Reply to FFRDCs

Forum Index » Jobs and Careers

Reply to "FFRDCs"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]No, in many cases the knowledge isn't gone because Mitre employees will jump back into for-profit government contracting, *if* they have relevant current skills (like I did when I decided to leave). And not every contractor is experiencing a bloodbath because my very-large employer has had relatively few layoffs, and redirected DOGE-affected staff to new work. There were some layoffs in my current agency work group but they were either known non-producers or their projects were cut.
[/quote]

This.  Someone with current knowledge, experience, and skills simply will land at Booz, Leidos, ManTech, or another for-profit firm.  Part of Mitre’s mistake was growing without _sufficient_ differentiation in expertise and experience from the commercial contractors, particularly in IT, less so in RF, collection, and more exotic technology.  It is fixable, but I will not hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

A lot of work that flows to FFRDCs (and to UARCs) does so primarily because it is easy to create a task order for an existing FFRDC/UARC contract vehicle and fund it using government-internal funds transfers (e.g., MIPR).  UARC and FFRDC contracts are sole-source and the standard boilerplate text to justify using them is well known.  By contrast, creating a new services contract competitively takes a long time, takes specialist contract-savvy civil service folks, and often will get protested/delayed.  To some extent, there is so much subcontracting under services contracts that are put in place to avoid creating a new contract.  The situation might well shift if Congress would simplify the services contracting rules, unlikely though that is.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics