1. Life Cycle Cost Growth Study
20 Science Mission Directorate (SMD) Missions
Presented at the
2011 NASA Program Management Challenge
9-10 February 2011, Long Beach, California
Claude Freaner, Science Mission Directorate, NASA HQ
1

2. Background
• Previous studies1, 2 have primarily examined Development Cost
Growth in an attempt to determine when in the development
lifecycle the growth occurs
• Growth was studied for 20 SMD Missions launched between 2000
and 2009.
– Mass, Power, Cost, and Schedule were examined
• Launch vehicle and Phase E operations costs (planned versus
actual) have also grown but the amounts/phasing of this growth
were not included in the prior studies
– Current study includes LV and Phase E operations cost
1. “Using Historical NASA Cost and Schedule Growth to Set Future Program and Project Reserve Guidelines”, Bitten R., Emmons D., Freaner C.,
IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, Montana, March 3-10, 2007
2, “Optimism in Early Conceptual Designs and Its Effect on Cost and Schedule Growth: An Update”, Bitten R., Freaner C., Emmons D., 2010
NASA Program Management Challenge, Galveston, Texas, February 9-10, 2010
2

3. Study Approach
• For a set of 20 missions in the study, the cost data were obtained from
all of the CADRes for missions at ATP (Phase B start), PDR, CDR, and
Launch.
• The cost data was “binned” into these Work Breakdown Structure
(WBS) element categories:
– PMSEMA: Project Management, Systems Engineering, Mission Assurance
– SCI/EPO: Science, Education, Public Outreach
– Payload
– Bus/AIT: Spacecraft Bus, System Assembly Integration and Test
– GDS/MOS: pre-launch Ground Data System, Mission Operations
– L/V: Launch Vehicle
– Phase E: Post-Launch Operations and Data Analysis
• Cost data has not been adjusted for “Full Cost” effects
– Primarily impacts STEREO, CALIPSO, FERMI
The majority of these missions were in development prior to the CADRe requirement existing, so separation of the costs
into the standard WBS Level 2 elements was difficult. Therefore, the elements were combined into the above bins.
3

4. Database Description:
20 Missions Represent a Wide Range of Recent NASA Missions
Key Launch Acquisition Number of
Planetary? Program Science Type Center(s) Year Type Instruments Comments
Advanced land imaging technology
EO-1 NMP Earth Science GSFC 2000 Competed 5
demonstrator
Collect samples of solar wind particles at
GENESIS X Discovery Planetary Science JPL 2001 Competed 4
L1 point and return them to Earth
• 5 Directed vs. 15 GRACE ESSP Earth Science JPL 2002 Competed 6 Earth Gravity Measurement
Competed missions Spitzer
Physics of
the Cosmos
Astrophysics JPL 2003 Directed 4
IR space telescope, the last of the Great
Observatories
GALEX Explorers Astrophysics JPL/CalTech 2003 Competed 1 UV space telescope
SWIFT Explorers Astrophysics GSFC 2004 Competed 4 Gamma Ray burst detector
• 7 Planetary missions MESSENGER X Discovery Planetary Science APL 2004 Competed 7 Investigate Mercury
vs. 13 Earth or near- MRO X MEP Planetary Science JPL 2005 Directed 7 Investigate history of water on Mars
Earth Orbiters Deep Impact X Discovery Planetary Science JPL 2005 Competed 3 Comet impactor
Cloudsat ESSP Earth Science JPL 2006 Competed 1 Radar observation of clouds
2 spacecraft looking at solar dynamics -
STEREO STP Heliospheric Science GSFC/APL 2006 Directed 4
• 7 Planetary Science Earth leading and trailing orbits
CALIPSO ESSP Earth Science LARC 2006 Competed 3 Aerosols
vs. 5 Astrophysics New
X
New
Planetary Science APL 2006 Competed 7 Investigate Pluto
Horizons Frontiers
vs. 5 Earth Science DAWN X Discovery Planetary Science JPL 2007 Competed 2 Investigate Ceres and Vesta protoplanets
vs. 3 Heliophysics AIM Explorers Heliospheric Science LASP 2007 Competed 3 Aeronomy of Ice in Mesosphere
missions Fermi
(GLAST)
Physics of
the Cosmos
Astrophysics GSFC 2008 Directed 2 Gamma Ray Telescope
Interaction between solar wind and
IBEX Explorers Heliospheric Science GSFC 2008 Competed 2
interstellar medium
Kepler Discovery Astrophysics JPL 2009 Competed 1 Search for Earth-sized exoplanets
Robotic ESMD/Planetary
LRO X GSFC 2009 Directed 7 Origin of the Moon
Lunar Science
Carbon Dioxide Investigation. Mission
OCO ESSP Earth Science JPL 2009 Competed 1
failed due to launch vehicle failure
4

5. Composition of Average Life Cycle Cost & Cost Growth
Category as Percent of Distribution of Growth of LCC
Average LCC at Launch From PDR to Launch
Phase E
6%
SCI/EPO
3% SCI/EPO
PMSEM PMSE 2%
Phase E L/V
11%
A MA
9% 7%
12%
L/V
GDS/
17% MOS
Payload 12%
23%
Payload
GDS Bus/AIT 32%
6% 29%
Bus/AIT
31%
5

6. “Portfolio” % Average LCC Cost Growth
Average Cost Growth by Major WBS,
200%
Reserves Not Included (20 Missions)
180%
160%
140%
Percent Growth
120%
100%
80% ATP to LRD
60% 56% PDR to LRD
40%
40%
20%
0%
Largest Percent Growth for PMSEMA & GDS/OS
Growth = (Total LCC at Launch/Total LCC at KDP) -1
Note: ATP is equivalent to KDP-B
6

7. Total Cost Growth ($) by Major WBS Element
(20 Missions)
1,000,000
800,000 Total Growth =
$2.1B
600,000 Total Growth =
$1.6B
400,000
Cost Growth in $K
200,000
ATP to LRD
PDR to LRD
-
(200,000)
(400,000)
Total Cost at
Launch = $7.6B
(600,000)
Reserves shown were planned to cover all growth
(800,000)
Largest Absolute Dollar Growth for Payload & Spacecraft
7

8. PMSEMA Cost Growth from ATP* (Phase B start)
450% Mission #1
Mission #2
400% Mission #3
Mission #4
350% Mission #5
Mission #6
300% Mission #7
Mission #8
250% Mission #9
Mission #10
200% 178% Mission #11
Mission #12
150% Mission #13
Mission #14
100% Mission #15
61% Mission #16
50% 38% Mission #17
0% Mission #18
0% Mission #19
ATP PDR CDR Launch Mission #20
-50% Average
-100%
Majority of PMSEMA Growth Occurs After CDR
* Note: Reserves not included
8

9. PMSEMA Cost Growth from PDR*
400%
Mission #1
Mission #2
350%
Mission #3
Mission #4
300% Mission #5
Mission #6
250% Mission #7
Mission #8
200% Mission #9
Mission #10
150% Mission #11
114% Mission #12
100% Mission #13
Mission #14
50% Mission #15
17% Mission #16
0%
Mission #17
0%
PDR CDR Launch Mission #18
Mission #19
-50%
Mission #20
Average
-100%
Majority of PMSEMA Growth Occurs After CDR
* Note: Reserves not included
9

10. Science/EPO Cost Growth from ATP* (Phase B start)
500%
Mission #1
Mission #2
Mission #3
400% Mission #4
Mission #5
Mission #6
300% Mission #7
Mission #8
Mission #9
200% Mission #10
Mission #11
Mission #12
100% Mission #13
48% Mission #14
11% 18% Mission #15
0%
0% Mission #16
ATP PDR CDR Launch Mission #17
Mission #18
-100% Mission #19
Mission #20
Average
-200%
Majority of Science/EPO Growth Occurs After CDR
* Note: Reserves not included
10

11. Science/EPO Cost Growth from PDR*
300%
Mission #1
Mission #2
Mission #3
250%
Mission #4
Mission #5
200% Mission #6
Mission #7
Mission #8
150% Mission #9
Mission #10
Mission #11
100% Mission #12
Mission #13
Mission #14
50% 32%
Mission #15
18%
Mission #16
0%
0% Mission #17
PDR CDR Launch Mission #18
Mission #19
-50% Mission #20
Average
-100%
Science/EPO Grows Steadily After PDR
* Note: Reserves not included
11

12. Payload Cost Growth from ATP* (Phase B start)
250%
Mission #1
Mission #2
Mission #3
200%
Mission #4
Mission #5
Mission #6
150%
Mission #7
Mission #8
103% Mission #9
100% Mission #10
Mission #11
Mission #12
Mission #13
50%
34%
Mission #14
15% Mission #15
0% Mission #16
0%
Mission #17
ATP PDR CDR Launch
Mission #18
Mission #19
-50%
Majority of Payload Growth Occurs After CDR
* Note: Reserves not included
12

13. Payload Cost Growth from PDR*
200%
Mission #1
Mission #2
Mission #3
Mission #4
150% Mission #5
Mission #6
Mission #7
Mission #8
Mission #9
100%
Mission #10
77%
Mission #11
Mission #12
Mission #13
50% Mission #14
Mission #15
17% Mission #16
Mission #17
0%
Mission #18
0%
PDR CDR Launch Mission #19
Mission #20
Average
-50% Majority of Payload Growth Occurs After CDR
* Note: Reserves not included
13

14. Bus/AIT Cost Growth from ATP*
160%
Mission #1
Mission #2
140% Mission #3
Mission #4
120% Mission #5
Mission #6
100% Mission #7
Mission #8
Mission #9
80%
Mission #10
Mission #11
60% 55%
Mission #12
Mission #13
40% Mission #14
Mission #15
18% Mission #16
20% 11%
Mission #17
0% Mission #18
0%
Mission #19
ATP PDR CDR Launch
Mission #20
-20% Average
-40%
Majority of Bus/AIT Growth Occurs After CDR
* Note: Reserves not included
14

15. Bus/AIT Cost Growth from PDR*
120%
Mission #1
Mission #2
Mission #3
100%
Mission #4
Mission #5
Mission #6
80% Mission #7
Mission #8
Mission #9
60% Mission #10
Mission #11
Mission #12
40%
40% Mission #13
Mission #14
Mission #15
Mission #16
20%
Mission #17
7% Mission #18
0% Mission #19
0%
Mission #20
PDR CDR Launch
Average
-20%
Majority of Bus/AIT Growth Occurs After CDR
* Note: Reserves not included
15

16. Pre-Launch GDS/MOS Cost Growth from ATP* (Phase B start)
EO-1 Excluded from Average
800% Mission #1
Mission #2
700% Mission #3
Mission #4
Mission #5
600%
Mission #6
Mission #7
500% Mission #8
Mission #9
400% Mission #10
Mission #11
Mission #12
300%
Mission #13
Mission #14
200% 165% Mission #15
Mission #16
100% 67% Mission #17
54%
Mission #18
0% Mission #19
0%
Mission #20
ATP PDR CDR Launch
Average
-100%
Majority of Pre-Launch GDS/MOS Growth Occurs After CDR
* Note: Reserves not included
16

17. Pre-Launch GDS/MOS Cost Growth from PDR*
EO-1 & CALIPSO Excluded from Average
900%
Mission #1
Mission #2
800%
Mission #3
700% Mission #4
Mission #5
600% Mission #6
Mission #7
500% Mission #8
Mission #9
400% Mission #10
Mission #11
300% Mission #12
Mission #13
200% Mission #14
Mission #15
100% 74%
Mission #16
0% 11% Mission #17
0% Mission #18
PDR CDR Launch
Mission #19
-100%
Mission #20
Average
-200%
Majority of Pre-Launch GDS/MOS Growth Occurs After CDR
* Note: Reserves not included
17

18. Launch Vehicle Cost Growth from ATP* (Phase B start)
100%
Mission #1
Mission #2
Mission #3
80%
Mission #4
Mission #5
Mission #6
60%
Mission #7
Mission #8
Mission #9
40% Mission #10
Mission #11
Mission #12
20% Mission #13
10%
Mission #14
0% 2% Mission #15
-3% Mission #16
0%
ATP PDR CDR Launch Mission #17
Mission #18
-20% Mission #19
Mission #20
Average
-40%
Majority of Launch Vehicle Growth Occurs After CDR
* Note: Reserves not included
18

19. Launch Vehicle Cost Growth from PDR*
100%
Mission #1
Mission #2
Mission #3
80%
Mission #4
Mission #5
Mission #6
60%
Mission #7
Mission #8
Mission #9
40% Mission #10
Mission #11
Mission #12
20% 14% Mission #13
Mission #14
5% Mission #15
0%
0% Mission #16
PDR CDR Launch Mission #17
Mission #18
Mission #19
-20%
Mission #20
Average
-40%
Majority of Launch Vehicle Growth Occurs After CDR
* Note: Reserves not included
19

20. Planned Phase E Cost Growth from ATP* (Phase B start)
CALIPSO Excluded from Average
400%
Mission #1
Mission #2
350%
Mission #3
Mission #4
300%
Mission #5
Mission #6
250% Mission #7
Mission #8
200% Mission #9
Mission #10
150% Mission #11
Mission #12
Mission #13
100%
Mission #14
Mission #15
50% 27% 34% Mission #16
11% Mission #17
0%
0% Mission #18
ATP PDR CDR Launch Mission #19
-50% Mission #20
Average
-100%
Majority of Phase E Growth Occurs Prior to CDR
* Note: Reserves not included
20

21. Planned Phase E Cost Growth from PDR*
CALIPSO Excluded from Average
400%
Mission #1
350% Mission #2
Mission #3
300% Mission #4
Mission #5
Mission #6
250%
Mission #7
Mission #8
200% Mission #9
Mission #10
150% Mission #11
Mission #12
Mission #13
100%
Mission #14
Mission #15
50% Mission #16
13% 21%
Mission #17
0%
0% Mission #18
PDR CDR Launch Mission #19
Mission #20
-50%
Average
-100%
Majority of Phase E Growth Occurs Prior to CDR
* Note: Reserves not included
21

22. LCC Growth from ATP* (Phase B start)
(Includes Planned Phase E)
180%
Mission #1
Mission #2
160% Mission #3
Mission #4
140% Mission #5
Mission #6
120% Mission #7
Mission #8
Mission #9
100%
Mission #10
Mission #11
80%
Mission #12
58% Mission #13
60% Mission #14
Mission #15
40% Mission #16
Mission #17
20%
20% Mission #18
9% Mission #19
0% Mission #20
0%
Average
ATP PDR CDR Launch
-20%
Majority of LCC Growth Occurs After CDR
* Note: Reserves not included Growth = Average ((Mission LCC at Launch/Mission LCC at KDP)-1)
22

23. LCC Growth from PDR*
(Includes Planned Phase E)
140%
Mission #1
Mission #2
120% Mission #3
Mission #4
Mission #5
100% Mission #6
Mission #7
Mission #8
80%
Mission #9
Mission #10
60% Mission #11
Mission #12
45%
Mission #13
40% Mission #14
Mission #15
Mission #16
20% Mission #17
10%
Mission #18
0% Mission #19
0%
Mission #20
PDR CDR LRD
Average
-20%
Majority of LCC Growth Occurs After CDR
* Note: Reserves not included Growth = Average ((Mission LCC at Launch/Mission LCC at KDP)-1)
23

24. Reserves Standards
• JPL Flight Project Practices, Rev. 7:
– At PDR, budget reserves must be 25% of cost to go.
– At CDR, budget reserves must be 20% of cost to go.
– At start of ATLO, budget reserves must be 20% of cost to go.
• GSFC “Gold Rules”
– At PDR, budget reserves must be 25% of cost to go.
•LCC growth from PDR to Launch averages 41% of
Total Cost (reserves excluded), not cost to go
•LCC growth from CDR to Launch averages 32% of
Total Cost (reserves excluded), not cost to go
24

25. Probability that 25% Reserves at PDR Are Sufficient
• Growth from PDR to Launch average is 41% (excluding EO-1)
– Standard Deviation = 21%
– Probability that a mission with 25% reserves at PDR will stay within
those reserves by Launch = 22%
– To achieve 70% CL, reserves of 47% would have been needed
• Growth from PDR to Launch average is 45% (including EO-1)
– Standard Deviation = 28%
– Probability that a mission with 25% reserves at PDR will stay within
those reserves by Launch = 23%
– To achieve 70% CL, reserves of 52% would have been needed
25

26. So…Why Do We Have Cost Growth?
• Over-optimism at the start
– Propensity for proposers to be in marketing mode
– Initial Mass estimates are low
• Average Payload Mass Growth PDR-Launch = 77%
– Initial Schedule estimates are short
– Cost… Likely bid to the cost cap or available budget, not what it realistically
takes
• Cost estimators can use wider ranges on parameters for estimating the
input values used for cost risk analysis
– Current Cost risk process appears to be underestimating the resource growth
• Schedule slips
– Average Launch date slip from PDR plan: 13+ Months
– Average Launch date slip from CDR plan: 10- Months
– Majority of schedule slips occur during ATLO.
• “Stuff” happens
– Harder than we thought
– Suppliers have problems
– Things break
– Congress/OMB/NASA HQ change funding profiles
26

27. What Can We Do to Decrease Cost Growth?
• Proper scoping of projects early in conceptual design to provide executable
program plans
• Require better Basis of Estimate
– Require proposers to show relevant actuals from prior missions at the subsystem
level
– “Relevant actuals” means Mass, Power, Cost, Schedule
– Risk assessment and quantification of risk
• Independent validation of instrument resources, and the resulting spacecraft
resources needed to meet mission requirements, would allow more accurate
estimates
• Increase reserves is one possible solution
– Reduces number of missions per year
– Costs will likely rise to beyond the new reserves after a short time.
• Incentivize contracts
– Large rewards to Center/Team for performing to initial budget/schedule
– Punishment
• Easy to apply to Corporations: take away fee, cost share any overruns, etc.
• Difficult to apply to NASA Centers
27

28. The author wishes to express sincere appreciation to Robert E. Bitten and Debra L.
Emmons, The Aerospace Corporation, for their help in the preparation of this presentation.
Electronic copies of this and the two previous studies referenced on slide 2 may be obtained
by sending an email to
claude.freaner@nasa.gov
28