NASA's science directorate spent about $76 million on mission concept studies during its last decadal survey cycle without fully accounting for them, and the agency's inspector general now wants that changed before the next round of surveys shapes billions in mission spending. The NASA Office of Inspector General report IG-27-001, dated October 19, 2026, found that the Science Mission Directorate (SMD) has kept the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) at arm's length while paying for the surveys. The audit closes with eight recommendations to the SMD Associate Administrator, and NASA management concurred with all of them.
The decadal surveys are the science community's consensus wish lists for each of NASA's science divisions. Congress directed NASA to contract with NASEM for them in the 2008 and 2022 authorization acts, and the OIG notes that survey recommendations steered NASA's investments of billions of dollars in missions such as the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope and Mars Sample Return. For the latest cycle, SMD spent about $16 million on task orders for the Astrophysics, Biological and Physical Sciences, Earth Science, Heliophysics, and Planetary Science surveys, which cover 2017 to 2033.
Why NASA Kept Its Distance From the National Academies
The OIG traced most of its findings to one deliberate choice. "NASA’s approach to managing the decadal survey process has generally been hands-off in practice and by design, mostly out of concern for preserving the independence of the subsequent recommendations," the report states. That independence gives the surveys their weight with Congress, but the OIG found it also leaves NASA and NASEM with few ways to talk to each other during a process that often takes two years.
The practical result shows up at the end of each survey. NASA receives few interim updates before a prepublication report that can run past 700 pages, and SMD officials told auditors they routinely had fewer than 10 days to read it before public release. Division officials reported "inflexible processes, unrealistic budget expectations, and unactionable recommendations," according to the audit.
The volume of recommendations has also climbed. One SMD division received 4 recommendations in its 2010s survey and 26 in its 2020s survey, the OIG found, and those recommendations were more complex while the division operated with a similar staff and budget.
Two Research Campaigns Bigger Than the Division's Budget
The sharpest example of mismatch came from the Biological and Physical Sciences division. Its latest survey recommended two research campaigns that would each require $100 million to $400 million per year for 10 years. "The cost for just one of these campaigns for one year exceeds the division’s entire annual budget, which was $85 million for fiscal year 2023," the OIG wrote.
An SMD official told auditors the division was surprised by the recommendations and opted to tackle the campaigns "piecemeal."
The audit tied part of the problem to contracting. Statements of task for the surveys did not contain performance metrics, according to the OIG, and the lack of lessons learned limited NASA's ability to tell NASEM what it needs. That gap, the report says, contributed to "surprising and unrealistic recommendations."
How $76 Million in Mission Studies Dwarfs the $16 Million Survey Contracts
The money NASA pays NASEM directly is only part of the bill. Mission concept studies, which define mission designs, assess technical readiness and identify risks before the survey committees weigh them, carry their own costs. SMD could provide cost data for 28 such studies from the Astrophysics, Heliophysics, and Planetary Science divisions, totaling approximately $76 million during their last survey cycle. The OIG calculated that figure at "nearly 5 times the approximately $16 million spent on the task orders to conduct the last five division decadal surveys."
NASA does not fully account for those costs or for the staff time divisions devote to the surveys, the OIG found. In its response to the cost-tracking recommendation, NASA said SMD "will examine the feasibility of options for tracking costs associated with decadal survey processes (including the costs associated with staff time)," with an estimated completion date of May 31, 2028.
Who Tracks Whether Recommendations Get Done?
The OIG found that NASA does not track the progress SMD divisions make on most decadal survey recommendations. Division officials pointed to NASEM's midterm assessment as their main tracking tool. The auditors rejected that as sufficient: "NASEM officials stated they do not view themselves as accountability managers, and we believe waiting 5 years to review recommendation status limits NASA’s ability to assess and respond more agilely to technological developments or changes."
Internally, SMD lacks formal guidance, routine lessons learned and sufficient resources to standardize how divisions prepare for and respond to the surveys, according to the report. The OIG said that leaves NASA failing to share best practices or preserve institutional knowledge as staff who worked the last cycle depart.
The eight recommendations direct the SMD Associate Administrator to:
- put performance metrics and progress deliverables in all survey task orders and statements of task;
- work with NASEM on interim reports and early sight of potential recommendations;
- work with NASEM to streamline survey development and the report timeline;
- plan and conduct routine formal lessons-learned reviews with NASEM;
- account for mission concept study costs and other division costs tied to the surveys;
- track recommendation status and share it with division staff who work with NASEM;
- issue SMD-wide guidance for preparing for and responding to the surveys; and
- formalize internal knowledge capture and lessons learned after each survey.
The OIG considers management's comments responsive. The recommendations are resolved and will be closed once the corrective actions are completed and verified. The audit summary also appears on Oversight.gov, which states that "NASA is not comprehensively capturing progress, costs, and resources required for the decadal survey process."
What It Means for Contractors
Decadal survey priorities flow directly into NASA science mission budgets, so changes to how SMD manages the process could reach the firms that build spacecraft, instruments and ground systems. Three effects are plausible.
First, mission concept study work may face more scrutiny. If SMD begins accounting for those studies alongside the NASEM task orders, as recommendation 5 calls for, study costs would become visible line items that divisions must justify against survey value. Firms that support concept design teams should be ready for closer cost reporting.
Second, if SMD adopts the first recommendation, future task orders with NASEM would carry performance metrics and progress deliverables. Earlier visibility into draft recommendations could give SMD divisions, and the industry partners that support them, more time to assess whether a proposed campaign fits a realistic budget before it becomes a published priority.
Third, formal tracking of recommendation status would create a clearer record of which survey priorities NASA is pursuing and which it has set aside. That record matters for companies planning bids years ahead. The proposed NASA Reauthorization Act of 2026, which the OIG says would direct a NASEM survey for aeronautics research and development, would extend the same process to a new segment of NASA's contractor base.
