Current / Former NASA Planetary Science Analysis Groups

Why It Matters

The analysis groups channel broad scientific consensus into NASA’s decision‑making, shaping priorities for multi‑decade exploration programs and ensuring resources align with community‑identified goals.

Key Takeaways

• Eight analysis groups guide NASA planetary mission priorities
• Groups are community‑based, not formal advisory committees
• ExMAG focuses on sample return and curation
• LEAG and MAPSIT shape lunar and mapping strategies
• OPAG, SBAG, VEXAG address outer planets, small bodies, Venus

Pulse Analysis

NASA’s planetary analysis groups serve as the connective tissue between the scientific community and the agency’s strategic planning. Established over the past two decades, groups such as ExMAG, LEAG and MAPSIT operate under the Planetary Science Subcommittee, delivering structured feedback on sample‑return logistics, lunar architecture, and planetary cartography. Their community‑driven nature ensures that a wide range of experts—from geochemists to mission engineers—contribute to the conversation, while the groups remain distinct from formal FACA advisory committees.

The practical impact of these groups is evident in how NASA prioritizes missions and allocates funding. MEPAG’s assessments shape the Mars Exploration Program’s long‑term goals, influencing rover concepts and orbiters. OPAG’s recommendations guide outer‑planet flagship studies, while SBAG and VEXAG identify high‑value investigations for asteroids, comets and Venus, respectively. By synthesizing diverse viewpoints, the groups help NASA avoid redundant efforts, focus on scientifically compelling targets, and align exploration architectures with emerging technologies and international partnerships.

Looking ahead, the analysis groups will become increasingly critical as NASA pursues ambitious initiatives like Artemis lunar bases, Mars sample‑return, and Europa Clipper follow‑ons. Their ability to rapidly incorporate new data—such as findings from Perseverance or the James Webb Space Telescope—means they can adapt roadmaps to evolving scientific landscapes. Continued support for these community forums ensures transparent, evidence‑based decision‑making, fostering a collaborative environment that maximizes the scientific return on federal investment.