FFRDCs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The effects of the DOGE cuts a year ago are still being felt in the DC workforce (including FFRDCs). Many local lives were unnecessarily upended and many have yet to recover.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/07/washington-dc-highly-qualified-workers-unemployment

Apparently, not an issue for the continued nepotism hires at MITRE!. Plenty of full-time and internship positions for the children, siblings and spouses of employees. The more the better!

Mitre has major nepo issues: spouses and in-laws as direct reports; wives with no college degree mysteriously rising from to L5, or in one case, L6 Department Manager; kids with barely a community college education getting plum L4 engineering roles over experienced SMEs.

I used to work at a national lab, and every once in awhile I’d learn that an admin staff member was the child of a higher level researcher. Made me feel better for getting a position with no connections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The effects of the DOGE cuts a year ago are still being felt in the DC workforce (including FFRDCs). Many local lives were unnecessarily upended and many have yet to recover.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/07/washington-dc-highly-qualified-workers-unemployment

Apparently, not an issue for the continued nepotism hires at MITRE!. Plenty of full-time and internship positions for the children, siblings and spouses of employees. The more the better!

Mitre has major nepo issues: spouses and in-laws as direct reports; wives with no college degree mysteriously rising from to L5, or in one case, L6 Department Manager; kids with barely a community college education getting plum L4 engineering roles over experienced SMEs.

Agreed. Good insight

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The effects of the DOGE cuts a year ago are still being felt in the DC workforce (including FFRDCs). Many local lives were unnecessarily upended and many have yet to recover.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/07/washington-dc-highly-qualified-workers-unemployment

Apparently, not an issue for the continued nepotism hires at MITRE!. Plenty of full-time and internship positions for the children, siblings and spouses of employees. The more the better!

Mitre has major nepo issues: spouses and in-laws as direct reports; wives with no college degree mysteriously rising from to L5, or in one case, L6 Department Manager; kids with barely a community college education getting plum L4 engineering roles over experienced SMEs.

Also, cronyism was rampant, especially in the Mass office. All lived in the same neighborhoods, coached each others kids sports, married each other. Provincial

[Anonymous]

In most cases, and clearly understanding some exceptions exist, getting above level 5 at MITRE says more about one's skills at office politics than it says about one's scientific or engineering skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In most cases, and clearly understanding some exceptions exist, getting above level 5 at MITRE says more about one's skills at office politics than it says about one's scientific or engineering skills.

I fully agree, but to play devils advocate -- at the higher levels you need to worry more about alignment, is the right work being done, how to bring in new work, etc. which rely more on soft skills/politics than on hard engineering skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In most cases, and clearly understanding some exceptions exist, getting above level 5 at MITRE says more about one's skills at office politics than it says about one's scientific or engineering skills.

I fully agree, but to play devils advocate -- at the higher levels you need to worry more about alignment, is the right work being done, how to bring in new work, etc. which rely more on soft skills/politics than on hard engineering skills.

And how do you know these things if you are not technical and can't understand the language of your sponsors or engineers? On the public sector side there is a long history of nontechnical DMs, TDs, and even VPs and, well, here we are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In most cases, and clearly understanding some exceptions exist, getting above level 5 at MITRE says more about one's skills at office politics than it says about one's scientific or engineering skills.

I fully agree, but to play devils advocate -- at the higher levels you need to worry more about alignment, is the right work being done, how to bring in new work, etc. which rely more on soft skills/politics than on hard engineering skills.

And how do you know these things if you are not technical and can't understand the language of your sponsors or engineers? On the public sector side there is a long history of nontechnical DMs, TDs, and even VPs and, well, here we are.

Many, not all, or the sponsors I've worked with weren't super technical. They knew they had a problem, or there's a better way, and came to us to solve that. If the L6/L7 is dealing with low level engineering problems, they shouldn't be an L6/L7.

There's a difference from having technical depth and understanding potential solutions to having "engineering skills".

I was on the public sector side too.

[Anonymous]

RAND’s CEO is in the news…. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/investigations/4532389/documents-tech-nonprofit-shaped-biden-era-ai-policy/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:RAND’s CEO is in the news…. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/investigations/4532389/documents-tech-nonprofit-shaped-biden-era-ai-policy/

"Just because Buchanan and Matheny had ties to CSET while in government service does not mean that the think tank or its donors were dictating their opinions or objectives. Often, donors opt to support causes or individuals who already align with them. This does, according to some, give the preferences of wealthy donors increased presence in policy discussions."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:RAND’s CEO is in the news…. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/investigations/4532389/documents-tech-nonprofit-shaped-biden-era-ai-policy/

"The Washington Examiner reached out to the RAND Corporation, where Matheny now serves as CEO, to request comment from him." This is what happens when you RIF most of your media relations team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In most cases, and clearly understanding some exceptions exist, getting above level 5 at MITRE says more about one's skills at office politics than it says about one's scientific or engineering skills.

I fully agree, but to play devils advocate -- at the higher levels you need to worry more about alignment, is the right work being done, how to bring in new work, etc. which rely more on soft skills/politics than on hard engineering skills.

And how do you know these things if you are not technical and can't understand the language of your sponsors or engineers? On the public sector side there is a long history of nontechnical DMs, TDs, and even VPs and, well, here we are.

Many, not all, or the sponsors I've worked with weren't super technical. They knew they had a problem, or there's a better way, and came to us to solve that. If the L6/L7 is dealing with low level engineering problems, they shouldn't be an L6/L7.

There's a difference from having technical depth and understanding potential solutions to having "engineering skills".

I was on the public sector side too.

How much L6/L7 makes at RAND or MITRE?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RAND’s CEO is in the news…. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/investigations/4532389/documents-tech-nonprofit-shaped-biden-era-ai-policy/

"The Washington Examiner reached out to the RAND Corporation, where Matheny now serves as CEO, to request comment from him." This is what happens when you RIF most of your media relations team.

I agree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In most cases, and clearly understanding some exceptions exist, getting above level 5 at MITRE says more about one's skills at office politics than it says about one's scientific or engineering skills.

I fully agree, but to play devils advocate -- at the higher levels you need to worry more about alignment, is the right work being done, how to bring in new work, etc. which rely more on soft skills/politics than on hard engineering skills.

And how do you know these things if you are not technical and can't understand the language of your sponsors or engineers? On the public sector side there is a long history of nontechnical DMs, TDs, and even VPs and, well, here we are.

Many, not all, or the sponsors I've worked with weren't super technical. They knew they had a problem, or there's a better way, and came to us to solve that. If the L6/L7 is dealing with low level engineering problems, they shouldn't be an L6/L7.

There's a difference from having technical depth and understanding potential solutions to having "engineering skills".

I was on the public sector side too.

How much L6/L7 makes at RAND or MITRE?

At Mitre, L6 for most job roles is > $300k plus substantial bonuses...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In most cases, and clearly understanding some exceptions exist, getting above level 5 at MITRE says more about one's skills at office politics than it says about one's scientific or engineering skills.

I fully agree, but to play devils advocate -- at the higher levels you need to worry more about alignment, is the right work being done, how to bring in new work, etc. which rely more on soft skills/politics than on hard engineering skills.

And how do you know these things if you are not technical and can't understand the language of your sponsors or engineers? On the public sector side there is a long history of nontechnical DMs, TDs, and even VPs and, well, here we are.

Many, not all, or the sponsors I've worked with weren't super technical. They knew they had a problem, or there's a better way, and came to us to solve that. If the L6/L7 is dealing with low level engineering problems, they shouldn't be an L6/L7.

There's a difference from having technical depth and understanding potential solutions to having "engineering skills".

I was on the public sector side too.

How much L6/L7 makes at RAND or MITRE?

Mitre has about 30 different engineering families. Midpoint of L6/L7 is roughly 225-275k, but the max of an L7 is over 330k.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In most cases, and clearly understanding some exceptions exist, getting above level 5 at MITRE says more about one's skills at office politics than it says about one's scientific or engineering skills.

I fully agree, but to play devils advocate -- at the higher levels you need to worry more about alignment, is the right work being done, how to bring in new work, etc. which rely more on soft skills/politics than on hard engineering skills.

And how do you know these things if you are not technical and can't understand the language of your sponsors or engineers? On the public sector side there is a long history of nontechnical DMs, TDs, and even VPs and, well, here we are.

Many, not all, or the sponsors I've worked with weren't super technical. They knew they had a problem, or there's a better way, and came to us to solve that. If the L6/L7 is dealing with low level engineering problems, they shouldn't be an L6/L7.

There's a difference from having technical depth and understanding potential solutions to having "engineering skills".

I was on the public sector side too.

How much L6/L7 makes at RAND or MITRE?

At Mitre, L6 for most job roles is > $300k plus substantial bonuses...

This is kind of incorrect. Mitre doesn't even do bonuses, in the normal christmas way. They do a lower salary adjustment (2-3%) and a cash bonus of another 2-7%, depending on how the company did.