FFRDCs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The RIF is another 600 people by August 11th. One more RIF "potentially" in October.

That’s the total # employees @CNA! Technical and administrative staff.

Govie here. I've been seeing some stuff that makes me think some of the less-well-run FFRDCs are gonna have a rough few years. From what I've heard, it sounds like Mitre was already a mess thanks to their old president, and now RAND is heading down the same path. CNA, IDA, and LL are also taking some hits, but it seems like their leadership is doing a better job of handling things than the others.

IDA had contracts cancelled so they RIFd people. Same as everywhere else. What exactly do you think was different in terms of leadership?

http://www.thinktankwatch.com/2023/12/rand-corp-received-millions-from.html

I was asking what CNA, IDA, and LL specifically are doing well now, weirdo RAND person.

These things aren’t happening at CNA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The RIF is another 600 people by August 11th. One more RIF "potentially" in October.

That’s the total # employees @CNA! Technical and administrative staff.

Not sure, but I think that (by employee count) CMU SEI is the smallest FFRDC and CNA is maybe the 2nd smallest or 3rd smallest FFRDC.

By contrast, MITRE very probably was the largest FFRDC. At end of CY 2024, MITRE had (very roughly estimated) 8000 employees. So MITRE is more than 10x larger than CNA - if CNA is 600 people as PP said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The RIF is another 600 people by August 11th. One more RIF "potentially" in October.

That’s the total # employees @CNA! Technical and administrative staff.

Govie here. I've been seeing some stuff that makes me think some of the less-well-run FFRDCs are gonna have a rough few years. From what I've heard, it sounds like Mitre was already a mess thanks to their old president, and now RAND is heading down the same path. CNA, IDA, and LL are also taking some hits, but it seems like their leadership is doing a better job of handling things than the others.

IDA had contracts cancelled so they RIFd people. Same as everywhere else. What exactly do you think was different in terms of leadership?

http://www.thinktankwatch.com/2023/12/rand-corp-received-millions-from.html

I was asking what CNA, IDA, and LL specifically are doing well now, weirdo RAND person.

These things aren’t happening at CNA.

Because of something their leadership is doing correctly, which IDA and LL also are doing correctly? If so, what? Because IDA did have RIFs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The RIF is another 600 people by August 11th. One more RIF "potentially" in October.

That’s the total # employees @CNA! Technical and administrative staff.

Govie here. I've been seeing some stuff that makes me think some of the less-well-run FFRDCs are gonna have a rough few years. From what I've heard, it sounds like Mitre was already a mess thanks to their old president, and now RAND is heading down the same path. CNA, IDA, and LL are also taking some hits, but it seems like their leadership is doing a better job of handling things than the others.

IDA had contracts cancelled so they RIFd people. Same as everywhere else. What exactly do you think was different in terms of leadership?

http://www.thinktankwatch.com/2023/12/rand-corp-received-millions-from.html

I was asking what CNA, IDA, and LL specifically are doing well now, weirdo RAND person.

These things aren’t happening at CNA.

Because of something their leadership is doing correctly, which IDA and LL also are doing correctly? If so, what? Because IDA did have RIFs.

It looks like the top brass at places like CNA, IDA, and Lincoln Labs are being really careful. They're basically keeping their heads down and not making a big deal about any policies where they might disagree with Trump. But then you have RAND. Their brass seems to be doing the opposite, at least when it comes to tech policy. They're actively pushing a very specific position and making noise. It's probably no surprise that this has put a target on their back. Politico and the NY Post have already run stories on them, and the GOP seems to be investigating their work. It seems like RAND's decision to speak out on AI policy is drawing a lot of heat that the others are managing to avoid by staying quiet.

[Anonymous]

IDA's RIF was due almost completely to the fact the government eliminated one of the FFRDCs IDA operated. Otherwise, IDA has filled its available ceiling. Some of RAND's FFRDCs have not filled their ceiling or are not near the funding limits for the FFRDCs that don't have ceiling. So, the argument that IDA is doing better is largely true as measured by performance against remaining contract vehicles. If viewed through the prism of contract vehicles eliminated and RIFs, then IDA is doing worse right now. However, the story for RAND is incomplete as all of their FFRDCs are somewhere in the renewal process. It is possible that one or more of the RAND FFRDCs could endure a cut (to ceiling; non-renewal; or complete elimination) of the scale that IDA received.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The RIF is another 600 people by August 11th. One more RIF "potentially" in October.

That’s the total # employees @CNA! Technical and administrative staff.

Govie here. I've been seeing some stuff that makes me think some of the less-well-run FFRDCs are gonna have a rough few years. From what I've heard, it sounds like Mitre was already a mess thanks to their old president, and now RAND is heading down the same path. CNA, IDA, and LL are also taking some hits, but it seems like their leadership is doing a better job of handling things than the others.

IDA had contracts cancelled so they RIFd people. Same as everywhere else. What exactly do you think was different in terms of leadership?

http://www.thinktankwatch.com/2023/12/rand-corp-received-millions-from.html

I was asking what CNA, IDA, and LL specifically are doing well now, weirdo RAND person.

These things aren’t happening at CNA.

CNA's fundamental difference from the other FFRDCs are that at any given moment many of its analysts are forward deployed, in combat zones (e.g., afghanistan and iraq in the early part of this century), on carriers inside the WEZ (e.g., during Houthi attacks in the Red Sea), in front line foreign countries (e.g., in middle east and asia/pacific). Others are also working in safer jobs as analysts for NSWDG, Pacific Fleet, 7th Fleet, and so on.

The other dimension of difference is that nothing CNA does is systems engineering or prototyping. They are not competing with any SETA or any product company.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:IDA's RIF was due almost completely to the fact the government eliminated one of the FFRDCs IDA operated. Otherwise, IDA has filled its available ceiling. Some of RAND's FFRDCs have not filled their ceiling or are not near the funding limits for the FFRDCs that don't have ceiling. So, the argument that IDA is doing better is largely true as measured by performance against remaining contract vehicles. If viewed through the prism of contract vehicles eliminated and RIFs, then IDA is doing worse right now. However, the story for RAND is incomplete as all of their FFRDCs are somewhere in the renewal process. It is possible that one or more of the RAND FFRDCs could endure a cut (to ceiling; non-renewal; or complete elimination) of the scale that IDA received.

Wasn’t this due to cuts to DOT&E? That had nothing to do with IDAs performance vs RANDs situation…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:IDA's RIF was due almost completely to the fact the government eliminated one of the FFRDCs IDA operated. Otherwise, IDA has filled its available ceiling. Some of RAND's FFRDCs have not filled their ceiling or are not near the funding limits for the FFRDCs that don't have ceiling. So, the argument that IDA is doing better is largely true as measured by performance against remaining contract vehicles. If viewed through the prism of contract vehicles eliminated and RIFs, then IDA is doing worse right now. However, the story for RAND is incomplete as all of their FFRDCs are somewhere in the renewal process. It is possible that one or more of the RAND FFRDCs could endure a cut (to ceiling; non-renewal; or complete elimination) of the scale that IDA received.

RAND will probably lose HSOAC and NDRI will likely get a ceiling cut.

[Anonymous]

The proportion of CNA’s presence “inside the WEZ,” etc. is overstated by CNA cheerleader PP, even if operational integration and knowledge is their key differentiator.

Other PP said that it was the loss of a whole FFRDC that led to IDA’s RIF, which isn’t true. It was the suspension of work by the sole sponsor of an entire division of their biggest FFRDC. A suspension that friends there say may be getting at least partly lifted now two months later. If that’s true, then yet again the slash-and-burn, anti-expertise bent of the administration caused a lot of unnecessary churn, pain, and likely permanent loss of institutional knowledge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

The RIF is another 600 people by August 11th. One more RIF "potentially" in October.

That’s the total # employees @CNA! Technical and administrative staff.

Govie here. I've been seeing some stuff that makes me think some of the less-well-run FFRDCs are gonna have a rough few years. From what I've heard, it sounds like Mitre was already a mess thanks to their old president, and now RAND is heading down the same path. CNA, IDA, and LL are also taking some hits, but it seems like their leadership is doing a better job of handling things than the others.

IDA had contracts cancelled so they RIFd people. Same as everywhere else. What exactly do you think was different in terms of leadership?

http://www.thinktankwatch.com/2023/12/rand-corp-received-millions-from.html

I was asking what CNA, IDA, and LL specifically are doing well now, weirdo RAND person.

These things aren’t happening at CNA.

Because of something their leadership is doing correctly, which IDA and LL also are doing correctly? If so, what? Because IDA did have RIFs.

RAND never had a problem with meeting ceiling under Michael.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The proportion of CNA’s presence “inside the WEZ,” etc. is overstated by CNA cheerleader PP, even if operational integration and knowledge is their key differentiator.

Other PP said that it was the loss of a whole FFRDC that led to IDA’s RIF, which isn’t true. It was the suspension of work by the sole sponsor of an entire division of their biggest FFRDC. A suspension that friends there say may be getting at least partly lifted now two months later. If that’s true, then yet again the slash-and-burn, anti-expertise bent of the administration caused a lot of unnecessary churn, pain, and likely permanent loss of institutional knowledge.

Definitely overstated. Few analysts were inside the WEZ and many weren’t ever in danger.

[Anonymous]

Curious what people think of MITRE's investment in a supercomputer. The non-DoD side has been investing heavily in advancing technologies/partnerships that move MITRE into highly technical advanced work. But so far big price tags and limited ROI. Is there a path forward?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Curious what people think of MITRE's investment in a supercomputer. The non-DoD side has been investing heavily in advancing technologies/partnerships that move MITRE into highly technical advanced work. But so far big price tags and limited ROI. Is there a path forward?

The Trump Administration is killing off all inconvenient results of science/analytics, destroying underlying data/data sources, and eliminating Federal Agencies and contractors involved in all such work.

Not exactly clear how any moderately self-respecting organization could generate a path forward.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious what people think of MITRE's investment in a supercomputer. The non-DoD side has been investing heavily in advancing technologies/partnerships that move MITRE into highly technical advanced work. But so far big price tags and limited ROI. Is there a path forward?

The Trump Administration is killing off all inconvenient results of science/analytics, destroying underlying data/data sources, and eliminating Federal Agencies and contractors involved in all such work.

Not exactly clear how any moderately self-respecting organization could generate a path forward.

Rest assured that some places are managing this better than others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Curious what people think of MITRE's investment in a supercomputer. The non-DoD side has been investing heavily in advancing technologies/partnerships that move MITRE into highly technical advanced work. But so far big price tags and limited ROI. Is there a path forward?

The Trump Administration is killing off all inconvenient results of science/analytics, destroying underlying data/data sources, and eliminating Federal Agencies and contractors involved in all such work.

Not exactly clear how any moderately self-respecting organization could generate a path forward.

Rest assured that some places are managing this better than others.

Did you note “self-respecting”?