Congress just sent NASA a monetary lifeline.

On Thursday (Jan. 15), the U.S. Senate passed a "minibus" spending bill that allocates $24.4 billion to NASA for fiscal year 2026 (FY26), which began on Oct. 1. The House of Representatives passed the same legislation last week, which means the bill now just needs President Donald Trump's signature to become law.

And the president is expected to sign, according to the nonprofit Planetary Society, even though the legislation is a rejection of the deep cuts Trump proposed for NASA last spring.

The president's 2026 budget proposal allocated just $18.8 billion to NASA, a 24% reduction from 2025 levels. The deepest cuts were to the agency's science programs, which had their funding slashed by 47% — a figure that, if enacted, would have terminated more than 40 NASA missions.

But influential members of the House and Senate had long signaled that they were not on board with this budgetary plan — a key fact, obviously, as Congress controls the nation's purse strings.

And they backed their words up with votes over the past week: The minibus passed the House 397-28 and the Senate 82-15.

The legislation consists of three appropriations bills, called Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies (which deals with funding for NASA and the National Science Foundation); Energy and Water Development; and Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies.

"Today, we sent funding bills to the president's desk that reject the steep cuts he wanted and protect investments that families across America depend on every day," Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), vice chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee and ranking member of the Energy and Water Development Subcommittee, said in a statement on Thursday.

"This package saves a key program to save families on their energy bills, sustains our investments in scientific research, and protects essential funding for our public lands and Tribes, among so much else," she added.

The new legislation almost completely rejects Trump's deep cuts to NASA science. The White House proposed just $3.9 billion for the agency's Science Mission Directorate for FY26, but the minibus allocates $7.25 billion — just a 1% drop from enacted 2025 levels.

The new funding saves dozens of missions that were slated to be terminated under the White House's budget proposal, including the Da Vinci and VERITAS Venus probes (which have yet to launch) and the New Horizons Pluto mission, the Juno Jupiter orbiter and the OSIRIS-APEX asteroid project (which are all operational in deep space).

One big-ticket item remains canceled, however: Mars Sample Return (MSR), NASA's planned campaign to bring to Earth pieces of the Red Planet collected by its Perseverance rover. But the baseline MSR architecture has faced delays and cost overruns for a while now, and NASA is already looking for new ways to get the samples home.

The newly passed legislation isn't the whole story on NASA's 2026 funding, by the way; the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," which Congress passed last summer, allocates $10 billion to the agency over the next six years, mostly to fund human spaceflight activities, as The Planetary Society pointed out.

"The result is that NASA will receive slightly more than $27.53 billion in FY 2026. Based on the data available in our Historical NASA Budget Data tracker, this is the largest budget for NASA since FY 1998, when adjusted for inflation," Jack Kiraly, director of government relations at The Planetary Society, wrote in an update on Thursday.

Congress is not on board with President Donald Trump's deep NASA budget cuts.

The White House allocated just $18.8 billion to the space agency — a 24% decrease from the previous year's funding — in its 2026 federal budget request, which was released last spring. The cuts were particularly harsh toward NASA's science portfolio, which was given just $3.9 billion — a drop of about 75%.

However, the federal budget request is just that: a request. Congress controls the nation's purse strings, and lawmakers just threw NASA a lifeline.

On Monday (Jan. 5), the House of Representatives and the Senate released a budget plan that would give the agency $24.4 billion in fiscal year 2026, which started on Oct. 1.

Much of the restored funding would go to NASA science programs.

"The bill rejects the administration’s devastating proposal to cut NASA Science by 47% and terminate 55 operating and planned missions. It instead provides $7.25 billion," a Senate bill summary states.

The budget plan is not the last word, however. The House and the Senate still need to vote on the bill — actions that could take place as soon as this week and the week after, respectively, according to Ars Technica's Eric Berger. President Trump would then need to sign it.

The restored science funding includes $500 million for the Dragonfly mission to Saturn's huge moon Titan. Dragonfly, which is targeting a 2028 launch, will use a rotorcraft to search for intriguing prebiotic chemicals on Titan, the only world beyond Earth known to harbor stable liquid on its surface.

The bill also provides $300 million to finish work on the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, which could launch as soon as this fall to study dark energy and galaxy and star formation.

But a very big-ticket NASA campaign does not get a reprieve: The bill doesn't support the current construction of Mars sample return, an effort that has suffered multiple delays and cost overruns over the years.

If the agency wants to bring home pristine pieces of the Red Planet — which have already been collected by the Perseverance rover — it will likely have to come up with a new way to do so.

For an agency shooting for the moon and onward to Mars, NASA in 2025 has been on a roller coaster ride of proposed budget cuts, personnel layoffs, and potential elimination of science missions.

A key question: Have these various traumas changed NASA dramatically, and potentially permanently?

Battle lines are being drawn and now Congress has to spin up their views as to the space agency's overall stability and, indeed, its future. As for what's ahead, it's all sausage making — political style. The outcome for NASA is literally a to-be-determined matter of time and space.

Corporate/agency history

"Clearly, things have changed," said Henry Hertzfeld, a research professor of space policy and international affairs at George Washington University's Elliott School of International Affairs, noting that his observations are from afar, not from within the space agency.

"A lot of very experienced people with a lot of 'corporate/agency history' are now gone from the agency. Some may have retired soon anyway, but that is not an excuse or explanation of the changes," Hertzfeld told Space.com.

Since the whole policy office at NASA was eliminated, said Hertzfeld, many of those people and functions are gone. Whether, for example, economics and other policy offices will be missed or not is arguable, he said.

"But I do think not having them is a significant loss of talent and input into NASA programs and decisions," Hertzfeld said.

Long-term loss

Like many suggest, if Congress doesn't act with funding, the real loss is in the science area.

"There will be fewer new initiatives and many cuts in the work that now won't be done across the board," said Hertzfeld.

"The science part of NASA is relatively small but it is the one true research area that has produced significant learning and information over the years. And, it will be a long-term loss since the agency will likely face more difficulty in hiring and keeping highly trained and skilled scientists," Hertzfeld said. "They will go elsewhere … and elsewhere is not the government."

Investment dollars

Hertzfeld said that one less well understood impact is the rapid funding of various defense and security space efforts.

"We read about the significant increase in private sector investment activity oriented toward space. But what is really happening is that the Department of Defense spending on buying more from companies is the main driver of these investment dollars," said Hertzfeld. "NASA programs and needs are no longer the main stimulus for 'commercial' space activity."

The resulting innovation and products for new space activities, Hertzfeld added, will primarily benefit the security aspects and not so much the civil space programs. "Thus, the aggregate commercial and government space sector will benefit, but quite differently from what we experienced in history," he said.

Heightening concerns

Keith Cowing is founder of the private NASA overseer website, NASA Watch. He is passionate about the space agency's revered history and its future.

"While every NASA field center saw workforce reductions of around 20%, perhaps no center was more drastically affected by budget cuts than NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center," pointed out Cowing.

There was a long term plan in place that would have morphed Goddard over the course of nearly a decade to better adapt it to future NASA needs, Cowing told Space.com. That plan was co-opted by Administration personnel in place at NASA Headquarters, he said, to accelerate and expand Goddard facility closures that will result in half of the center's buildings and laboratories being mothballed, he said.

"These cuts are a standout when compared to changes elsewhere at NASA," Cowing said, "so much so that the House Oversight and House Science, Space and Technology committees sent repeated inquiries to NASA asking for an explanation."

The result is that "NASA has been slow to respond, thus heightening concerns about the overall impact on NASA science programs as presented by the White House in its FY 2026 budget request," Cowing said.

Tremendous challenge

Marcia Smith is founder and editor of the informative SpacePolicyOnline.com

NASA is not "crippled," Smith said, but time will tell the effects of the loss of personnel.

"I certainly don't know the names and positions of all the 4,000 or so people who left, but of the people I personally know, they were the best of the best," Smith advised. "Now, surely, a lot of terrific people are still there, but how they're going to manage to execute whatever programs remain with so many excellent colleagues gone will be a tremendous challenge."

Both what's happening at the NASA Goddard field center and given layoffs of Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) talent, "is extremely worrisome to American leadership in space science," said Smith.

Smith observed that it may well be the effect on morale is the most dramatic effect.

"People who have spent their lives keeping America as the world leader in civil space science and technology basically being told their work is valueless and can be erased with the wave of a 'DOGE wand.' That's tough," Smith said.

DOGE stands for the Department of Government Efficiency, a special commission put in place by President Donald Trump, established to slash federal spending.

Years to rebuild

NASA does what no other organization — public or private — can do, said Jack Kiraly, director of government relations for the Planetary Society, a member-funded nonprofit organization based in Pasadena, California that's dedicated to advancing space science and exploration.

"The agency has led the world in the exploration of space, redefining our understanding of the universe, and inspiring countless innovations in science and technology," Kiraly told Space.com.

Kiraly sees the events of 2025 as a profound shock to NASA and the space community.

"The agency will begin the new year with a civil servant workforce smaller than what it had at the dawn of human spaceflight in 1961. Nearly 4,000 scientists, engineers and space professionals have left the agency through pressured resignation and layoffs amid rapid reorganizations and funding uncertainty," said Kiraly.

That action represents a loss of specialized expertise and institutional knowledge that will take years to rebuild, added Kiraly.

Pivotal moment

Beyond the immediate impacts, said Kiraly, the termination of NASA awards valued at more than $315 million and the reduction of future research opportunities have disrupted the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) pipeline that trains the next generation of scientists, engineers, and innovators.

Because NASA's activities involve every state and more than 75% of congressional districts, these effects will be felt nationwide, Kiraly said.

"The damage is real, but it doesn't have to be permanent," Kiraly said. "Congress has, in a bipartisan way, signaled to the White House and the public that they intend to fully fund NASA in 2026, rejecting the worst of the cuts proposed earlier this year."

And given the confirmation of Jared Isaacman to be NASA's Administrator "brings new leadership and momentum at a pivotal moment for the agency," Kiraly concluded.

BREMEN, Germany — The European Space Agency member states have approved a record-breaking budget for the agency's next three-year period, including an increase in funding for science exploration and dual-use technologies for security and defense.

The budget of nearly 22.1 billion Euros ($25.63 billion) was agreed upon at the European Space Agency's (ESA) Ministerial Council — a high-level conference of its 23 member states held every three years — which took place in Bremen, Germany from Nov. 25 to Nov. 27. The funding pledged by the member states will cover the period between 2026 and 2028 and is more than 5 billion Euros ($5.8 billion) higher than that subscribed for the previous budgetary period.

ESA's Director General Josef Aschbacher described the outcome of the summit as "outstanding" and sending an important message to Europe. The decision comes as Europe takes stock of its critical technologies amid rising geopolitical tensions and continued chaos around the future direction of ESA's key partner, NASA.

The squabble over NASA's 2026 budget is leaving several joint science and exploration projects in uncertainty as the vision for the American space agency put forward by President Trump cuts funding for multiple international collaborations.

Despite the funding increase, ESA's budget is still way below that of NASA. In fact, it is way below even the $18.8 billion offering proposed by the Trump administration for 2026, which presents a reduction of $6 billion compared to the 2025 budget.

Still, ESA hopes its new record-breaking budget will help Europe make important steps toward the continent's sovereignty and autonomy in critical infrastructure including space launch systems and secure communications. These two areas have been particular pain points for Europe, which has lost its edge in rocket technology to SpaceX's Falcon 9 and has a long way to go to catch up with the company's Starlink internet-beaming mega-constellation. Investment into launch vehicle development makes up the highest portion of ESA's new budget — 4.439 billion Euros ($5.15 billion) over the next three years, up 1.604 billion ($1.86 billion) compared to the triennial budget agreed in 2022.

Boost to science amid NASA chaos

Most importantly, ESA member states, for the first time in years, increased their spending on science missions, a sharp diversion from the Trump vision for NASA, which made massive sacrifices in science funding.

ESA will have 3.787 billion Euros ($4.39 billion) for its science project in the coming budgetary period, up 600 million Euros ($696 million) compared to the 2022 budget. The member states also pledged an additional 328 million Euros ($380 million) to ESA's PRODEX program, which develops innovative science experiments and technologies.

"We have managed to come out from a relatively flat curve and we will increase [the science funding] in 2026, 2027 and 2028 by 3.5 percent per year in addition to inflation," Aschbacher said in a press briefing. "This is a very important signal that with this budget, we can really focus on the backbone of the ESA program, which is the science program."

Self-reliance

ESA executives hinted during the summit that the agency intends to become more self-reliant in the future. ESA has suffered painful setbacks in its international collaborations and although it still continues to seek partnerships, it will work toward securing all technologies "on the critical path" domestically, one ESA executive told Space.com on the sidelines of the conference.

The life-hunting ExoMars Rosalind Franklin rover is a prime example of such a fraught collaboration. First conceived as a partnership with NASA, Europe's first Martian rover became a joint project with Russia in 2012 after budget cuts imposed by the Obama administration forced NASA to withdraw. Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022, however, forced ESA to halt that partnership just a few months before a planned launch.

ESA member states subsequently had to invest an additional 360 million Euros ($417 million US) into the mission to build a new landing platform to replace the one made by Russia. NASA at that time stepped back in, offering to pay for a launcher and provide a few components not available in Europe. Trump's budget proposal, however, cut that funding, leaving ESA once again in uncertainty. In the latest twist of events, Aschbacher said NASA had confirmed its commitment to the mission in a letter received on the eve of the Bremen meeting.

A further 19 science missions could be hit by the Trump-proposed budget cuts. The Laser Interferometer Space Antenna (LISA) gravitational wave observatory, the Venus orbiter EnVision and the proposed X-ray telescope New Athena all count on significant NASA contributions.

ESA's Director of Science Carole Mundell told Space.com that ESA is working on a rescue plan for all three of those missions and estimates it would have to invest an additional 900 million Euros ($1.043 billion) over a ten-year period to get them all off the ground without NASA. That funding is not part of the latest science budget as most hope that at least some of the cancelled collaborations will be reinstated by the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.

During its upcoming budget period, ESA wants to develop a proposal for a mission to land on the pole of Saturn's moon Enceladus to search for life under its icy crust. That mission would launch in 2042 in order to reach Enceladus in 2053 when the positions of Saturn and Enceladus are favorable.

New future for Orion Service Module and Earth Return Orbiter

ESA's budget for human and robotic space exploration received only a minor boost compared to 2022 and will have just a little under 3 billion Euros ($3.5 billion) to work with in the next three years.

Most of ESA's exploration activities, including its presence at the International Space Station, are done in cooperation with NASA. But the agency's Director for Human and Robotic Exploration Daniel Neuenschwander told Space.com that here, too, ESA would work to strengthen its position.

"The three billion of support for exploration activities will serve to increase our own capabilities," Neuenschwander said. "It's very simple. If you want to be a partner sitting at the table and not to be on the menu, you need your own capabilities."

ESA develops the service module, which provides power, propulsion and atmosphere regeneration for NASA's Orion spacecraft, designed to take Artemis astronauts to the moon. That program, however, is another victim of Trump's proposed NASA budget cuts. Currently, NASA expects to discontinue Orion and its launching rocket, the Space Launch System, after the Artemis 6 mission in the early 2030s and replace the combo with commercial vehicles. Neuenschwander said ESA would study options to convert the service module into a multi-purpose space tug to keep the technology in use.

The new funding will also allow ESA to repurpose the Earth Return Orbiter which was to bring back to Earth samples collected by NASA's Perseverance Mars rover. The Mars Sample Return mission was axed by the Trump administration, and although it might be reinstated by the Congress, ESA's plan is to use the technology for a new Mars-orbiting mission. Called ZefERO, the mission would launch in 2032, study Martian geology and atmosphere, and serve as a communication relay for rovers on the Red Planet's surface.

The agency will also continue with the development of components of the Lunar Gateway, a space station foreseen to orbit the moon from 2027, and the lunar lander called Argonaut, designed to place around 3,300 lb (1,500 kilograms) of cargo on the moon's surface.

At the conference, Aschbacher announced that the first European astronaut to fly to the moon with one of the future Artemis missions will be from Germany, ESA's currently largest budget contributor.

Further programs that received significant funding increases include Earth observation, connectivity and secure communications and navigation. ESA previously announced plans to develop a low-Earth-orbit navigation constellation to serve as a back-up to Europe's alternative to GPS — the Galileo global navigation satellite system.

The member states also approved the European Resilience from Space (ERS) program, which will include communications and Earth observation satellites serving defense-related purposes. The ERS program received $1.39 billion in funding from the member states, many of which have previously announced substantial boosts to domestic spending on space defense technologies.

The program is a response to rising tensions with Russia and Europe's acknowledgement of its dependencies on American space defense assets. For ESA, however, ERS is a major departure from its founding document, the Convention, which explicitly states the Agency is dedicated exclusively to peaceful purposes.

Chants of "Save NASA!" echoed through downtown Washington, D.C., Monday(Sept. 15) as agency workers and supporters rallied outside NASA headquarters. Carrying signs and repeating calls, protestors urged lawmakers to protect the space agency's future.

It was the third such demonstration this summer, and part of a campaign organized by NASA Needs Help that the group says is growing as the budget fight intensifies. Demonstrators warned that layoffs, mission shutdowns and the loss of union rights are already sinking morale and threatening safety across NASA centers.

Protestors argued that the agency is being hollowed out before Congress finalizes NASA's next budget, and that the damage to science and the U.S. space program could be irreparable. "Like other federal employees, the people of NASA have suffered months of attacks on their work," one protest organizer, Helen, who did not provide a last name, told the gathered crowd through a microphone. "They've endured shortsighted decisions, paralyzing uncertainty, and a steady erosion of the very expertise that makes these missions possible."

At the center of their concerns is President Donald Trump's proposed fiscal year 2026 (FY 26) budget. The White House's plan would reduce NASA's overall funding by nearly a quarter, slash science programs almost in half, and cancel 41 active or planned science missions, including spacecraft already operating in Earth orbit and beyond.

Protestors warn that those cuts threaten not just individual projects but also NASA's position as the world leader in science and innovation. Several in attendance Monday took the opportunity to address the crowd, arguing that canceling active missions wastes taxpayer dollars already spent and undermines relationships with international partners who have invested their own time and resources in such projects.

Colette Delwalla, executive director of Stand Up For Science, framed the threat as an attack on American ideology. "NASA is a tangible product of the greatest expression of the American dream," she said. "All of humanity has mused about reaching into the stars, and through decades of unified support by Congress, by presidents and the American public, we've done it. Dismantling this American institution is a travesty that no one voted for."

Delwalla argued that the U.S. is on the verge of relinquishing its global leadership in science, "in exchange for tax cuts for the ultrawealthy."

"We didn't accidentally land on the moon," Delwalla said. "We did it through unified investment in science, and we cannot separate the benefits of science from that investment."

But those benefits are already walking out the door. Since January, at least 4,000 employees have departed NASA through layoffs, early retirements and voluntary separations through the Trump administration's deferred resignation programs (DRPs). Protestors fear that includes an institutional knowledge base that may not be recoverable.

The group's pleas haven't gone unnoticed on Capitol Hill. Rep. Suhas Subramanyam (D-Va.), a member of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, addressed protestors Monday, telling the crowd that the people at NASA are central to U.S. leadership.

"NASA is one of the best investments we can make in our country, and NASA's workforce is critical to making our country great," he said. "We have to fully fund NASA in our budget, return those 4,000 jobs back to NASA and continue to support science all across this country."

The protest also spotlighted an Aug. 28 executive order signed by Trump that eliminated collective bargaining rights at NASA and a handful of other federal agencies in the name of national security. Union representatives at Monday's demonstration said the order has already forced the cancellation of contracts, the closure of union offices and an end to payroll dues contributions.

An area vice president for the Goddard Engineers, Scientists and Technicians Association (GESTA), Monica Gorman, said the order is creating a climate of uncertainty and fear. She warned that undermining unions isn't only about job protections — it directly threatens mission safety as well.

Gorman pointed to past tragedies like the Apollo 1 fire and the Challenger and Columbia space shuttle accidents, arguing that creating an environment in which engineers and technicians feel silenced prevents problems from being raised before they turn into disasters. "If they don't have the trust that they can speak up and bring those concerns forward without retaliation, then those concerns get buried, and people will die," she said.

Matthew Biggs, president of the International Federation of Professional & Technical Engineers, said the union crackdown is part of a larger effort to make it easier for the administration to reduce NASA's workforce. "They're literally evicting our unions from their office space," Biggs said, calling Trump "the number one union-busting president in U.S. history."

Biggs pointed at NASA's headquarters adjacent to the protest area, saying that it's "NASA leadership that's right in this building right here that's implementing what Trump wants them to do."

A NASA representative confirmed to Space.com that the agency was aware of the protest. "NASA is not affiliated with the demonstration outside the agency's headquarters building in Washington on Monday. This activity was permitted by the Metropolitan Police Department," the spokesperson wrote in an email.

Representatives of other federal agencies showed up to add their voices to the union frustrations. National Institutes of Health (NIH) geneticist Mollie Manier turned her remarks toward Congress, arguing for a strong continuing resolution (CR) to extend last year's funding levels.

Lawmakers face a Sept. 30 deadline to pass a funding bill for FY 26 or else face a government shutdown. If they don't reach an agreement, passing a CR will keep agencies operating. A "clean CR," Manier explained, continues existing budgets with no changes. A "dirty CR" adds policy "poison pills" that can alter or weaken agency programs.

Manier said Congress needs to go further, pressing for what she described as a "fighting CR." Citing a "dirty CR" passed by Congress in March, Manier said, "This time needs to be different. This time we want Congress to pass a fighting CR that not only keeps the lights on but includes checks on this administration's authoritarian overreach and protections for institutions, including fully funding NASA, NIH, science, and provides protections for federal workers and due process and civil liberties."

Jack Kiraly, who has long spearheaded the effort to raise awareness about cuts to NASA programs, was the final scheduled speaker at Monday's demonstration. Kiraly, the director of government relations for the nonprofit Planetary Society, assured protestors that their efforts are having real impacts. "Your advocacy is working," he said. "We have budgets in the House and Senate that keep NASA fully funded … Both sides understand what NASA means for jobs, for inspiration, and for America's leadership in science."

Kiraly compared the early wins in Congress to a political campaign gaining traction. "This is like winning the first straw poll or winning the first debate. It means the message is working," he said. "Republicans, Democrats, Independents — everyone I've met with on the Hill understands what NASA represents."

With days remaining before the Sept. 30 deadline, Kiraly urged protestors to keep up the pressure in Washington and at NASA centers across the country.

Organizers stressed that Congress' actions in the coming weeks will determine not only whether jobs and missions are saved, but whether the U.S. retains its scientific authority and space exploration dominance.

A day after the protest, two more lawmakers added their voices to the effort, sending a bipartisan letter to the House Appropriations Committee urging the body to safeguard NASA funding at FY 25 levels. In it, Reps. Judy Chu (Democrat, CA-28) and Don Bacon (Republican, NE-02) warned that "without a [CR] anomaly providing guidance on the NASA budget … a budgetary interruption of this magnitude would be devastating and poses a number of serious concerns that will affect every state and nearly every congressional district."

The Mars science community is concerned that the growing costs of NASA's Mars 2020 rover mission could reduce the funds available for other robotic missions, according to a presentation that took place during a meeting of NASA's Planetary Science Advisory Committee.

The two-day meeting, which was held in late September in Washington and livestreamed, featured presentations from various groups in the planetary science community examining mission options and science goals for exploration of planets, exoplanets and the Earth. Mars 2020 is a flagship-class mission, or one of NASA's most expensive and robust space-exploration endeavors, with a total cost estimate of $2.46 billion, according to NASA's latest budget request. The mission's launch is practically imminent, targeted for no earlier than July 2020. What comes next is still being determined.

Planetary geologist Aileen Yingst, who is with the Planetary Science Institute, said in a presentation that the community is concerned about the cost growth for Mars 2020 and how that could affect other Mars missions. Yingst is co-investigator on the SHERLOC spectrometer and WATSON sidekick camera on the Mars 2020 rover, as well as chair of the Mars Exploration Program Analysis Group (MEPAG), a team of planetary science experts that helps NASA figure out science priorities for Mars exploration. 

Related: 4 Mars Missions Are One Year Away from Launching to the Red Planet

While Yingst (who was representing MEPAG in the presentation) said the community supports Mars 2020, there are concerns about how the mission's budget overruns could be affecting other priorities for Mars exploration. For example, although Yingst did not state this directly, NASA will soon need to order a new Mars orbiter to relay communications between  rovers and Earth, because the existing spacecraft orbiting Mars are aging and nearing the end of their lives.

Cost vs. science return

It's common for large, technical space projects to go beyond their cost estimates, in part because the instruments and hardware being developed are so new. Flagship projects such as the James Webb Space Telescope (which may launch in 2021) and the Hubble Space Telescope (which has been operating for 30-plus years, with the help of several astronaut repair teams) far exceeded the cost mark set in their initial budget discussions. 

Proponents often argue that the science returns on these over-budget and often-overdue projects do justify the cost. For example, NASA's Curiosity Mars rover, which found evidence of ancient water within weeks after landing in 2012, faced its own overrun, from $1.6 billion to $2.5 billion. And it was two years late in launching. But the rover is still doing work on Mars and has found extensive evidence of water reshaping the landscape in Gale Crater, year after year. In the realm of telescopic missions, Hubble's observations have led to numerous new insights about the universe, including the Nobel-prize-winning discovery that the universe is accelerating in its expansion.

In a statement emailed to Space.com, NASA said it's keeping an eye on Mars 2020. The mission is meant to cache promising samples of Red Planet soil — samples that could have evidence that Mars held life in the ancient past — for return back to Earth on a future mission as soon as the 2030s.

"While challenges contributing to cost growth are not uncommon for a Mars surface mission of this complexity, we continue to evaluate the cost impact [of Mars 2020]," said Lori Glaze, NASA's director of planetary science, in a statement emailed to Space.com.

"Entering into this new fiscal year," Glaze continued, "NASA will endeavor to ensure this project has sufficient funding to guard against programmatically disruptive delays. We have a robust Mars science budget, and we are not only looking forward to the exciting astrobiology results of Mars 2020, but we're also excited to be taking the next steps onward to the first Mars sample-return mission."

Years of budgetary growth

The cost of Mars 2020 has been growing for a while. The initial proposed cost for the rover, when the mission was announced in 2012, was $1.5 billion. Six years on, a 2018 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report showed that the cost had soared to $2.46 billion. And in NASA's latest budget, the overrun looks set to grow by as much as 15% (or about another $360 million) beyond that last 2018 estimate, although the latest numbers are yet to be confirmed.

Glaze explained that Mars 2020 is developed with a close eye to the overall goals of NASA's Mars exploration program, a process that "relies on robust dialogue with the community and the National Academy’s solar system decadal surveys to ensure the science goals are prioritized accordingly." (The National Academy of Sciences is a scientific advisory board in the United States that provides advice on future research directions).

Mars 2020's contributions to the overall program include attempting to determine whether life existed on Mars, exploring the Red Planet's climate and geology, and preparing for possible human missions in the 2030s, according to NASA. 

The agency's Red Planet science-exploration program, including Mars 2020, is "strongly supported by the community," with each mission to the Red Planet building upon the knowledge of past missions. Indeed, in the rover sequence alone, Mars 2020 will be the fifth NASA rover to reach the surface of Mars, after Sojourner, Spirit, Opportunity and Curiosity, which each probed aspects of the planet's watery past. 

Yet the GAO report singled out Mars 2020 and three other NASA programs (such as NASA's Space Launch System megarocket) for "technical challenges that were compounded by risky programmatic decisions," such as holding the critical design review earlier than usual.

"The Mars 2020 project held its critical design review before it had a stable design, at which point it had released about 72% of its expected design drawings," the GAO said. "Project officials stated that they held the design review earlier than normal to avoid delaying the development of heritage technologies, which make up a large percentage of the Mars 2020 rover. As a result of holding the review early, new and highly complex developments were not stable at the time of the design review."

The result was cost growth on two instruments: one on the rover's entry, descent and landing system (which faced unexpected integration challenges) and a technology-demonstration instrument to convert carbon dioxide to oxygen, which proved tougher to develop than expected.

More cost growth in 2019

By March 2019, the mission was facing even more cost growth only 16 months before its expected launch window, which opens in July 2020. This cost growth was rumored for months in the planetary science community but became clear only in NASA's fiscal year 2020 budget proposal, according to SpaceNews.

This time around, the cost growth was due to multiple development issues for several components: SHERLOC (Scanning Habitable Environments with Raman & Luminescence for Organics and Chemicals), an X-ray spectrometer called PIXL (Planetary Instrument for X-ray Lithochemistry) and a caching system designed to hold samples for a future return mission to Earth.

At the time, NASA said it would provide a more precise overrun figure around the same time the agency releases its fiscal 2019 operating plan. That was released last month but is still going through the appropriations process in the House and Senate. 

"It [the overrun] is less than 15% over the agreed-upon cost for [Mars] 2020," Glaze, who was then acting director of NASA's planetary sciences division, said during a town hall meeting March 18 at the 50th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference, according to SpaceNews. This would place the additional overrun at no more than about $360 million (or 15% of the last estimate of $2.46 billion).

•  In Photos: NASA's Mars 2020 Rover Mission to the Red Planet 
•  NASA Asks Students to Name Its Mars 2020 Rover  
•  Feel the Burn! Watch NASA's 2020 Mars Rover Do a Bicep Curl (Video) 

Follow Elizabeth Howell on Twitter @howellspace. Follow us on Twitter @Spacedotcom and on Facebook. 

SANFRANCISCO ? Although constrained budgets may spur U.S. federal agenciestoestablish collaborative space missions, these joint ventures areinherentlymore complex and result in higher overall costs than independentprojects,according to a new National Research Council report.

Thereport'sprimary recommendation is that agencies avoidcollaborative Earth-observingor space science missions, said Daniel Baker, director of theLaboratory forAtmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Colorado, Boulder,andco-chairman of the NRC committee that drafted the Nov. 23 analysis"Assessmentof Impediments to Interagency Collaboration on Space and Earth ScienceMissions."

Ifgovernment agencies have a compelling reason to collaborateon a specific mission in spite of that warning, agencyofficials shouldtake great pains to clearly define the scope of the project as well astheroles and responsibilities of each team member, according to thereport.

Evenwhen there is a compelling reason for agencies to work together ? forexample,if one agency has unique capabilities that are deemed essential to amission?ssuccess ? the NRC report recommends ways to structure that cooperationwithoutsharing overall responsibility for the project. One agency could builda scientificinstrument for inclusion on a spacecraft built by another agency, forinstance,or two agencies might opt to share data produced by a mission insteadofjointly managing the mission, Baker said.

"Experiencehas shown that collaborative projects almost invariably lead toincreasedcosts," the NRC report said. "When additional participants join aproject, the basic costs remain, but the costs of duplicatingmanagementsystems and of managing interactions must be added."

Asa result, collaborative efforts that involve more than one U.S.governmentagency in a domesticspace program result in higher overall costs forthe U.S.government, according to the report. While international cooperativeventuresalso are more costly than independent programs, those projects can savemoneyfor the U.S. government because international partners are absorbingsome ofthe mission?s expense, the report said.

Althoughinternational cooperative projects share many of the same challenges asdomestic interagency programs, multinational efforts traditionallybenefit froma higher degree of planning at the outset, Baker said. That extensiveplanningis an important ingredient for any successful interagency partnership,according to the report.

?Inthe event of a decision to proceed with collaboration, conscious stepstomitigate risk are required at every stage of development ? fromidentificationof the potential partner agencies and assignment of their respectiveroles;through project definition, management, and acquisition; to workingwith the administrationand Congress to ensure mission success,? thereport added.

Analyzingspace agencies

Toreach its conclusions, the NRC committee studied a broad range ofdomestic andinternational collaborative efforts, including the Advanced CompositionExplorer spacecraft, a NASA satellite which provides space weather datato theNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and theNationalPolar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite System (NPOESS), anambitious mission that was managed jointly by NASA, NOAA and the U.S.DefenseDepartment to establish a spacecraft constellation capable of replacingboththe U.S. DefenseMeteorological SatelliteProgramand NOAA?s Polar Operational EnvironmentalSatellites.

TheNPOESSprogram,which was plagued by cost overruns and schedule delays, was canceled byU.S.President Barack Obama in February and replaced by two distinct effortstodevelop weather satellites to address civil and military needs.

NPOESSis the "poster child" for the problem of interagency collaboration,Baker said. ?We should have put a picture of NPOESS on the cover ofthis report.?

Inits report, the NRC panel pointed out some of the inherent challengesinNASA-NOAA partnerships.

Althoughthe two agencies have complementary missions, NASA?s program is focusedonresearch and development of space instruments, while NOAA has a widerange ofoperational and regulatory responsibilities. The two agencies work welltogether in cases where NOAA can use NASA research data and models tofulfillits responsibilities.

"Yetthe issue of the technology transfer from research to operations isstill athorny one that bears heavily on interagency collaboration," accordingtothe report. "For example, when a NASA-funded research satellite thathasproved to provide valuable data for operational applications reachesits end oflife, NASA has no research requirement (and consequently no funding) tocontinue collecting the same type of data, even though a need for thisvaluabledata still exists."

Thatwas the case when NASA?s Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometerproveduseful in detecting fires, when the space agency?s Sea-viewing WideField-of-view Sensor proved adept at spotting harmful algal bloom, andwhenNASA?s Tropical Rainfall Measurement Mission offered useful data onprecipitation, the NRC report said.

"Problemsin executing the transition to operations, in extending the lifetime ofEarth-observing missions, and in sustaining measurements over long timeperiodsin support of climate research are all examples of a misalignmentbetween NASAand NOAA roles and responsibilities and their budgets," the reportadded.

Somespace successes

Inspite of that inherent conflict, several NASA-NOAA collaborations haveworkedwell.

Thereport points to the GeostationaryOperationalEnvironmental Satellites as a successful project in whichNOAA establishesrequirements, provides funding and distributes satellite data, whileNASAoversees procurement, design, development and launch of the spacecraft.

Thereport also cites the Ocean Surface Topography Mission (OSTM), aneffort tomeasure sea-surface height, as a successful collaborative project thatrequiresa higher level of coordination among agencies. For OSTM, the Frenchspaceagency, CNES, built the spacecraft and instruments were provided byNASA andCNES.

InOctober 2008, after CNES and NASA confirmed the satellite and groundsystemwere functioning properly, operations were turned over to NOAA and theEuropeanOrganization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites. Inspite ofthat high level of coordination, the effort succeeded in part becauseNASA andNOAA had clearly defined roles, according to the report.

?        Howthe WeatherSatellite Changed theWorld

?        LawmakersCurbSpending on DefenseWeather Satellites

?        FinishingTouches Put on TroubledNPOESS Weather Satellite

Thisarticle was provided bySpace News, dedicated tocovering all aspectsof the space industry