106

THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

3. Science education

Support to higher education seems very likely to expand, with many activities of the Office of Education of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, paralleling science education activities of the Foundation. The future relations of the Office of Education and the Foundation will bear close watching. If their respective educational programs begin to compete with or unnecessarily duplicate each other, it may be necessary to inquire into some sort of unified program under a single administration.

Supporting graduate and postgraduate education in the sciences and engineering is definitely a future NSF function. To reap the most benefit, the Foundation must organize its programs to attract superior students to those scientific and engineering disciplines which look toward future application of science and technology for both public and private purposes.

4. Application of science

As the output of scientific research continues to increase, the Foundation may become more involved in improving the use of this new knowledge and understanding where the public need is involved but where other Federal agencies have yet to begin their research. One can see the Foundation bridging part of the gap between discovery and application. It may well sponsor further research in selected fields of science to establish a firm base of theoretical and quantitative understanding upon which the technologists can build new applications. Experimental engineering, in particular, will extend to demonstrations that prove the principles of new technologies. Of particular importance will be NSF support of interdisciplinary investigations of the more complex questions of the sciences.

5. Information for science

The subcommittee sees the Foundation with a more active, responsible function for Federal science information. Its research into fundamental processes of science information can be expected to improve the national science information network and to definitely identify the Foundation as a leader in the science of information, both among Federal departments and agencies, and among the nonFederal parts of the network. With increasing competence and extensive relations within the world of science information, the Foundation should become a major element of the impending effort to improve coordination of all the parts of the national information network.

6. International scientific undertakings

The Foundation can be seen as a representative of American science in international scientific undertakings. It has a great potential as principal initiator of American participation in future projects, extending beyond collaborative ventures to include the international construction and operation of facilities for basic research. This capability should be developed and should be given a freedom of action greater than it enjoys today. As suggested above, the subcommittee is especially interested in future NSF initiatives to obtain international support and sharing of costs for large basic research projects. Machines for high-energy physics already have become so large, complex, and expensive to build and to operate that joint ventures appear very

THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

107

attractive. In fields of science where other agencies have the primary interest, such as the Atomic Energy Commission in high-energy physics, the Foundation could become a catalyst, a broker, an instigator to take advantage of the possibilities of international cooperation. In addition to multilateral savings in costs, such projects could be a powerful means of increasing the dialogue among nations of differing economic and political views.

The Foundation's past experience with international scientific programs has created within it a valuable resource of experience and practical know-how for organizing and carrying out U.S. participation in future ventures. On the other hand, no appreciable expansion of NSF support to individual foreign scientists is expected unless this becomes important to foreign policy and foreign relations.

The very real and valuable competence of the Foundation in science education may well be turned to advantage in those developing countries that are willing and able to mount an effort requisite for full entry into the Scientific Age. The Foundation's future interest in the application of science would be relevant here, for countries seeking to transform themselves into industrial powers must emphasize application of science and technology until they are far enough along in later years to afford basic research.

7. Statistics and information

All of the foregoing must take place within the framework of responsible, representative government. Thus Congress and the public, as well as the executive branch, will continue to require good, reliable, current information about research and development throughout the nation, about the state of the nation's resources for scienceparticularly manpower, funds and facilities. The Foundation has an important responsibility of pulling together and correlating existing sources of information, developing new ones, and devising methods of analysis and ways of presentation of statistical data so that it is meaningful and useful for national decisions concerning science. 8. Science policy

One more aspect of the Foundation's emerging future is its role in the establishing of national policies for science and technology. This role can be best indicated by stating a few assumptions_about the future functions of the Foundation, the National Science Board, the Office of Science and Technology, the President's Science Advisory Committee and the Federal Council on Science and Technology. All of these are collectively concerned with the creation and application of science and technology, with the OST at the apex of the organizational interrelations.

The Foundation will be concerned with the state of national resources for science, including knowledge, manpower and institutions, with the National Science Board becoming increasingly active in studies that extend beyond the programs of the Foundation. One can see the Board taking on science resource studies of the kind sometimes now handled by PSAC and OST. Hence, the Board can enable them to turn more of their attention to the application of science, to scientific research in mission agencies, and to technology as these affect great national problems. In addition, an annual appraisal of science resources by the National Science Board should

108

THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

nicely complement a needed annual review by the Office of Science and Technology of the status of applied science and technology. An OST yearly report on the substance, organization, costs, programs, goals, progress of Federal science and technology could be used by the Congress as a basis for annual hearings about the national state of science and technology. By following the example of the Joint Committee on Economics with its annual hearings on the President's Economic Report, the Congress might open the way to better public debate of issues of Government and science. The Federal Council, for its part, could become a more effective means of amplifying departmental collaboration and cooperation with the Foundation in activities affecting science resources and in collecting and analyzing statistical data about them.

As a concluding thought, an aspect of science policy which can be expected to become more active during the coming decade is the interaction between Congress and the executive branch. Much of Federal planning for science ultimately comes to the fundamental questions of who decides what is to be done, where, when and for how much. Each of these questions is and will continue to be well within the boundaries of congressional interests and capabilities. Also likely to receive sustained future attention are the means and incentives to assure strong, positive interdepartmental cooperation and coordination in sciences and technologies that cut across agency jurisdictions.

CHAPTER VI

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The review of the National Science Foundation, its functions and operations which the subcommittee has thus far completed reveals a large number of possible recommendations for changing and improving the Foundation's charter. At the same time, many of the possibilities are characterized by such a variety of facets and inherent complexity as to require caution in suggesting their implementation. Accordingly, the subcommittee is limiting its findings to the following points, each of which the subcommittee believes to be supported by the evidence it has obtained during the past year from both government and non-government sources.

The findings fall into three categories:

Recommendations for changes in the organic act of the

Foundation.

Recommendations for alterations in the structure and/or practice of the Foundation's administrative machinery.

Observations which, while not in the form of recommendations, appear germane and worthy of further study and consideration.

AMENDING THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION ACT OF 1950

The subcommittee recommends that the Foundation's organic act be amended so as to

1. Give the National Science Board (NSB) almost exclusively a policymaking function in its relationship to the National Science Foundation.

This is not to suggest that the Board should become "advisory" in nature. In fact, the change is intended to make the Board more active and operational. It would, as an example, release the Board from current time-consuming requirements that it weigh and decide whether to approve large grants. Thus the Board could concentrate on policy matters which, according to testimony, are proliferating rapidly. At the same time it would lend legal sanction to what is already happening. The trend toward concentrating on policy appears to be a proper one and to be working well, but the subcommittee feels that the Board should have a clear statutory mandate from this point on. This is particularly important since NSB is the only available instrument of its kind, outside the Executive Office of the President, where across-the-board science policy may be considered and made. The development of such capabilities by an independent group in establishing Foundation policies has proved of great value to NSF. In addition, it is noted that this function of the Board could provide an extra input into the deliberations of the President and the

1 Note that not all executive and administrative functions of the Board would be removed, see 5(a), infra,

110

THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Office of Science and Technology (OST) which might be highly illuminating in view of the growth of Government-sponsored scientific research. It is the subcommittee's belief that, if properly utilized, the Board could provide valuable services to the Presidential office in the determination of many phases of Government science policy.

2. Require the Board to make an annual report on the status and health of science and its various disciplines, the report to be made to the Congress via the President.

This procedure would be especially useful to Congress, which has been demonstrating a desire for greater information on the current state of science and technology. It would result in the Congress receiving up to date information on the subject, including national scientific resources and trained manpower, and from a competent source not hitherto used by the legislative branch. Such studies should also include an assessment of basic scientific progress made during the previous year and indicate whether such progress has technological overtones or potential which might be applied to the needs of the American society. A specific date for the submission of this report should, perhaps, be set.

3. Require NSF to evaluate the status and needs of individual science disciplines across the entire scientific spectrum and report to the Board at appropriate intervals.

This would likewise be useful and perhaps necessary in helping the Board carry out its duties mentioned in #2 above. Beyond that, however, it would seem essential if NSF is going to fulfill its role as "balance wheel," since the Foundation must know where the problem areas are. It is not suggested here that NSF make such evaluations entirely by in-house methods. The Foundation should be free to employ, by grant or contract, such consulting services as might be warranted. Finally, this recommendation, if adopted, should help NSF to reacquire some of the stature which Congress intended for it, but which was partially removed through Reorganization Plan No. 2; e.g., the original task of evaluating agency performance with respect to science support and fundamental research.

4. Authorize NSB to delegate policy functions to the Director and/or to the Board's executive committee.

This recommendation is purely in the interests of efficiency-and it is intended only as a permissive authorization. The Board would be able to delegate, if it so desired, but it would not be required to. The subcommittee's inquiry clearly shows that there are times when the Director or an executive committee of the Board should be empowered to exercise this kind of authority.

5(a). Modify the existing_authority of NSB with regard to the certification of major grants and programs so that such authority need be exercised only in cases of disapproval.

On all large grants (over $2 million or $500,000 in 1 year) the Board must now consider each grant and approve or disapprove it. The intent here is to leave with the Board the authority to disapprove the grant if it feels such action is necessary-but not retain the requirement of approval on each such grant. The same would apply with regard to major new programs, contracts or operational ac