FFRDCs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Managing multiple FFRDCs like MITRE does is beneficial to the government because the technical experts can move around between different FFRDCs as needed. If all those FFRDCs were siloed (e.g., each FFRDC is run by a different company), then there would be a lot less sharing of knowledge and new capabilities and the company managing ine of those FFRDCs would have less flexibility to adapt to ebb and flow of needs. I know people at MITRE that split time between projects across multiple FFRDCs working for IRS in one and DoD in another. The common thread between the projects is their technical expertise, like Generative AI engineering for example.

I work at MITRE and we’re quite siloed. Folks rarely go between FFRDCs. Been there 17 yrs.

[Anonymous]

What about CNA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Managing multiple FFRDCs like MITRE does is beneficial to the government because the technical experts can move around between different FFRDCs as needed. If all those FFRDCs were siloed (e.g., each FFRDC is run by a different company), then there would be a lot less sharing of knowledge and new capabilities and the company managing ine of those FFRDCs would have less flexibility to adapt to ebb and flow of needs. I know people at MITRE that split time between projects across multiple FFRDCs working for IRS in one and DoD in another. The common thread between the projects is their technical expertise, like Generative AI engineering for example.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Managing multiple FFRDCs like MITRE does is beneficial to the government because the technical experts can move around between different FFRDCs as needed. If all those FFRDCs were siloed (e.g., each FFRDC is run by a different company), then there would be a lot less sharing of knowledge and new capabilities and the company managing ine of those FFRDCs would have less flexibility to adapt to ebb and flow of needs. I know people at MITRE that split time between projects across multiple FFRDCs working for IRS in one and DoD in another. The common thread between the projects is their technical expertise, like Generative AI engineering for example.

I work at MITRE and we’re quite siloed. Folks rarely go between FFRDCs. Been there 17 yrs.

There are some who finish one project and move to another in a different FFRDC. Depends on what your area of expertise is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Managing multiple FFRDCs like MITRE does is beneficial to the government because the technical experts can move around between different FFRDCs as needed. If all those FFRDCs were siloed (e.g., each FFRDC is run by a different company), then there would be a lot less sharing of knowledge and new capabilities and the company managing ine of those FFRDCs would have less flexibility to adapt to ebb and flow of needs. I know people at MITRE that split time between projects across multiple FFRDCs working for IRS in one and DoD in another. The common thread between the projects is their technical expertise, like Generative AI engineering for example.

I work at MITRE and we’re quite siloed. Folks rarely go between FFRDCs. Been there 17 yrs.

There are some who finish one project and move to another in a different FFRDC. Depends on what your area of expertise is.

It happens, but definitely not the norm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What about CNA?

Are they even relevant anymore?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I work at MITRE and we’re quite siloed. Folks rarely go between FFRDCs. Been there 17 yrs.

It’s not rare at all. Around 50% of the staff work within “MITRE Labs” where each division/department is focused on a specific technically capability. Those staff move freely between FFRDCs as they transition on and off projects. I’ve been at MITRE for 10 years. This is common in my Labs division with over 300 people.

Based on your perspective, I assume you work for a “program division” that is aligned under a single FFRDC and focuses on a narrow set of customers (or just a single department/agency). I agree that those staff rarely leave one FFRDC and move to another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about CNA?

Are they even relevant anymore?

They are an oddity among the FFRDCs; they are tiny, the smallest FFRDC, but probably provide more direct military operational support than any other, because their people spend a lot of time either forward deployed (e.g., Japan, Okinawa, Guam, Bahrain), embedded with USMC units overseas, or at sea. They had multiple people on the ground continuously in Iraq and Afghanistan during the years the US military was there. I think most of their people are either retired military or active reservists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I think most of their people are either retired military or active reservists.

This describes very few if any of the CNA people I’ve worked with. Usually techie types who wanted to do something completely different from their Ph.D. field. Mostly very smart and dedicated to the mission, and willing to give (justified) answers different from the other contractors, but varying levels of people and presentation skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think most of their people are either retired military or active reservists.

This describes very few if any of the CNA people I’ve worked with. Usually techie types who wanted to do something completely different from their Ph.D. field. Mostly very smart and dedicated to the mission, and willing to give (justified) answers different from the other contractors, but varying levels of people and presentation skills.

How many FFRDCs exist? Never heard of these before. Is it subject to RIFs by Trump?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think most of their people are either retired military or active reservists.

This describes very few if any of the CNA people I’ve worked with. Usually techie types who wanted to do something completely different from their Ph.D. field. Mostly very smart and dedicated to the mission, and willing to give (justified) answers different from the other contractors, but varying levels of people and presentation skills.

How many FFRDCs exist? Never heard of these before. Is it subject to RIFs by Trump?

There are 42 and they’re privately operated. They are indirectly subject to RIFs as they’re federally funded.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think most of their people are either retired military or active reservists.

This describes very few if any of the CNA people I’ve worked with. Usually techie types who wanted to do something completely different from their Ph.D. field. Mostly very smart and dedicated to the mission, and willing to give (justified) answers different from the other contractors, but varying levels of people and presentation skills.

How many FFRDCs exist? Never heard of these before. Is it subject to RIFs by Trump?

There are 42 and they’re privately operated. They are indirectly subject to RIFs as they’re federally funded.

42 sounds too high. Source?

Maybe confusing UARC's like JHU/APL with FFRDCs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think most of their people are either retired military or active reservists.

This describes very few if any of the CNA people I’ve worked with. Usually techie types who wanted to do something completely different from their Ph.D. field. Mostly very smart and dedicated to the mission, and willing to give (justified) answers different from the other contractors, but varying levels of people and presentation skills.

How many FFRDCs exist? Never heard of these before. Is it subject to RIFs by Trump?

There are 42 and they’re privately operated. They are indirectly subject to RIFs as they’re federally funded.

42 sounds too high. Source?

Maybe confusing UARC's like JHU/APL with FFRDCs?

Wikipedia. There are fewer administrators than facilities as some companies represent multiple FFRDCs. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federally_funded_research_and_development_centers

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I think most of their people are either retired military or active reservists.

This describes very few if any of the CNA people I’ve worked with. Usually techie types who wanted to do something completely different from their Ph.D. field. Mostly very smart and dedicated to the mission, and willing to give (justified) answers different from the other contractors, but varying levels of people and presentation skills.

How many FFRDCs exist? Never heard of these before. Is it subject to RIFs by Trump?

There are 42 and they’re privately operated. They are indirectly subject to RIFs as they’re federally funded.

42 sounds too high. Source?

Maybe confusing UARC's like JHU/APL with FFRDCs?

41 now, it appears:

https://ncses.nsf.gov/resource/master-gov-lists-ffrdc

But a lot of those are things like national labs, national observatories, JPL, etc. that aren't really what people in this area are talking about when they talk about FFRDCs, and as PP said there are some organizations (like Mitre, IDA, RAND) that operate multiple FFRDCs, sometimes in different categories.

The studies and analysis FFRDCs (RAND's, most of IDA's, CNA) are dwarfed by the systems engineering and R&D ones, even limiting it to just DoD-sponsored. To say nothing of UARCs.

[Anonymous]

How many organizations operate FFRDCs?

Note: In this count, Mitre counts as 1, not as 10.