FFRDCs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems that RAND is starting a silent RIF among research staff.

They did a small RIF recently. It was not hidden. Why would a new one be?

I was under the impression that leadership wanted to keep it quiet but that didn’t work so they had to own up to what they were up to….

You obviously can't hide this stuff and everyone is doing it, so I don't know why you'd try.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems that RAND is starting a silent RIF among research staff.

They did a small RIF recently. It was not hidden. Why would a new one be?

I was under the impression that leadership wanted to keep it quiet but that didn’t work so they had to own up to what they were up to….

You obviously can't hide this stuff and everyone is doing it, so I don't know why you'd try.

Large employers hide RIFs so the press doesn’t broadcast that they are losing money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems that RAND is starting a silent RIF among research staff.

They did a small RIF recently. It was not hidden. Why would a new one be?

I was under the impression that leadership wanted to keep it quiet but that didn’t work so they had to own up to what they were up to….

You obviously can't hide this stuff and everyone is doing it, so I don't know why you'd try.

Large employers hide RIFs so the press doesn’t broadcast that they are losing money.

Do you think the media hasn't figured out that contracts are getting cancelled? RIFs are very common right now among government contractors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I heard it might be more than one round still to come. I suppose they will keep having layoffs until their staff size is aligned with their revenue.

Where are you getting this info? What centers are most vulnerable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems that RAND is starting a silent RIF among research staff.

They did a small RIF recently. It was not hidden. Why would a new one be?

I was under the impression that leadership wanted to keep it quiet but that didn’t work so they had to own up to what they were up to….

You obviously can't hide this stuff and everyone is doing it, so I don't know why you'd try.

Large employers hide RIFs so the press doesn’t broadcast that they are losing money.

Do you think the media hasn't figured out that contracts are getting cancelled? RIFs are very common right now among government contractors.

If a place is having a lot of problems already and then does rounds of layoffs, then it can look like a management problem.

[Anonymous]

RAND’s Army research unit took a huge hit in the Army’s budget - over 25M for FY26 - and if that holds they will need to lay off folks. And every round of cuts gets harder, starting with solid utility players and then folks with unique and hard to replace expertise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:RAND’s Army research unit took a huge hit in the Army’s budget - over 25M for FY26 - and if that holds they will need to lay off folks. And every round of cuts gets harder, starting with solid utility players and then folks with unique and hard to replace expertise.

While Arroyo's core funding was reduced, it retained the ability to fund work with non-core money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:RAND’s Army research unit took a huge hit in the Army’s budget - over 25M for FY26 - and if that holds they will need to lay off folks. And every round of cuts gets harder, starting with solid utility players and then folks with unique and hard to replace expertise.

RAND has GER now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RAND’s Army research unit took a huge hit in the Army’s budget - over 25M for FY26 - and if that holds they will need to lay off folks. And every round of cuts gets harder, starting with solid utility players and then folks with unique and hard to replace expertise.

While Arroyo's core funding was reduced, it retained the ability to fund work with non-core money.

This is true, but that is typically a slower process and there are no guarantees - bringing in add-on projects is hard, especially for units with less of an entrepreneurial culture, and there are a lot of hands out for limited studies funds. The same stresses that led the Army to cut Arroyo's core will persist into the year. RAND will start the fiscal year with many staff on gap with no immediate prospects for work, and at a certain point it will be unaffordable. The Army risks losing a cadre of experts who provide objective and independent analyses.

Because of RAND's matrix model, people who do not deliver results do not last long. The first round of RIFs may have cut a few folks who could be considered marginal, but for the most part hit researchers who offered value to the projects that they were staffed on, who will deliver to whatever organizations are lucky enough to hire them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:RAND’s Army research unit took a huge hit in the Army’s budget - over 25M for FY26 - and if that holds they will need to lay off folks. And every round of cuts gets harder, starting with solid utility players and then folks with unique and hard to replace expertise.

While Arroyo's core funding was reduced, it retained the ability to fund work with non-core money.

This is true, but that is typically a slower process and there are no guarantees - bringing in add-on projects is hard, especially for units with less of an entrepreneurial culture, and there are a lot of hands out for limited studies funds. The same stresses that led the Army to cut Arroyo's core will persist into the year. RAND will start the fiscal year with many staff on gap with no immediate prospects for work, and at a certain point it will be unaffordable. The Army risks losing a cadre of experts who provide objective and independent analyses.

Because of RAND's matrix model, people who do not deliver results do not last long. The first round of RIFs may have cut a few folks who could be considered marginal, but for the most part hit researchers who offered value to the projects that they were staffed on, who will deliver to whatever organizations are lucky enough to hire them.

In under 3 years, RAND’s CEO really destroyed the place.

[Anonymous]

Upthread someone said RIFs were happening this week … for MITRE. Not sure if trying to return there makes sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Upthread someone said RIFs were happening this week … for MITRE. Not sure if trying to return there makes sense.

+1