and that the current state of A&A

is lacking consistent rigor in its application. However, OCIO does not agree that

this specific challenge should be directed towards OCIO as sole owner to

mitigate. The cause for inconsistent implementation of policy cannot be blamed

on the policy itself. Rather, the overall risk acceptance and authorization actions,

or lack thereof, must be examined to identify and address these A&A challenges.

As noted by the OIG in draft report Q-21-005-00, “we reported that NASA is

inconsistent and ineffective with its A&A process because of its decades-long

decentralized approach to cybersecurity.” System owners are responsible for the

proper execution of defined A&A policy, and the challenges pertaining to A&A

must be mitigated by the responsible parties defined within the process, including

NASA’s missions, not solely by those responsible for developing and maintaining

the process itself.

To aid in mitigating this challenge, NASA OCIO intends to leverage the

upcoming Cybersecurity and Privacy Enterprise Solutions and

Services (CyPrESS) contract to provide a standardized internal security

assessment team and process. This will provide a “level playing field” baseline

assessment for all NASA systems, as well as realize significant cost savings for

the Agency.
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 144

OTHER INFORMATION — Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

10 

While the Agency continues to enhance its cybersecurity policies, processes, and governance 

in FY 2021, NASA recognizes there is still progress to be made, specifically in addressing 

Mobile Device Security and A&A. The Agency remains committed to tackling these issues 

and to building an even stronger, more proactive risk-based cybersecurity program that 

safeguards NASA’s IT assets, data, and its users.

Challenge 5: Improving Oversight of Contracts, Grants, and Cooperative Agreements 

The NASA Office of Procurement (OP) is committed to making meaningful progress in 

addressing contract oversight challenges and continues to strengthen its overall procurement 

processes and policy. In response to an OIG recommendation, OP is pursuing the ability to 

link contract assignments to acquisition workforce personnel and is continuously monitoring 

closeout performance across the Agency. An annual closeout target metric of 6,000 contracts 

has been approved by Agency leadership, with quarterly reporting provided at the BPR. In 

FY 2021, 8,926 contracts were closed. 

Challenge 6: Attracting and Retaining a Highly Skilled and Diverse Workforce 

NASA agrees with the challenges identified in this section of the report. As the OIG has 

acknowledged in their report, within the last few years, NASA implemented several 

approaches and tools to increase agility within the workforce. To address NASA’s dilemma 

created by low attrition and a need for new skills, the Office of the Chief Human Capital 

Officer (OCHCO) focused on expanding usage of time-limited appointments. Time-limited 

appointments do not currently count against NASA’s permanent Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) 

“ceilings” and can be used in conjunction with the Agency’s NASA-unique Direct Hire 

Authority to quickly recruit and hire people with new and critical skills. NASA is working 

with the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) to update the Government-wide timelimited appointment definition to “up to ten years” (rather than four) for STEM. Civil 

service employees on time-limited appointments can be part of the pipeline to permanent 

roles as retirements occur or they can end when the project or program is completed. 

To promote workforce mobility and enable talented people to move to critical tasks, NASA 

launched its Talent Marketplace (TM). The Agency-wide TM gives NASA’s civil service 

employees access to non-competitive development and/or lateral opportunities (e.g., internal 

detail opportunities, short-term/part-time assignments, lateral reassignments, etc.) across 

NASA. Managers are now able to look for talent across a wider pool than just their unit or 

Center, and employees are getting more diverse work experiences as a result. Through TM, 

NASA is embracing transparency, inclusion, and access by offering more and more 

opportunities remotely which enables additional cross-Agency talent to gain desirable 

experiences without relocation costs or personal move barriers.

Additionally, as the OIG states, “to maintain a world-class workforce, NASA must fill 

current critical workforce gaps and prepare for those yet to emerge.” NASA has been 

moving to a more “demand-driven” workforce planning model/process in order to 

accomplish this goal. The Agency no longer employs a “back-fill only” way of performing 

the mission, since NASA must understand where the mission is going, Administration and 

Congressional priorities, what is going to be done by partners (e.g., private sector versus in-
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 145

OTHER INFORMATION — Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

11 

house), what aspects of work will be performed by technology, and how technology will 

impact NASA’s various work roles (e.g., digital transformation). OCHCO is looking at the 

degree to which reshaping the workforce size and skills will be possible through the use of 

the Agency workforce master planning process. An element of the master planning process 

includes projecting loss rates and the extent to which past patterns of employee tenure 

beyond retirement eligibility dates may change, providing opportunity for workforce 

reshaping. 

Although not mentioned in this report, NASA is still reliant on an antiquated personnel 

system that does not match the complex and dynamic work NASA is required to 

perform. The current position-based, mid-century personnel system defines work as static 

and repeatable, requires lengthy hiring processes, is agnostic to the external labor market, 

rewards workers for longevity, disincentivizes mobility, and is overly complicated. This 

rigid, outdated personnel system has an impact on the Agency’s ability to compete for talent 

in a very tight talent market and to retain talented individuals who are motivated by very 

different careers than in the past. NASA continues to seek workforce flexibilities for hiring, 

development, and other modern personnel practices. For example, NASA is seeking 

legislation that would allow engagement in talent exchange programs with the private sector. 

Challenge 7: Managing NASA’s Outdated Infrastructure and Facilities

NASA agrees with the challenges identified in the “Managing NASA’s Outdated 

Infrastructure and Facilities” section of the OIG report. To address the challenges with 

outdated infrastructure and facilities, NASA is implementing a top-down mission-driven 

Agency Master Plan (AMP). This plan ensures that the required infrastructure is available

and affordable, guides Agency investments to mission-critical assets, reduces the risk of 

unplanned failures, and guides divestment of assets not needed for the Agency’s missions. 

The AMP will establish a 20-year vision for physical infrastructure and real property assets 

that aligns with current, evolving, and future mission requirements. NASA will use this 

process to identify critical capabilities and areas for asset sustainment, investment, or 

divestment of infrastructure. To alleviate the maintenance burden, NASA will continue to

increase its funding for demolition of unneeded facilities. 

NASA has also identified investment strategies using Reliability Centered Maintenance 

(RCM) principles to stave off the increasing deferred maintenance within the Agency. 

Condition Based Maintenance and a Tiered Maintenance approach for relevant and critical 

assets are cornerstones of this strategy. These efforts will lead to improving the condition of 

important building systems and facilities across the Agency and increasing the reliability of 

these assets to meet mission needs. Implementation of these RCM principles, with particular 

focus upon Tiered Maintenance, ensures the right type of maintenance is performed on the 

most critical assets, at the right time, and for the right reasons. RCM, paired with immediate 

investments in the replacement of obsolete items associated with the Agency’s highercriticality assets, can provide near-term corrective mitigation for known risks and avoid 

mission/schedule impacts. These maintenance strategies focus on increasing asset 

availability and avoiding unplanned repair costs. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 146

OTHER INFORMATION — Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

12 

These initiatives will mitigate the Agency’s ongoing challenge of aging and outdated 

infrastructure and facilities. Through the implementation of the AMP and the ongoing 

investments in maintenance, demolition, repair, and recapitalization, NASA continually 

strives to right-size the Agency’s infrastructure towards more modern and efficient facilities 

that will continue to meet NASA mission objectives.

Challenge 8: Managing the Impacts of COVID-19 on NASA’s Mission and Workforce 

NASA agrees with the OIG that COVID-19 is an unprecedented event and remains a 

challenge for the Agency mission and its workforce. As the OIG noted, COVID-19 is an 

unprecedented event, and NASA’s understanding of the impact of COVID-19 continues to 

evolve. NASA agrees with the OIG’s assessment that a final accounting of the full impact of 

COVID-19 on Agency activities will not be available until well after the Agency and its 

contractors and partners return to “normal.” Nevertheless, NASA is proud of the resiliency 

of its workforce in sustaining critical national missions and for being ranked first among 

large Federal agencies for the Agency’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. 

NASA appreciates the OIG’s recognition of the Agency’s operational flexibility and 

adaptability in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. Of the $2.8 billion in impacts to 

NASA’s programs and projects identified by the OIG, over 95 percent have been absorbed 

into Agency plans, mostly through a combination of deploying project- and Headquartersheld unallocated future expenses (UFE), program/project replans, and deferral of previously 

planned content. NASA has emphasized reporting on the impacts of COVID-19 through its 

Earned Value Management (EVM) activities and is highlighting if COVID-19 is a factor, as 

was the case with the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope and the Plankton, Aerosol, 

Cloud, ocean Ecosystem (PACE) spacecraft.

NASA is also taking steps to be in full compliance with the Administration’s Executive 

Order requiring vaccination of Federal and contractor employees. The Agency is reviewing 

its policies for the future of work, including consideration of workforce policies which 

embrace teleworking and other trends that accelerated under COVID-19, in order to ensure 

NASA attracts and retains the world-class talent needed to carry out its mission. 

Finally, as of the close of FY 2021, NASA had obligated 100 percent of the $60 million in 

supplemental funding the Agency received as part of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and 

Economic Security (CARES) Act. 

If you have any questions regarding NASA’s response to the 2021 Top Management and 

Performance Challenges report, please contact Anthony Mitchell, Audit Liaison Project 

Manager, on (202) 358-1758. 

Bill Nelson
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 147

OTHER INFORMATION — Agency Response to OIG Report on NASA’s Top Management and Performance Challenges

13 

cc: 

Chief Financial Officer/Ms. Schaus 

Chief Information Officer/Mr. Seaton

Associate Administrator for Exploration Systems Development/Mr. Free

Associate Administrator for Space Operations/Ms. Lueders 

Assistant Administrator for Procurement/Ms. Smith Jackson

Assistant Administrator for Strategic Infrastructure/Mr. Carney

Assistant Administrator for Human Capital Management/Ms. Datta
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 148

OTHER INFORMATION OTHER INFORMATION — — Payment Integrity Information Act (PIIA) Reporting Payment Integrity Information Act (PIIA) Reporting

PAYMENT INTEGRITY INFORMATION ACT (PIIA) REPORTING

Payment Integrity Information Act

Under the parameters set forth in the Payment Integrity Information Act (PIIA) of 2019 (Public Law (P.L.) 116-117) which reorganizes 

and revises the previous statues which established requirements for Federal agencies to reduce improper payments set forth 

by the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 (IPIA) (P.L. 107-300); the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act 

of 2010 (IPERA) (P.L. 111-204); and the Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Improvement Act of 2012 (IPERIA) (P.L. 

112-248); agencies are required to perform a risk assessment of all programs and activities, identify programs and activities that

are susceptible to significant improper payments, sample and estimate annual improper payments for susceptible programs

and activities, and report the results to the President and Congress via the Agency Financial Report (AFR) or Performance and

Accountability Report (PAR). Throughout this evolution, NASA has stayed committed to preventing and reducing improper

payments through its Payment Integrity Improvement Program (PIIP). In FY 2021, the Agency executed the aforementioned

responsibilities via the Payment Integrity Information Act Assessment. For additional details related to NASA Payment Integrity

Information Act Reporting, including all information previously included in the AFR, please visit https://paymentaccuracy.gov/.

Payment Integrity Information Act Assessment

NASA executed its FY 2021 Payment Integrity Risk Assessment Methodology under the requirements set forth in OMB 

Circular A-123 Appendix C, Requirements for Payment Integrity Improvement. On an annual basis, NASA reviews and updates 

its risk assessment methodology to ensure proper assessment activities are conducted and to implement modifications as 

appropriate with regard to, changes to improper payment legislation and guidance, changes to NASA’s operating environment, 

recommendations from external auditors, and other circumstances. NASA performed its FY 2021 Payment Integrity Risk 

Assessment employing the updated risk assessment methodology. This methodology incorporates seven risk conditions, each 

with a set of related criteria designed to account for 11 OMB-designated and NASA-specific risk factors. 

OMB requires that each agency assess programs or activities deemed not susceptible to significant improper payments at least 

once every three years. In order to meet this requirement, NASA assesses approximately one third of all programs annually, 

selecting each program based on the most recent year of assessment and prior year assessment results. Accordingly, NASA 

extracted the population ($21.5 billion) of FY 2020 disbursements from its financial management system to develop a list of 

NASA programs eligible to be assessed for the FY 2021 Payment Integrity Risk Assessment. The universe of payments subject 

to analysis included disbursements to vendors, NASA employees, and other government agencies issued by NASA between 

October 1, 2019 and September 30, 2020. 

As required by OMB Memorandum M-18-14, Implementation of Internal Controls and Grant Expenditures for the Disaster- Related 

Appropriations, management conducted statistical sampling and testing on the Hurricane Harvey, Hurricane Matthew and 

Hurricane Irma programs (under the Institutional Construction of Facilities program). No improper payments were identified as a 

result of the testing.

Actions Taken to Address Auditor Recovery Recommendations

As permitted by OMB Circular A-123, Appendix C, NASA has determined to exclude recapture audits from its Recapture Audit 

Program. In FY 2019, NASA performed an analysis that indicated that it was no longer cost-effective to continue conducting 

payment recapture audits for identifying and recovering improper payments, as evidenced by the fact that for the final 3 years of 

the previous recapture auditor’s contract, there were no overpayments identified or recaptured through the payment recapture 

audit program. As a result, NASA did not receive recommendations from recapture auditors regarding actions needed to prevent 

overpayments. However, NASA continues to monitor and assess its payment platforms to ensure appropriate controls are in place 

to prevent, detect, and collect improper payments.

| Continued on the next page →
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 149

OTHER INFORMATION — Payment Integrity Information Act (PIIA) Reporting

| Continued on the next page →

Overpayments Outside the Recapture Audit

Annually, NASA performs an internal review of Overpayments Outside of Recapture Audit as a mechanism to identify and analyze 

the cause and amount of improper payments and total amounts recovered. The scope of the review includes cost-type and fixed 

priced contracts. The review includes an Agency-wide data call to allow for reporting of Agency identified overpayments and 

collections of improper payments. The data call is sent to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer organizations at NASA Centers, 

Office of Inspector General (OIG), Office of Procurement and the Headquarters Office of the Chief Financial Officer Policy & Grants 

Division. Examples of activities included in reporting are Agency post-payment review/audits, single audit, and self-reported 

overpayments, which include OIG investigation settlements. As a result, in FY 2020, NASA recovered $6.86 million, which is 

42.9% of the total overpayments identified for payments outside of the recapture audit.

NASA attributes much of the positive results of its improper payment program to the centralized procurement and payment 

activities executed at the NASA Shared Services Center (NSSC). Centralized processing provides a sound internal control 

environment that helps to mitigate the risk of improper payments across the Agency. 

Financial and Administrative Controls Relating to Fraud and Improper Payments

NASA has the stewardship responsibility for establishing and maintaining internal controls to safeguard its assets against loss 

from unauthorized use or disposition, ensure that its financial statements are not materially misstated, and ensure compliance with 

applicable laws and regulations. As an integral part of this stewardship responsibility, management has a specific duty to design 

and implement programs and controls to prevent, deter, and detect fraud. In order to achieve this responsibility, NASA has the 

following fraud safeguarding mechanisms in place: 

FRAUD PREVENTION & DETECTION  ACTIVITIES OBJECTIVE

Acquisition Integrity Program (AIP)

To monitor and ensure coordination of criminal, civil, contractual, and administrative remedies for investigations 

of fraud and/or corruption related to procurement activities. To establish and maintain coordination with the OIG 

and the Department of Justice

Payment Integrity Improvement Program To identify programs susceptible to improper payments through annual risk assessment and testing

Fraud risk assessments To identify and prioritize fraud risks and determine scope of testing

Evaluation of fraud risk management 

control activities through the annual 

Control Environment Summary

To describe how the organization considers the potential for fraud in assessing risks to the achievement of 

objectives, and to rate the effectiveness of control activities

Enterprise Risk Assessment & Management 

of Agency Risk Profile

To identify and report significant cross-cutting risks impacting the Agency that require escalation to senior 

management

Anti-fraud awareness and training To establish the tone at the top, communicate employee responsibility/accountability, and increase awareness 

of fraud reporting mechanisms. Includes mandatory fraud prevention training, anti-fraud campaign

Coordination and collaboration with 

the OIG

To share information on potential fraud risks, relevant controls, identified issues, results of investigations, and 

other reviews. To learn of emerging fraud trends and improved fraud prevention and detection techniques

OIG audits, reviews, and investigations To evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of controls (this may include controls that address fraud risk); to 

investigate potential incidents of fraud, waste, and abuse

Financial Statement audit To obtain reasonable assurance that the financial statements are free from material misstatements whether due 

to fraud or error

Data Breach Response Program To establish policies, procedures and practices that address Federal information technology mandates including 

privacy and security requirements, and to reduce the risk of loss of NASA’s data and technology assets

Counterfeit Parts Awareness & Inspection 

program

To identify counterfeit parts through components and materials investigation and to mitigate the risk of 

misrepresentation by a supplier or vendor

NASA’s Fraud Risk Management Framework
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 150

OTHER INFORMATION — Payment Integrity Information Act (PIIA) Reporting

NASA aims to detect and prevent improper payments via fraud reduction through the PIIP. NASA identifies, reviews, classifies, 

determines root causes for, and develops Agency corrective actions for instances of fraud identified via the improper payment risk 

assessment. Cases of fraud are also considered when determining whether NASA’s programs are susceptible to significant improper 

payments as required by OMB Circular A-123, Appendix C, Requirements for Payment Integrity Improvement. When suspected 

instances of fraud are identified, the Agency coordinates with the appropriate parties by referring those instances for investigation 

and adjudication to the appropriate parties such as NASA’s OIG or the Department of Justice. In addition to NASA’s PIIP, the Agency 

has taken additional steps to ensure appropriate strategies and procedures are in place to reduce fraud. Leveraging GAO’s “A 

Framework for Managing Fraud Risks in Federal Programs” as a guide, NASA has implemented several activities to prevent and/or 

detect fraud across the Agency and will continue to enhance processes to identify and mitigate fraud risks. Fraud prevention and 

detection activities include AIP and PIIP regular fraud risk assessments, an enhanced Statement of Assurance process to include 

assessment and evaluation of fraud risk management control activities, external and internal audits and investigations, and a Data 

Breach Response Program.

NASA has deployed several fraud-awareness initiatives across the Agency, including mandatory fraud prevention training for all 

employees, anti-fraud campaigns to increase awareness of reporting mechanisms and coordination and collaboration with the 

OIG to further assess the Agency’s risk posture. NASA has an extensive Counterfeit Parts Awareness and Inspection program that 

includes regular investigation and examination of parts, components and materials to mitigate the risk of misrepresentation by a 

supplier or vendor. As such, NASA employs many of the leading practices outlined in GAO’s Framework to ensure effective fraud 

risk management across NASA. NASA’s Mission Support Offices, Mission Directorates and Centers participate in annual fraud 

assessments related to the GAO’s “Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government” (the “Green Book”); and OMB Circular 

A-123 with respect to the leading practices for managing fraud risk. These assessments aid in the evaluation of all aspects of fraud,

including fraud prevention, fraud detection through continuous monitoring and evaluations, fraud corrective action plans and the

communication of fraud control activities across the Agency.

NASA’s comprehensive OMB Circular A-123 Appendix A assessment approach includes assessment of all risks, including fraud risk, 

associated with each business cycle; evaluating whether internal controls mitigate those risks to acceptable levels; and conducting 

risk-based internal control reviews to determine whether controls are operating as intended. To identify potential risk areas for fraud, 

NASA analyzes known fraud cases and inherent risk of errors and irregularities due to fraud that could potentially impact business 

cycles. 

NASA also employs an Ethics Program that requires all NASA employees to: (1) Comply with all applicable ethics laws, regulations, 

Executive orders, and other guidance, and avoid even the appearance of impropriety; and (2) Complete annual and other periodic 

training as required. The Agency widely communicates and encourages employees to report instances observed or allegations of 

fraud, waste, abuse and mismanagement. One reporting mechanism is the OIG’s Hotline. NASA continues to provide Agency-wide 

fraud risk training sponsored by the AIP. This training covers the importance of fraud awareness and acquisition integrity, types 

of fraud, how to identify, recognize and report fraud. The training also covers fraud remedies and the AIP and OIG’s roles and 

approaches to addressing fraud. NASA remains committed to combating fraud through its strong risk management and internal 

control structure, which allows its organizational structure to be conducive to effective fraud risk management and continues to 

expand fraud awareness outreach as part of its plan to counter fraud within the Agency.

Do Not Pay Initiative

OMB requires agencies to report annually on Do Not Pay (DNP) activities as it relates to the Payment Integrity Information Act of 2019. 

NASA enrolled in the Department of the Treasury’s DNP portal process on September 27, 2014. Its Payment Automation File is vetted 

against the Social Security Administration (SSA) Death Master file.

The cumulative results of these monthly reviews reported are for the period of October 1, 2020 through September 24, 2021. During 

this time period, there were 62,386 payments made by Treasury on behalf of NASA with a dollar value of $15.962 billion.

The review by NASA resulted in no matching improper payments for FY 2021. 
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 151

OTHER INFORMATION OTHER INFORMATION — — Undisbursed Balances in Expired Grant Accounts Payment Integrity Information Act (PIIA) Reporting

UNDISBURSED BALANCES IN EXPIRED GRANT ACCOUNTS

In December 2015, Congress passed the Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2016 (Division 

B of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, Pub. L. 114-113), which required NASA to report undisbursed balances in 

expired grant accounts. OMB Memorandum M-16-18, Financial and Performance Reporting on Undisbursed Balances in Expired 

Grant Accounts, requires this information to be included each year until instructed otherwise if the requirement is included in 

subsequent fiscal year’s appropriations acts. NASA monitors and tracks grants’ undisbursed balances in expired accounts through 

a monthly review of internal control activities designed to identify undisbursed balances in expired accounts.

NASA generates financial management reports to aid in the tracking and monitoring of undisbursed amounts. An aging report of 

open obligations is generated on a monthly basis to determine the last day activity occurred. For open obligations in which no 

activity has occurred in a six month period and/or there is no supporting documentation, further review is performed to determine 

the validity of obligation balances and the existence of valid source documentation. Additionally, further analysis is performed to 

determine if funds can be de-obligated. If obligations are valid, the aging reports are updated to reflect that obligations have been 

confirmed with procurement as valid.

NASA will continue to track undisbursed balances in expired grant accounts through its monthly review of internal control 

activities designed to identify funds for de-obligation. This involves the continuous monitoring of undisbursed balances, identifying 

balances that should be de-obligated, and performing timely close-out of grants and other activities. Additionally, NASA’s financial 

management and procurement offices will continue to collaborate in monitoring and tracking undisbursed balances.

Currently, NASA does not have undisbursed balances in expired accounts that may be returned to the Treasury of the United 

States. The following chart reflects the total number and dollar amount of undisbursed grants in expired appropriations. All 

amounts have been obligated to a specific project.

FISCAL YEAR

TOTAL NUMBER OF

EXPIRED GRANTS WITH

UNDISBURSED BALANCES

TOTAL AMOUNT OF UNDISBURSED

BALANCES FOR EXPIRED GRANTS

(IN DOLLARS)

2020 87 $803,167

2019 6 $70,288

2018 0 $-
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 152

OTHER INFORMATION OTHER INFORMATION — — Grants Programs Information Payment Integrity Information Act (PIIA) Reporting

GRANTS PROGRAMS INFORMATION

The Grants Oversight and New Efficiency (GONE) Act (P.L. 114-117) reporting requirements have expired. Nevertheless, to promote 

the efficient administration of grants programs, all reporting entities with Federal grants programs must submit a brief high-level 

summary of expired, but not closed, Federal grants and cooperative agreements (awards). NASA continues to ensure its grants 

programs operate efficiently with the timely processing of expired, but not closed, Federal grants and cooperative agreements 

(awards) for closeout.

The CMP ensures ongoing review and validation of financial data and the effectiveness of internal controls over the entire 

financial management process, including grants. When grants undisbursed balances in expired accounts are identified, 

appropriate action is taken to ensure optimum use of grant resources.

In FY 2021, there were 1,485 grant closeouts completed. This represents a 5% increase compared to FY 2020 for grants closed 

out. NASA recognized an increase in awards expired in the 2-3 years category with undisbursed balances and in awards expired 

2-3 years with zero-dollar balances. The closeout team continues to work diligently to ensure that the grant close out process is

consistent throughout the fiscal year.

NASA has implemented an automated process which sends expired grants to closeout on a weekly basis. This process 

improvement will continue to ensure that the agency operates with efficiency when managing and monitoring the grant close out 

process. This enhancement will also assist to make certain that there is no challenge of awards being transferred to close out 

within a timely manner.

CATEGORY 2-3 YEARS 3-5 YEARS MORE THAN 5 YEARS

Number of Grants/Cooperative Agreements with 

Zero Dollar Balances

77 17 2

Number of Grants/Cooperative Agreements with 

Undisbursed Balances 85 6 3

Total Amount of Undisbursed Balances $793,548 $70,288 $167,177
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 153

OTHER INFORMATION OTHER INFORMATION — — Civil Monetary Penalty Adjustment For Inflation Payment Integrity Information Act (PIIA) Reporting

CIVIL MONETARY PENALTY ADJUSTMENT FOR INFLATION

AUTHORITY (STATUTE) PENALTY (NAME OR 

DESCRIPTION)

YEAR 

ENACTED

LATEST YEAR 

ADJUSTMENT

PENALTY 

LEVEL 

($ AMOUNT)

LOCATION

Program Fraud Civil 

Remedies Act of 1986

Penalty for False 

Claims 1986 2021 Maximum

$11,803

Federal Register Vol.86, 

No. 48 (15 March 2021)

Rules and Regulations

www.federalregister.gov

Department of the Interior 

and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act of 1989, 

Public Law 101-121, sec. 319

Penalty for use 

of appropriated 

funds to lobby or 

influence certain 

contracts.

1989 2021 Minimum

$20,731

Federal Register Vol.86, 

No. 48 (15 March 2021)

Rules and Regulations

www.federalregister.gov

Department of the Interior 

and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act of 1989, 

Public Law 101-121, sec. 319

Penalty for use 

of appropriated 

funds to lobby or 

influence certain 

contracts.

1989 2021 Maximum

$207,314

Federal Register Vol.86, 

No. 48 (15 March 2021)

Rules and Regulations

www.federalregister.gov

Department of the Interior 

and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act of 1989, 

Public Law 101-121, sec. 319

Penalty for 

failure to report 

certain lobbying 

transactions.

1989 2021 Minimum

$20,731

Federal Register Vol.86, 

No. 48 (15 March 2021)

Rules and Regulations

www.federalregister.gov

Department of the Interior 

and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act of 1989, 

Public Law 101-121, sec. 319

Penalty for 

failure to report 

certain lobbying 

transactions.

1989 2021 Maximum

$207,314

Federal Register Vol.86, 

No. 48 (15 March 2021)

Rules and Regulations

www.federalregister.gov

The Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act of 1990, as amended, requires agencies to make regular and consistent 

inflationary adjustments of civil monetary penalties to maintain their deterrent effect. To improve compliance with the Act, and 

in response to multiple audits and recommendations, agencies should report annually in the Other Information section the most 

recent inflationary adjustments to civil monetary penalties to ensure penalty adjustments are both timely and accurate.

NASA reviewed each of the penalty amounts under its statutes and penalty amounts for inflation when required under law. The 

following table reflects the authorities imposing the penalties, the civil penalties, the adjustment years, the current penalty amount 

and location for penalty updates.

FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2021
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 154

OTHER INFORMATION OTHER INFORMATION — — Summary of Financial Statement Audit and Management Assurances Payment Integrity Information Act (PIIA) Reporting

SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT AND MANAGEMENT ASSURANCES

The following tables summarize the Agency’s FY 2021 Financial Statement Audit and Management Assurances. Table 1 

summarizes the status of prior year—FY 2020 material weaknesses identified, if any by the Financial Statement Auditor. Table 2 

summarizes the status of prior year material weaknesses, if any identified by NASA Management.

Agency Auditor

1. Federal Financial Management System Requirements No lack of compliance noted No lack of compliance noted

2. Applicable Federal Accounting Standards No lack of compliance noted No lack of compliance noted

3. USSGL at Transaction Level No lack of compliance noted No lack of compliance noted

Audit Opinion Unmodified

Restatement No

Material Weaknesses Beginning Balance New Resolved Consolidated Ending Balance

None 0 0 0 0 0

Total Material Weaknesses 0 0 0 0 0

Effectiveness of Internal Control over Financial Reporting (FMFIA 2)

Statement of Assurance Unmodified

Material Weaknesses Beginning Balance New Resolved Consolidated Reassessed Ending Balance

None 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total Material Weaknesses 0 0 0 0 0 0

Effectiveness of Internal Control over Operations (FMFIA 2)

Statement of Assurance Unmodified

Material Weaknesses Beginning Balance New Resolved Consolidated Reassessed Ending Balance

None 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total Material Weaknesses 0 0 0 0 0 0

Conformance with Financial Management System Requirements (FMFIA 4)

Statement of Assurance Federal Systems conform, except for instances of non-conformance, or do not conform to financial management 

system requirements.

Non-Conformances Beginning Balance New Resolved Consolidated Reassessed Ending Balance

None 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total Non-Conformances 0 0 0 0 0 0

Compliance with Federal Financial Management Improvement Act (FFMIA)

TABLE 1: Summary of Financial Statement Audit

TABLE 2: Summary of Management Assurances
This page has been left blank intentionally.
FY21 AFR VERSION 5 DRAFT

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 156

The Northrop Grumman Antares rocket, with Cygnus resupply spacecraft aboard, launches from Pad-0A, Saturday, Feb. 20, 

2021, at NASA’s Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia. Northrop Grumman’s 15th contracted cargo resupply mission for NASA to the 

International Space Station will deliver about 8,000 pounds of science and research, crew supplies, and vehicle hardware to 

the orbital laboratory and its crew.

PHOTO CREDIT — Wallops/Terry Zaperach

APPENDIX

SECTION 4

156

nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 156
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 157

APPENDIX — Glossary of Acronyms

CERTIFICATE OF EXCELLENCE IN 

ACCOUNTABILITY REPORTING AWARD

APPENDIX — Certificate of Excellence in Accountability Reporting Award

On May 27, 2021, the Association of Government Accountants 

(AGA) awarded NASA its prestigious Certificate of Excellence in 

Accountability Reporting (CEAR) award. This marks the 7th consecutive 

year NASA has been recognized for its excellency in financial reporting.

Certificate of Excellence in

Accountability Reporting®

in recognition of outstanding effort in preparing the 

Agency Financial Report for fiscal year 2020

presented to the

Ann M. Ebberts, MS, PMP

Chief Executive Officer, AGA

Diane L. Dudley, CGFM, CPA

Chair, CEAR Board

National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 158

APPENDIX APPENDIX — — Glossary of Acronyms Glossary of Acronyms

AA Associate Administrator

A&A Assessment and Authorization

AES Advanced Exploration Systems

AFR Agency Financial Report

AFRC Armstrong Flight Research Center 

AGA Association of Government Accountants

AgMIP Agricultural Model Intercomparison and Improvement Project

AMP Agency Master Plan

AICPA American Institute of Certified Public Accountants

AIP Acquisition Integrity Program

APM Airborne Particulate Monitor

APMC Agency Program Management Council

ATV Automated Transfer Vehicle

ARC Ames Research Center

ARMWG Agency Risk Management Working Group

ASAP Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel 

ASC Accounting Standards Codification

BLE Basic Level Entitlement

BPR Baseline Performance Reviews

CADRe Cost Analysis Data Requirement

CALIPSO Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite

Caltech California Institute of Technology 

CAP Corrective Action Plan

CARES Act Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act

CASIS Center for the Advancement of Science in Space

CCP Commercial Crew Program

CCU Collapsible Contingency Urinal

CEAR Certificate of Excellence in Accountability Reporting

CFO Chief Financial Officer

CFO Act Chief Financial Officers Act of 1990

CFT Crewed Flight Test

Challenger Trust Fund Science, Space and Technology Education Trust Fund

CLD Commercial Leo Destinations

CMP Continuous Monitoring Program

CNES Centre National D’Etudes Spatiales

CoF Construction of Facilities

COTS Commercial Off-The-Shelf

COVID-19 Coronavirus 

CRV Current Replacement Value

CrIS Cross-track Infrared Sounder

CS Core Stage

CSPD Cybersecurity and Privacy Division

CSRS Civil Service Retirement System

CUI Controlled Unclassified Information

CyPrESS Cybersecurity and Privacy Enterprise Solutions & Services

DATA Act Digital Accountability and Transparency Act of 2014

GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS

| Continued on the next page →
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 159

APPENDIX — Glossary of Acronyms

DAVINCI+ Deep Atmosphere Venus Investigation of Noble-gases, Chemistry, and Imaging

DCIA Debt Collection Improvement Act

DLP Data Loss Prevention

DM&R Deferred Maintenance and Repairs

DM method Deferred Maintenance Parametric Estimating Method

DNP Do Not Pay

DVT Development Verification Test

EC Executive Council

ECS Environmental Control System

EGS Exploration Ground Systems

xEMU Exploration Extravehicular Mobility Unit

Endeavor Trust Fund Endeavor Teacher Fellowship Trust Fund

ERM Enterprise Risk Management

ERMWG Enterprise Risk Management Working Group

ERP Enterprise Resource Planning

ESD Exploration Systems Development

ESDMD Exploration Systems Development Mission Directorate

ESPC Energy Savings Performance Contract

EVA Extra-Vehicular Activity

xEVAS Exploration Extravehicular Services

Evidence Act The Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018

EVM Earned Value Management

EY Ernest & Young LLP

FAMU Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University

FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation

FASAB Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board

FASB Financial Accounting Standards Board

FBWT Fund Balance with Treasury

FCI Facility Condition Index

FECA Federal Employees’ Compensation Act

FEGLI Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance

FEHB Federal Employees Health Benefits

FERS Federal Employees Retirement System

FEVS Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey

FFMIA Federal Financial Management Improvement Act

FFRDC Federally Funded Research and Development Center

FISMA Federal Information Security Modernization Act of 2014

FITARA Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act

FMFIA Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act

FPAs Federal Program Agencies

FR Financial Report

FRDA Fraud Reduction and Data Analytics Act

FTE Full-Time Equivalent

FY Fiscal Year

GAAP U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles

GAO Government Accountability Office

GFE Government-Furnished Equipment

GPRAMA Government Performance and Results Act Modernization Act of 2010

GISS Goddard Institute for Space Studies

| Continued on the next page →
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 160

APPENDIX — Glossary of Acronyms

| Continued on the next page →

GOES R Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellites-R Series

GONE Grants Oversight and New Efficiency

GRC Glenn Research Center

Green Book GAO Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government

GSFC Goddard Space Flight Center

GTAS Government Treasury Account Symbol

G-PP&E General Property, Plant, and Equipment

HALO Habitation and Logistics Outpost

HEOMD Human Exploration and Operations Mission Directorate

HLS Human Landing System

HQ Headquarters

HTV H-II Transfer Vehicle

HVA High-Value Asset

HVAC Heating, Ventilating and Air Condition

IBNR Incurred But Not Reported

IGT Intragovernmental

INCLUDES Inclusion Across the Nation of Communities of Learners of Underrepresented Discovers in Engineering and Science

IPERA Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Act of 2010

IPERIA Improper Payments Elimination and Recovery Improvement Act of 2012

IPIA Improper Payments Information Act

IRT Independent Review Team

ISRO Indian Space Research Organisation

ISS International Space Station

ISSNL ISS National Laboratory

IT Information Technology

JAXA Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency 

JCL Joint Confidence Level

JPL Jet Propulsion Laboratory

JPSS Joint Polar Satellite System

JSC Johnson Space Center

JWST James Webb Space Telescope

KDP Key Decision Point

KSC Kennedy Space Center

LaRC Langley Research Center

LaRC-SI Langley Research Center-Soluble Imide

LBFD Low-Boom Flight Demonstrator

LCRD Laser Communications Relay Demonstration

LEO Low-Earth Orbit

LEONL Low-Earth Orbit National Laboratory

MAVEN Mars Atmosphere and Volatile Evolution mission

MDM Mobile Device Management

MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology 

ML Mobile Launcher

MOXIE Mars Oxygen In-Situ Resource Utilization Experiment

MSC Mission Support Council

MSD Mission Support Directorate

MSFC Marshall Space Flight Center

MSWG Management Systems Working Group

MUREP Minority University Research and Education Project
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 161

APPENDIX — Glossary of Acronyms

| Continued on the next page →

M&R Maintenance and Repairs

NAC NASA Advisory Council

NAC Network Access Control

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NISAR NASA-ISRO Synthetic Aperture Radar

NPR NASA Procedural Requirements

NSSC NASA Shared Services Center

OCE Office of the Chief Engineer

OCFO Office of the Chief Financial Officer

OCHCO Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer

OCHMO Office of the Chief Health and Medical Officer

OCIO Office of the Chief Information Officer

OFT Orbital Flight Test

OFT-2 Orbital Flight Test-2

OIG Office of Inspector General

OMB Office of Management and Budget

OP Office of Procurement

OPM Office of Personnel Management

Orion Orion Multi-Purpose Crew Vehicle

OSMA Office of Safety & Mission Assurance

PACE Plankton, Aerosol, Cloud ocean Ecosystem

PAR Performance and Accountability Report

PDR Preliminary Design Reviews

PFE Personally Furnished Equipment

PIIA Payment Integrity Information Act

PIIP Payment Integrity Improvement Program

P.L. Public Law

PM Project Management

PMC Program Management Council

PMIAA Program Management Improvement and Accountability Act

PMIO Program Management Improvement Officer

PPE Power and Propulsion Element

President’s Budget FY 2023 Budget of the United States Government

PSE Program Support Equipment

QAD Quality Assurance Division

RCM Reliability Centered Maintenance

RFP Request for Proposal

RMB Risk Management Board

R&D Research and Development

REALM Radio-frequency Identification Enabled Autonomous Logistics Management

RFID Radio-frequency Identification

Saffire V Spacecraft Fire Safety V

SAP ECC Systems, Applications & Products ERP Central Component

SAT Senior Assessment Team

SBIR Small Business Innovation Research

SBR Statement of Budgetary Resources

SBU Sensitive But Unclassified

SDRs Special Drawing Rights

SERFE Spacesuit Evaporation Rejection Flight Experiment
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 162

APPENDIX — Glossary of Acronyms

SES Senior Executive Service

SFFAS Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards

SoA Statement of Assurance Process

SOC Security Operations Center

SOMD Space Operations Mission Directorate

SLS Space Launch System

SMC Senior Management Council

SMD Science Mission Directorate

SNC Statement of Net Cost

SPLICE Safe and Precise Landing Integrated Capabilities Evolution

SR&T Supporting Research and Technology

SSA Social Security Administration

SSC Stennis Space Center

SSMS Safety, Security, and Mission Services

STEM Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics

SWOT Surface Water and Ocean Topography

TM Talent Marketplace

Treasury U.S. Department of the Treasury

U.S. United States

UAM Urban Air Mobility

UFE Unallocated Future Expenses

UNICORN Unified Comprehensive Operational Risk Network

UWMS Universal Waste Management System

VIPer Volume of Integrated Performance

VPN Virtual Private Network

Webb James Webb Space Telescope

WFF Wallops Flight Facility
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 163

Stay connected with NASA via the following social media sites:

Facebook.com/NASA

Twitter.com/NASA

Instagram.com/NASA

Youtube.com/NASA

Flickr.com/photos/nasahqphoto

Linkedin.com/company/nasa/

APPENDIX — Connect With NASA

CONNECT WITH NASA

Bryan Jackson, grandson of Mary W. Jackson, left, and Raymond Lewis, son-in-law of Mary W. Jackson, right, unveil the Mary W. Jackson 

NASA Headquarters sign during a ceremony officially naming the building, Friday, Feb. 26, 2021, at NASA Headquarters in Washington, 

DC. Mary W. Jackson, the first African American female engineer at NASA, began her career with the agency in the segregated West Area

Computing Unit of NASA’s Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia. The mathematician and aerospace engineer went on to lead

programs influencing the hiring and promotion of women in NASA’s science, technology, engineering, and mathematics careers. In 2019,

she posthumously received the Congressional Gold Medal.

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/Joel Kowsky

Thank you for interest in NASA’s FY 2021 AFR. We welcome your comments on how we can make this report more informative 

for our readers. Electronic copies of this report and prior years’ reports are available through the Agency’s website. Please 

send your comments to: hq-ocfo-afrfeedback@mail.nasa.gov

It is difficult to say what is impossible, for the dream of yesterday is the hope of today 

and the reality of tomorrow.

Dr. Robert Hutchings Goddard
nasa.gov NASA FY 2021 — Agency Financial Report 164

APPENDIX — Acknowledgments

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Margaret Vo Schaus, CFO

Zeb Agbanyim

Carlos Aguirre

Terrance Alfred

Cherisse Aquil

Larisa Aranbayeva

Kelly Barnes

Irvin Bigay

Walter Bland

Alex Brillman

Shepherd Brown

Sharon Bryant

Michelle Butler

Kim Butler

Cheryl Carrington

Tamara Chapman

Haideh Chubin

James Davis

John Dillon

Kristian Dixon

Eileen Eley

John Emery

Monique Gregory

Glendon Hale

Laurese Hale

Sonja Hill

Gatrie Johnson

Purnell Johnson

Jin Kim

Reid Koester

Tina Liu

Andre Long

Courtney Mason

Jonathan “Craig” McArthur

Teferi Mekonnene

Hakim Muhammad

Steven Murdoch

Ellis Ogun

Chidilim Okonkwo

Ignatius Okonkwo

Omar Palmer

Eric Peters

Frank Petersen

Brian Petrone

Amberly Plummer

Wilfredo Rivera

Joi Salisbury

Tierra Sawe

Desiree Seaward

Sunita Sharma

Jamell Sharpe

Anne Simmons

Camelia Spence

Martin Tran

Tien Tran

Tiffany Tran

David Walters

Derek Wells

Charlene Williams

Ryan Willing

We would also like to acknowledge Deloitte & Touche LLP for their objective review of the Agency’s Financial Report and Ernst & Young 

LLP for the professional manner in which they conducted the audit of the FY 2021 financial statements. We would like to send a special 

thank you to the Office of the Chief Human Capital Officer (OCHCO) and Office of Communications. 

We offer special thanks to our graphic designer, Darren Fuller.

THANK YOU

The AFR was produced with the energies, time, and talents of the National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration employees in Washington, D.C. We offer our sincerest thanks and acknowledgments. In 

particular, we recognize the following individuals and organizations.

OFFICE OF STRATEGIC 

INFRASTRUCTURE

Ronald Dilustro

Kristy Hopewell

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR 

GENERAL

Regina Dull

Mark Jenson

MISSION SUPPORT 

DIRECTORATE

Kelly DiMario

Anthony Mitchell

Jeanne Tran
The SpaceX Crew Dragon Resilience spacecraft is lifted onto the GO Navigator 

recovery ship after it landed with NASA astronauts Mike Hopkins, Shannon 

Walker, and Victor Glover, and Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA) 

astronaut Soichi Noguchi aboard in the Gulf of Mexico off the coast of Panama 

City, Florida, Sunday, May 2, 2021. 

PHOTO CREDIT — NASA/Bill Ingalls

Mary W. Jackson NASA Headquarters

300 E Street SW (Hidden Figure Way)

Washington, DC 20546

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration