The Unofficial SMART Scholarship Forum

I second that- what's the name of the current woman in charge? It's pretty sad that I should have to ask here in the forum. This should be common knowledge.

what's the current lady's name?

The lady in charge of the SMART program is hell bent on not letting anyone transfer to another agency. She will require you pay back a ton of money if you do. This stuff is coming down the pike soon. My advice, stick with the program or owe a ton of money.

Wow, I had no idea this forum existed. I wish I had known this a year ago... I would have had a better time discussing my options with other SMART recipients.

Basically, I'm in the same situation as several of the folks above. I ended up at a *DAU* facility. I've been lucky in that I have been able to create programming projects for myself to work on in support of our job at my SF. But, that isn't actually my job and my job description shouldn't require a real engineering degree. It's easy as balls; I could have done it equally well coming straight out of high school. I have nearly 3 months to the day left on my 3 year service commitment, but I've wanted out since over a year ago...

The worst part about all this is that I feel like my last 3 years out of college were just sucked into a void. I didn't do enough worthwhile engineering to make my resume look competitive, especially not since I have an electrical engineering degree, and I'm no longer a new grad, so a lot of entry level positions in private industry are closed off. I feel lied to and betrayed. I care about my country a lot -- I obviously would have had to if I wanted to work for the DoD -- but the federal job system is fundamentally sick. Everything in this system takes way too much time to get done, low performers basically can't get fired, and there's too much red tape preventing anyone who wants to improve processes from doing anything.

Basically, I'm out looking for jobs so I can jump ship the day my service commitment is done. These past 3 years do absolutely nothing for my resume, and I'd have to wait at least another year before I can go back to grad school. I also accumulated debt due to all of my moving expenses not being covered, the starting pay being over 10k/year lower than my peers from college who got jobs elsewhere, moving to a state with a very high living expense, and then sequestration screwing me about a year or so into my service commitment. The SMART program was literally the biggest mistake I have ever made and it has set me back in my career several years. The only way I'm going to make up for it now is by going back to school, which I can't do immediately, but I absolutely need to leave my SF as soon as I can. Too bad my SF does nothing for my resume... it's making it very difficult to find a job.

I totally understand the frustrations. I was appalled at the lack of professionalism in the program (2010 cohort). The whole thing about cutting the internship payments and all the missing pay. The difficulties associated with changing SFs, everyone having bad experiences, being stuck in a job, not knowing how to repay debt, a 2:1 repayment on award extensions, getting an award extension, the fear propaganda at the orientation... It was a lot. I really didn't have much of a choice, I needed the almost $60k/year I got during my 3 years for my PhD...I have kids and bills. But, somehow I ended up at a great SF. It's in a crappy place that I'd never want to live, but the job is great and the people are great. I lead my own research and have been mentored and am being developed into a R&D leader there. I am well funded and respected. I have even hired people to work for me. I am making (GS 13-4) a few percent less than I would have as a tenure track assistant professor at a top tier university and I work about 2/3 as much time (45-50 hr/wk) as that would require (60-70 hr/wk). My retirement is already set up. At 67, as long as I don't screw up my TSP somehow, I'll retire making full salary or more. I will most likely be a GS15 in 5 years and I have a good shot at being an SES or ST by 15-20 years of service. My research is applied and goes beyond anything in my field that an academic institution would do since they have short-term goals in mind and limited budgets. Because of this, if I ever wanted to leave, I would most likely be able to count my time almost 100% toward tenure. I can publish, present, or not. It's up to me.

I know that many of you have bad experiences, but not everyone does. However, even though it has worked out for me well, I don't think I will ever recommend SMART for anyone unless they have no other choice. BS students need to get over themselves and realize, everyone in the world has a BS now and it doesn't command much pay. MS students are probably underpaid in the end here. PhD's have a good chance of getting good pay and opportunities, but it is SF specific. The real problem for PhDs is Phase 1 is SUPER stressful. How can you possibly tell someone when you will be done with your dissertation research? Lab tests go bad, professor gets cancer or goes on sabbatical, someone on your committee is a douche, your research loses funding, anything can happen and usually does. Being told you are a widget and you have to be delivered on the due date is crazy. Ulcers.

One final reason I won't recommend it, it's not worth the hassle anymore since they reduced the pay. When you got 1200/wk for internships, it was an ok trade off. No other fellowship would have paid me $60k/yr. Now, $41k isn't worth it. Get a RA or TA job, pays for your tuition, eek out a department fellowship, and work a few hours a week at a dinky job. It's better than trading however many years for $41k/yr. I actually think the severe reduction in award amount will cause this to stop attracting the best students. It will attract mediocre students and it will quickly lose face among SFs. Then it will die and all will be forgotten.

[quote="CMMMM"]Along the lines of OnlyJust's suggestion, I think the SMART program should reduce the remaining service commitment for Phase 2 scholars by a percentage equal to the percentage of time they have served (i.e., 75% of commitment completed => reduce the remaining 25% by 75%). Obviously for anything like this to happen, the SPO has to own up to the mistakes they've made, which I'm not convinced has happened, yet.[/quote]

I think OnlyJust's idea was great, and I like your spin on it, too. Both of them seem like they would be easy to implement, at least until you take the bureaucracy into account...

Along the lines of OnlyJust's suggestion, I think the SMART program should reduce the remaining service commitment for Phase 2 scholars by a percentage equal to the percentage of time they have served (i.e., 75% of commitment completed => reduce the remaining 25% by 75%). Obviously for anything like this to happen, the SPO has to own up to the mistakes they've made, which I'm not convinced has happened, yet.

I never like giving advice that Lawyers get to litigate, nor give my opinion when it could be held against me later.

As I've mentioned, if a government employee is unhappy with their current position, especially a scientist or engineer, they would be well served to find a position elsewhere. Given that the SMART Program financially obligates SMART Scholars for a period of time, it would seem advisable to seek that within DOD.

Happy to discuss options for current SMART (Phase I, II, III) on a one/one basis.

[quote="Larry"]
I spoke at length to the SMART Program Manager about the process going forward. New SMART Scholars will see a different front end process because of your comments.
[/quote]

Hi Larry,

I know one of your main missions is to make changes to improve the program for future scholars. Like I told you last night, I think that's great. I really hope that you do. Clearly, there are a lot of problems with the program, many of them have been described in this thread.

Not to sound self-centered, but what about those of us who are already dealing with these issues? None of us signed on to be guinea pigs for the SMART program. It's little consolation to know that future SMARTs might not be told lies about their pay and work environment, when I'm living with it in the here and now.

What if I said, "No, I'm not going to complete my service commitment - but I'm sure some other SMART scholar in the future will." Would that let me off the hook? I don't think so.

The SMART program and our SFs made promises to us. Both written and verbal. Promises that they refused to keep. If future SMARTs are the only ones that are going to see those promises fulfilled, then they are the ones that should have service commitments, not us.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts - SMART would have nothing to do with you finding a new position in DOD. In general I find USAJOBS frustrating, but the "Labs" have direct hire authority and thus don't need to use USAJOBS in all cases. I highly recommend reaching out and finding folks doing work in your preferred line of effort and talking to them. Get them to reach out through their HR to hire you. Heck, get a detail position and move for a year.

I spoke at length to the SMART Program Manager about the process going forward. New SMART Scholars will see a different front end process because of your comments.

ATB
Larry

I'd like to echo both parts of this conversation: The frustration, and the help by Larry (Dr. Schuette?)

I don't really have much ill will towards my SF as in all honesty they have at least been courteous.
I am not doing much of anything related to either of my degrees (Undergraduate or PhD).
I don't think I'd be more marketable because of this job. I am fortunate enough to have publications based on my dissertation that I have been trying to churn out when I get home from the 9-5, but this certainly takes up more of my free time than I'd like ;) and it would be nice to do some research during work too.

I also knew about the pay I was getting as I checked OPM (though getting the actual pay rate I was do wasn't easy). I think SMART as a whole is unfortunate in that some positions are in fact great science and engineering jobs, but it seems that there is too much noise in the process and too many people are getting (what really are) non-science/engineering positions. I do think the information on the website is misleading and I do feel out of the loop (though this site has helped).

I myself am also in a *DAU* position and thus have been relegated to pretty much no science/engineering work and mostly administrative (e.g., meeting minutes) tasks during my current tenure in my position. This is especially frustrating after coming out of a PhD program (and would be coming out of my undergrad Computer Science program).

I would suggest that everyone reach out to other places and/or look on USAJOBS. The research labs (from my experience and knowing some of the researchers in the labs) at least do some cool stuff.

At Larry's advice (and in fact previous to it) I've tried to contact other places that may be able to take me on for the rest of my tenure. I've even given a talk at another research lab and received a lot of positive feedback and contacts based on it (unfortunately none of the contacts seem to have panned out). My biggest issue seems to be just finding a place willing to take me on and it hasn't been clear to me how easy being a SMART scholar makes the hiring (but at times it may be that I, and others, are not contacting through the correct channels). If anyone has advice on the correct channels to use I think that also would be useful to many of us.

For me it's a race. If I find an academic position before I can find a gov't position I'll likely leave, however if I can find a suitable place to move, then I'll probably stay. I think, just like many of us, I still have an urge to contribute to the DoD in a meaningful way in my area.

But again, thanks for the help Larry

OK this is just preliminary, but I've started a group for Phase 2 and 3 SMARTs to discuss these issues. Please email me at smartscholars2014 at gmail if you are interested in joining, and I will send you an invite.

I encourage anyone who has experienced ongoing issues with the SMART program to email me so we can work collectively and try to resolve them. Any past SMARTs that have left the program early are also welcome to join.

My experience with smart has been practically identical to those described above. If you're still planning on forming a group, I would definitely be interested in joining. Please provide contact info whenever you have it.

[quote="OnlyJust"]
I believe that the main problem relevant to SMARTs is the difference between the work environment they encounter and the one advertised by the SMART program. [/quote]

I totally agree with this. SMART scholars were sold on the idea of working in cutting-edge facilities and solving challenging problems. The SMART website is slightly more realistic now then it used to be (check the wayback machine at archive.org) but even now it describes a program that I've never been a part of. From the website:

[quote]The SMART Program aims to increase the number of scientists and engineers in the DoD. The program is particularly interested in supporting individuals that demonstrate an aptitude and interest in conducting theoretical and applied research. As such, the program primarily targets "hand-on-the-bench" researchers and engineers. Individuals applying to the program should have a strong interest in working for the DoD as a civilian research scientist or engineer. Applicants must be pursuing an undergraduate or graduate degree in one of the disciplines listed on the About SMART page.[/quote]

I've never done any research for my SF. I've done my own research to keep busy, but research is definitely not a part of my job. My point is, they deliberately try to recruit people who are at or near the top of their class, have a demonstrable aptitude in their field, and want to conduct research. Basically, they recruit overachievers.

When I showed up at my SF, they didn't even know I was coming. They stuck me in exactly the same position that they would put any other new hire. My participation in the SMART program has had absolutely no effect on my position or the type of work that I do. I know for a fact that this is true of many other SMART scholars as well.

One experience that I had highlights this issue particularly well. I was talking to one of my superiors about how low the starting pay was. He responded by telling me that actually, the starting pay was only a little below the average starting pay for computer scientists in our state (he was wrong on that point, but I didn't have the stats right in front of me at the time). Now, if I was at the bottom of my class I would probably be very happy to earn "a little less than average." Even if I was an average student it wouldn't have been that bad. But I wasn't an average student.

They tell you that you're going to have access to the best facilities and resources, but in reality you have to fight to get your hands on anything useful for your job. They tell you that you're going to make a fair wage, but in reality they pay you like a coffee-fetching intern. They tell you that you're going to be conducting research, but in reality you're organizing storage cages and updating inventory spreadsheets.

In sales, they say that you should always under-promise and over-deliver. The SMART program took the opposite approach, and that's why people are unhappy now.

[b]Intro:[/b]

This post is long, so I've included headings for your convenience.

[b]Background:[/b]

I left the day after completing my commitment, that's 3 years of employment. Now I'm working on a CS PhD earning exactly what my SMART stipend was (tuition + fees + healthcare also covered), but without any commitment. I've considered these topics extensively for several years. I even held a position at my SF specifically designed to facilitate communication between new employees and senior leadership, thereby effecting positive change.

[b]My view on the problem:[/b]

I believe that the main problem relevant to SMARTs is the difference between the work environment they encounter and the one advertised by the SMART program. I'll add my working-for-the-government complaints, but really the problem is the [i]difference[/i] between what was advertised and what was provided.

As far as I've seen, government facilities currently maintain a work environment that is absolutely incompatible with the type of employee SMART attracts. New SMARTs want to work with cutting edge technology, attack intellectually stimulating problems that have yet to be solved, participate in teams with intelligent, hardworking individuals, make a difference in the world, and increase their skills and marketability. We then discover that government employment requires dealing with out-of-date technology, working with teams of individuals who are lucky to have a job that pays over $45k/year, being a small part of a huge organization, and moving forward with projects at an extremely slow pace due to gratuitous bureaucracy and ineffective security/accountability policies. I spent the majority of my time getting approval to do the kind of work I was trained to do.

I jokingly (only partially joking) thought the solution would be for the government to hire one new person to replace every three current employees, and then double the standard salary. This increase in salary and decrease in employee numbers, combined with making performance affect your pay and making it actually possible to fire someone (*gasp*), would be a fantastic first step, in my opinion. In theory this would save money and time without sacrificing any productivity (I promise you that an employee worth $140k/year is better than three worth $70k), but of course in practice...

Anyway I initially saw this as an opportunity for me to make a difference; here was a problem that needed to be solved, an important problem, and I had some ideas about moving toward a solution. Of course I didn't actually suggest firing anyone, but I did work with senior leadership on improving morale and productivity. However, I quickly learned that change doesn't come easily, if at all, to a government facility. This was the most frustrating part. I'm happy to be presented with a challenge, but only when I can make progress toward a solution. During my talks with senior leadership I would hear time lines for changes that involved the word "years." To them this must have sounded reasonable, but I didn't want to spend that much of my life solving this particular problem. So I left.

[b]Re: reporting lazy employees:[/b]

I want to respond to Larry's request that we report lazy employees. Of course I encountered many and never reported individuals by name. The reason was that it didn't seem fair to single one person out for doing something that nearly everyone is doing. The policies [i]produce[/i] the laziness. You can't get fired. Period. Ever. Once you've been around for a year you have a job for life. Also, your performance has essentially zero effect on your pay. How can you expect someone to work hard in this situation?

I also don't think it's fair to report my organization because they were trying extremely hard to fix these issues and improve new-employee morale. I blame the nature of the system, not our organization or its employees.

[b]Lawyers:[/b]

That's enough complaining about government employment. It has issues, yes, but like I said before, the problem relevant to us is that it was falsely advertised and we don't really learn what we agreed to until after signing the contract. I know absolutely nothing about law, but I bet a good lawyer could get you out of paying SMART back if you left early. But who can afford a good lawyer on a government salary?

[b]Problem prevention:[/b]

I think requiring SMARTs to do an internship at their SF prior to signing the contract would go a long way toward solving this problem. But implement it right. It should not be optional; make sure it's required. Undergrads don't know enough about the situation to keep from making a decision they'll regret until they've been there.

[b]Conclusion:[/b]

Thank you, Larry, for reading these posts. As I mentioned, I think false advertising is the problem. The type of students SMART attracts don't want to put up with the government work environment. Whenever I saw someone with a Master's degree in Electrical Engineering taking out the garbage, doing CBTs, or spending hours trying to figure out which signatures were needed on a justification of why we need to update to a new version of Eclipse, while someone else watched cat videos in the background, the phrase, "this is why we can't have good employees" came to mind.

I think the early internship idea ([i]prior[/i] to contract signing) is [i]great[/i] for new SMARTs, but it doesn't help those who are already trapped in the system. I suggest removing 1 year from every single current SMART's commitment as a show of good faith. Just to say, "we really weren't trying to trick you into signing your life over to us, and we are sorry for accidentally lying about your future." It looks like the website may have cut back on some of its promises about cutting-edge research/tech etc. That's good too.

Since starting graduate school I've worked about 55 hours/week, pulled about two all-nighters/month, been put under tremendous pressure to meet deadlines, and it's still preferable to working at my SF. I'm learning new things every day, participating in cutting-edge research, making a difference in the world, and when I need a new piece of software I can download and install it in 10 seconds rather than waiting 6 months for someone to sign a piece of paper pretending that they've evaluated it for security risks.

Thanks for the detailed comments.

I'd really like to know where you work and who you are talking to (by name).

I can anonymize at my end but will reach out via email.

Please send me an email at larry dot schuette at navy dot mil

Thanks,
Larry

My answers to the original poster:

[quote]
1. Are you doing anything related to your degree?
[/quote]
The job description was quite rosy compared to what I actually ended up doing. My job responsibilities did not require an engineering degree at all, of any flavor. Most of my coworkers honestly spent their whole day watching movies and youtube on their computer. On the occasion that I was tasked with work, I filled out paperwork so that the government could buy parts for the equipment our office was responsible for. It did not require an engineering degree at all. I occasionally interacted with a defense contractor for a project, but did nothing technical.

Before I get accused of not being proactive, I'd like to state that I was anything but lazy here. The only "tools" we had were a POS office computer with Microsoft Office. So, even if there was a technical project to be done in our office - we didn't have the means to do it! There were several projects that I fought to do (instead of contract them out). I brought in my own personal laptop with engineering software and my own hardware such as an oscilloscope and DAQs I had, and tried to tackle a few of them while they were in the process of contracting them out. I found it extremely challenging to get things done. For example, I couldn't buy anything except office supplies. Like you, everyone looked at me like I was crazy trying to get work done, and dragging my own equipment in to do it! For being an office full of "engineers," no one was even curious enough to ask me what I was trying to do, how I was trying to accomplish it -- let alone had any advice to give.

[quote]
2. Has SMART helped or hindered your development within your field. Have you learned anything in your time at your SF, or have your skills atrophied?
[/quote]
I had to do the same as you, bring my own stuff in to work on during the work day. I bought my own hardware outside of work too, trying to remain relevant and up-to-date with industry. I did not learn anything technical from my SF directly. I spent a considerable amount of time keeping my skills up outside of work. Finding another job in private industry generally requires a technical interview....

This is sad though. There is so much more to learn than what is in our textbooks and what we learn in college in undergrad and grad school. As an engineer who is a recent graduate, you should by no means be the most technically inclined person in the room. You should be reaching out, and learning from senior engineers. As you're probably discovering, this is impossible to do with a non-technical group at a SF.

[quote]
3. Have you been lied to?
[/quote]
Yes - job responsibility and pay. The pay figure that was advertised to us at our orientation was modified once we were all knee-deep in SMART. It was not a small cut either. I did not meet anyone at my SF that did anything close to the job description that was advertised to me.

[quote]
4. Do you think the SMART program is one-sided?
5. Are you out of the loop?
[/quote]

Combined these two,

Sure do. They advertise on their website that they want to attract the best and the brightest to work in a research environment. As I stated above, the description provided and the actual work provided was totally different.

After my internship, I could tell that there was going to be problems. I tried contacting HR at my SF, my CA, and the liaison. I traded several emails back and forth, had a few phone calls. At first, I tried to transfer to a different group on base -- I then tried to get transferred to a different SF. I got excuse after excuse from HR and from the service liaison. As some on this forum have tried, I tried to interview at other DoD places myself. SMART would not have any part of it. I tried to contact the SMART office even after graduation. I think they only responded once.

I am still shocked to this day why they would rather participants be miserable and leave (and get a very poor return on the tax payer's dollar) than try to fix the problem. I know at my SF alone that almost everyone has left in my cohort -- either before their commitment was up, or immediately following completion of Phase 2.
----

Larry,

I appreciate you being attentive to this forum. As was just mentioned in the previous post, we have some very major problems with SMART. There are some of us that have left or plan to leave (early or otherwise) and have done all of the things in our power to make sure we will enjoy our work and our SF. SMART is a huge commitment with major ramifications to a participant's life, financially and career wise. The fact that SMART treats the scholarship as an exclusively one-way street is extremely frustrating - and forces many of us to do the exact thing we do not want to do, but have no other choice - and that is to leave early. It is nothing short of outrageous.

Like others on this forum, I'd name my SF - but feel that can be used to identify us. In general, I'd say though that if the facility requires scholars to take DAU classes, there is a good chance SMART should remove that facility from the prospective sponsoring facilities list. The goal shouldn't be to hire as much DoD employees as possible, it should be to hire them, and put them to meaningful work, like SMART advertises.

[quote]
Many folks aren't cut out to be a DOD scientist or engineer. You have to create more of your own opportunities, and you have to manage your career very actively.
[/quote]
I tried to remain relevant, and create my own opportunities as discussed above. It is (or at least was) extremely challenging to get a transfer approved. I even tried to do most of the work - find contacts, line up interviews, etc. Quite frankly, the SF HR, the SMART office, and the service liaison were honestly more interested in sticking their head in the sand than to try to solve the problem. It'll be good news if things are better now - but for those of us that have already left - either pre-or post phase 2, it's too late.

[quote="CMMMM"]I asked a few months ago about details on how the program measures retention rate, because I find 80% or whatever hard to believe.[/quote]

Yeah I seriously doubt 80% retention is an accurate figure. I can't foresee a situation in which I would stay on even a single day after my service commitment is up.

I also warn people not to get involved with SMART or other scholarship for service programs. If the job was so great, they probably wouldn't have to lock people into contracts to work for them. I had other scholarship offers when I accepted the SMART scholarship, too. I guess it doesn't do any good to dwell on that now.

Thanks for posting- I really appreciate your input.

Hi Larry,

I've seen a few of your posts over the past few months and I appreciate your insight.

As far as complaining to the IG, I have already ran these issues up the chain. If I do go directly to the IG, it will be on my way out. I doubt it will do any good anyway. I've been dealing with a particular issue at work for about 6 months now, and it's done nothing except earn me enemies. I don't want to get into the details, because it would easily identify me to anyone reading this. However, I will say that I was lied to by my SF, and I actually have email traffic that shows that I was lied to. Nobody wants to do anything to fix the situation, so I'm left to pick up the pieces on my own. Frankly, I'm done complaining. I've given my SF every opportunity to do the right thing, and they have made it clear that they have no intention doing so.

I readily admit that I'm not cut out to work for the government. The way I've been treated in my time working with SMART and the DoD is inexcusable. I wouldn't expect a janitor to be treated the way I have. I've been ignored, lied to, bullied, threatened, and just generally treated like garbage. Then, my superiors act as if I should be happy to have this job. I guess they're used to working with people who couldn't find a job elsewhere if they wanted to. I've spent a little over a week looking for a new job and I've already been offered a position that would almost double my salary. I'm hard-working, marketable, and I deserve better than this.

There is only one thing keeping me here, and that's my service commitment. If it wasn't for that, I would have walked away a long time ago. Honestly, I'm at the point now that I really don't even care about that.

All I want to know is how much I will owe, and how long I have to pay it back. Is that really such an extravagant request? My SF has done absolutely everything they can to show me how little they value my services. It seems like the SMART program should be eager to hand me a bill and send me on my way. It's incredibly unfair to keep SMART scholars in the dark about this. When I asked my service liaison if someone could contact me so we could work out payment arrangements, he flat out refused. Why is this so difficult? It would take 10 minutes to work it out over the phone. For the life of me, I don't see what the problem is. There are a finite number of SMART scholars who leave early. This isn't a Sisyphean task.

For what it's worth, I do think that your interaction on this board is helping. I hope you don't take this as a personal attack against you. I've just had a terrible experience with SMART.

There are two valid sets of concerns raised above.

One set relates to the SMART Program. The other to being a government employee.

Let me address being a government employee.

I'd ask those who are unhappy with there SF to name the SF. Trust me, if your co-workers are as screwed up as you think, they won't be monitoring this board to see if you are trash talking them (or speaking truth to power...). This will shine light on what a lousy place it is to work, and hopefully you'll prevent others from making the mistake you feel you made.

Your organization has an IG. Given that you are already planning on bailing you owe it to yourself and others to go to the IG and complain about your co-workers. Bring facts/figures/supporting documentation (a journal works).

You own your future - plan your escape now. Transfer to another SF, another Department and head to a better place. Trust me - no one cares about your future more than you do.

Sadly, the government has become more bureaucratic. Perhaps more so in the supporting Departments, which has the effect of making transaction that seem normal (eg, hiring, firing, promotions) harder to do, and requiring more supervision of the line manager.

Many folks aren't cut out to be a DOD scientist or engineer. You have to create more of your own opportunities, and you have to manage your career very actively. These can be a bonus or a curse. I have had friends bail because they couldn't handle the temporal incoherency who have been happy elsewhere - and others that came back. Somewhere I have an Instruction on returning...

---
Regarding SMART. I watch the staff of the SDO go through 6 pages of taskers every week - so someone is being responded to... There are a large # in the SMART Cohort, and the new SMART Program Office director is trying to simultaneously get the services to take a larger role in managing all the Phases, resolve the past, and plan for the future.

I'd have to dumpster dive old posts, but I don't think I've let a post that could be answered by a non-SMART scholar go unanswered in the last 3-4 months. As the Director of Research at ONR (all Navy fundamental and applied science funds come through my office) I have a vested interest in making SMART a better program. Ideas like requiring an intern position at the SF, with your future supervisor, prior to accepting the Scholarship are being discussed by at the Pentagon, and with Service leadership to make SMART more successful.

ATB
Larry

PS: and to think that I was chatting with my Deputy about 1730 today saying that I hadn't seen a new post in a while and maybe the engagement on this board was helping. Well, maybe in the future that will be true.

It is posts like this that make me thankful for how my placement turned out. I still view accepting the SMART scholarship as the biggest mistake of my life/career, and I have vigorously tried to dissuade as many students as possible from entering the program. I think that if potential applicants understand what the SMART program and working for the gov actually entails, they will only apply/accept if desperate. In my case, I already had a fellowship through my university, but I accepted the SMART scholarship because I had grand misconceptions about working for the DoD. The biggest let-down for me was to observe the pervasive culture of laziness (as you and others can attest to).

Re: 1, yes, fortunately I am doing something related to my degree. When I arrived at my SF, the work they wanted me to do was better suited for an undergrad student than a PhD, so I fought to start and develop projects that yielded work worthy of publication (and I don't mean the ridiculous Tech Reports that everyone uses to meet metrics). Just as you have experienced, many of my co-workers are content to dink around on the internet for 3-4 hours per day. Unfortunately there isn't much accountability when you work for the gov, and once you have that status, you have to really F up to get fired (recall that DOE guy that downloaded and watched porn on his work computer and still kept his job). I commend you for taking the initiative to find productive things to do - that will help you when the time comes to find employment elsewhere.

Re: 3, yes, my mentor lied to my face about the salary I would receive. By the time you actually hear what they'll pay you (after you supply a letter from your school stating your degree is conferred- probably 2-3 wks before your start date...), it is way too late to get other offers (from other DoD facilities if you want to fulfill your commitment). I've talked to others in the SMART program who've had similar experiences, though I figure this is more of a gov facility thing than a SMART thing since they wash their hands from the start of any salary promises.

The program and its propaganda website are misleading, but that is necessary to attract applicants. This forum didn't exist when I applied, but nowadays, any student that is looking to apply can find the other side of the coin in this forum via a cursory internet search. People like Ed B can write off the posters in this forum as much as they want, but the fact is that we will leave as soon as possible. I asked a few months ago about details on how the program measures retention rate, because I find 80% or whatever hard to believe.

As for what to do, I'm happy to help you in any effort you have in mind. At this point, I've just resolved myself to getting through the remainder of my commitment with my sanity, though if terms of payback are actually published, I will assess my options for leaving early.

A thoughtful email from a frustrated employees deserves an answer in kind.

I am a man behind the curtain...
I will respond after I get through my emails, eat my dinner, and put my kids to bed.

ATB
Larry

I've been in Phase II for some time now. I had a negative experience at work recently (one of many over the past year and a half) and basically, it's the last straw. I'd like to get some feedback from other Phase II or Phase III SMART scholars to get an idea of how many others have had similar experiences.

1. Are you doing anything related to your degree?

During my time as a Phase II SMART scholar, I have never been tasked with anything related to Computer Science, which is my field of study. I have, however, been tasked with taking out the recycling, mopping the kitchen, cleaning up trash in front of my building, and many, many other tasks that you could pay someone minimum wage for. This is a waste of government money, as well as a waste of my time. Don't get me wrong, I'm not above doing some manual labor every once in a while. I just think that I should also do some CS-related work from time to time.

2. Has SMART helped or hindered your development within your field. Have you learned anything in your time at your SF, or have your skills atrophied?

Call me old fashioned, but I think that when you quit a job, you should be more marketable than when you started. Seeing as how I haven't had the opportunity to do any real-world CS projects, I have had to come up with my own projects just to keep myself occupied and to attempt to keep my skills sharp. People that I work with give me this silly look when I say that I'd like to be doing some real work. I guess I should be satisfied with surfing the internet all day. I've never met a SMART scholar that got into the program because they enjoyed slacking off. We want to be challenged, and we want to achieve something. And by challenged, I don't mean the annual cyber-awareness video game challenge and other nonsensical CBT BS.

3. Have you been lied to?

OK, so this is kind of a foregone conclusion, since the entire SMART website is a lie. Sometimes I visit the site just for a laugh. Looking back, It's hilarious that I thought I would actually be doing meaningful work. Personally, I've been lied to about my pay several times as well as numerous other aspects of my job. It's almost like the government is in the business of making their work sound way more important than it is.

Also, mentorship - what's that? I've never once had anyone at my SF ask me what my career goals are, or even if I had any. Nobody has offered me any meaningful advise on my development. Actually, one time a guy from the NSA told me all about the best way to sneak out of work early. I don't think that counts. Mentorship is supposed to be a major part of the SMART program. I guess I should consider myself lucky, since I've never directly worked with anyone that was qualified to be a mentor.

4. Do you think the SMART program is one-sided?

Speaking of lying- while I was in Phase I there was several times that our stipend payment came late. We would get multiple emails saying the money was on its way, but usually SMART managed to miss several of the deadlines (that they set for themselves!) before they finally came through with the money. Now, think about what would happen if you did that. What if you didn't meet the GPA requirement one semester and you just told them, "Hey, I'll make it up next semester." Do you think they would let that slide? I really doubt it. I'm pretty sure you'd be out of the program. If you ask me, it seems like SMART is already in breach of their contract. But hey, I'm not a lawyer (although I'm seriously considering getting one).

That's just one example. Same thing with trying to figure out what the payback will be if you leave Phase II early. We were told that they would start the collection process this year, and it's now December 12. Spoiler alert: they're not going to figure it out this year. Is it really that hard to send someone a bill? Again, SMART can't meet its deadlines. Bear in mind, these aren't unreasonable deadlines set by an outside agency. They make these deadlines for themselves, and then they miss them. Seriously people, get it together.

5. Are you out of the loop?

SMART is about as transparent as a brick wall. Why all the secrecy? It's almost as if the sole job of your CA and Service Liaison is to keep you from talking to anyone that could actually help you. That's the opposite of what they're supposed to be doing. I'd like to talk to the man behind the curtain, please.

[b]Bonus Question: What do we do about it? [/b]

I'm of the opinion that our biggest weakness is that we are each acting as individuals, rather than as a group. By posting this message, I am basically testing the waters. If I'm the only one that's had this experience in the SMART program, then fine. I'll leave it alone. But if you feel like you've had a similar experience, please comment. If there is a meaningful response, I will set up a mailing list or something and we can start working together. I'm not talking about a mutiny. I'm just talking about leveling the playing field and making sure that the SMART program is as committed as we are. I don't think that's so much to ask.