WHY WAS THIS FUNDED?

The DOE is authorized to fund scientific research and education programs that support the nation's energy, national security, and science workforce needs. ORISE was created to help the government manage research participation programs, health studies, and science education initiatives.

WHAT PUBLIC PROBLEM IS IT TRYING TO SOLVE?

The United States needs a steady pipeline of trained scientists, engineers, and technical workers to support national security, energy research, and public health efforts. ORISE helps address this by connecting students, researchers, and professionals with government-sponsored training and research opportunities.

WHO BENEFITS?

Students, recent graduates, and early-career researchers across the country benefit through fellowships, internships, and research opportunities at federal agencies. Federal agencies also benefit because ORISE handles the administration of their science workforce and research programs.

WHAT ARE THE RISKS?

At 3.1 billion dollars over roughly ten years, this is a large contract with a single recipient, which raises questions about competitive oversight and whether costs are being managed efficiently. Because the contract type is listed as unknown, it is harder to assess what financial controls or performance standards are built in.

WHAT HAPPENS IF FUNDING IS REMOVED?

If this contract were cancelled, thousands of student fellowships, internships, and research participation programs run by federal agencies could be disrupted or shut down. Federal agencies that rely on ORISE to administer their workforce and research programs would need to find other ways to manage those functions.

ARGUMENTS FOR

• •ORISE supports a national pipeline of science and engineering talent that strengthens long-term U.S. competitiveness and national security.
• •Centralizing these programs under one experienced manager can be more efficient than having each federal agency run its own separate workforce and research programs.
• •The program has a decades-long track record of connecting researchers with federal science missions across energy, health, and defense.

ARGUMENTS AGAINST

• •Awarding 3.1 billion dollars to a single organization over ten years with limited competitive bidding can reduce accountability and allow costs to grow unchecked.
• •The unknown contract type makes it difficult for the public to know what performance requirements or financial safeguards are in place.
• •Some may argue that individual federal agencies should manage their own workforce programs rather than outsourcing that responsibility to a third party at significant expense.