Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some FFRDCS (Mitre we are looking at you) stray too far from their core mission by taking non-gov money. This is very different than what you described.

What are you talking about “taking non-gov money”? I’ve worked at MITRE for a long time and provide leadership to staff that work across hundreds of projects. If what you write is happening, it’s so rare that I couldn’t give you an example of it.

Anonymous wrote:Some FFRDCS (Mitre we are looking at you) stray too far from their core mission by taking non-gov money. This is very different than what you described.

Anonymous wrote:All the FFRDCs are at risk for losing work, especially work that does not align with administration priorities. That said, as government contractors, this is not the first downturn they have dealt with. The drawdown after the Cold War ended and sequestration were two events that put funding at risk, and the FFRDCs survived. There is always a push to prove value and show how much money research can save or otherwise the value it delivers. The need for FFRDCs will endure, even though it is not clear if the current administration supports independent research. That said, China researchers will be better placed than those working on trans-Atlantic security. The industrial base remains a hot topic. Leaders may need to kiss the ring to survive.

Anonymous wrote:All the FFRDCs are at risk for losing work, especially work that does not align with administration priorities. That said, as government contractors, this is not the first downturn they have dealt with. The drawdown after the Cold War ended and sequestration were two events that put funding at risk, and the FFRDCs survived. There is always a push to prove value and show how much money research can save or otherwise the value it delivers. The need for FFRDCs will endure, even though it is not clear if the current administration supports independent research. That said, China researchers will be better placed than those working on trans-Atlantic security. The industrial base remains a hot topic. Leaders may need to kiss the ring to survive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which MITRE FFRDCs are laying off staff?

bump

Anonymous wrote:Which MITRE FFRDCs are laying off staff?

Anonymous wrote:"https://data.usatoday.com/see-which-companies-announced-mass-layoffs-closings/mitre-corporation-va-layoff/va-w001024/".

Mitre McLean layoff details above.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Negative comments about MITRE are not true and wonder what is motivating them. Full of hardworking, thoughtful people that care about their work.

Who are you kidding?

Not helpful... somebody here has an axe to grind about MITRE

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ffrdcs shouldn’t be lobbying like this

RAND was specifically mentioned in that article. An important fact is that RAND is not an FFRDC. It’s a company that does stuff and also operates a few FFRDCs on behalf of the government. Same goes for University of California, MIT, and Carnegie Mellon.

I assume RAND has a firewall or conflict of interest controls between its FFRDC and non-FFRDC business, but I don’t know that for sure as I don’t work there.