The View from NSF

1. The View from NSF LSC - Hanford, WA 19–22 August 2002 Beverly K. Berger and Tom Lucatorto • GP Funding FY 2002 • NSF Funding Prospects FY 2003 • Funding Opportunities for GWP • Some Areas of Special Interest LIGO-G020303-00-M

2. Funding 2002 Budget ($M) Gravitational waves are predicted by Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity. To date there has been no direct observation of gravitational waves. LIGO is designed to accomplish this and then to use gravitational waves to explore the most exotic structures in the universe. The technique used by LIGO to achieve this goal will be described by the LIGO Deputy Director and Construction Project Manager, Dr. Gary Sanders in the following talk. • Gravity Program fared much better than most PHY Programs A $300M construction project requiring development of new technologies to meet a design sensitivity several orders of magnitude better than any yet achieved. MRE account created to protect single and few investigator research programs from being squeezed out of existence by the requirements of the much larger LIGO program.

3. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. GP Detailed Distribution • Most of the 11% initial Core base reduction, reported at March LSC Meeting, was restored to the GP base from PHY reserves • Additional NSF Gravitational Research Funding in FY02: - Center for GW Physics (PFC) - Two GW source simulation projects (ITR) - LIGO participation in two ongoing Grid projects (ITR)

4. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. FY 2003 - in Process • President’s request submitted to Congress in January • President’s budget has small increase for LIGO • House Budget Authorization bill passed 397 to 25

5. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Funding Opportunities: 2003 Gravity Program • Submission to “PHY Support for LIGO Research”* • Target date: September 25, 2002 • Proposals to LIGO Lab for review (with PI permission) • Presentation by PI or team to LIGO PAC • Independent NSF Review * Note on commissioning activities in proposals– Stress importance to LIGO success and creative aspects.

6. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Additional Funding Opportunities: Other Programs • Information Technology Research (ITR) Program – Announcement due very soon • Major Research Instrumentation (MRI) Program • Special opportunities for undergraduate and (possibly) minority serving institutions • PHY share depends on total amount requested in submissions to PHY • Undergraduate institutions: RUI and ROA Programs http://www.ehr.nsf.gov/crssprgm/rui/start.shtm

7. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. Areas of Special Interest 2002-3 • Anticipating Advanced LIGO • LIGO Outreach development • Identifying GWP opportunities in the ITR, MRI, and RUI Programs • Encouraging National interest in NASA/NSF/DoE coordination in gravity research: - Joint NSF/NASA Task Group on GW Computation - Turner Report “From Quarks to the Cosmos”

8. I will illustrate the oversight issues that have required attention over the years, and the procedures that were devloped to address them by referring to a few of the to the items included in this brief history of LIGO. Even this “brief history” fills several slides and I don’t expect that you will be able to absorb it all as they flash by, but if you are interested we can supply copies. In compiling this history, I have used the Lifecycle of Large Facility Projects (LLFP) presented in the NSF’s new Large Facility Projects Management and Oversight Plan on which to map the equivalent stages in the development of LIGO. So on each of the brief history slides the black letters are my description of the LIGO development and the blue letters refer to the LLFP stages. My purpose in doing this is to demonstrate that the new Facility Management Plan is mostly based on a model that was developed by NSF staff and has been used successfully for a long time. There were reviews conducted by various panels during these early and these led to NSFauthorization for the MIT and Caltech scientists to appoint a project director. NASA/NSF Cooperation on GW Computation • Task group report has been made available to both agencies (http://astrogravs.gsfs.nasa.gov). • GW source simulations are regarded by both NASA and NSF as an important area for cooperation. • Time scales and formats for actual cooperative programs are under consideration.

9. Turner Report Observes that: -“More that ever before, astronomical discoveries are driving the frontiers of physics, and more than ever before our knowledge of physics is driving the understanding of the universe and its contents. ” and recommends: - “the agencies [DoE, NASA & NSF] proceed with an advanced technology program to develop instruments capable of detecting GWs from the early universe”

10. Present Outlook • NSF awaits proposal for Advanced LIGO • President’s budget requests a decrease for PHY, but Congressional sentiment strongly supportive of large increases for NSF and for MPS • LIGO Lab support will increase but amount depends on final budget.