During the second week of the Trump Administration, the Office of Personnel Management offered most federal employees months of paid leave if they agreed to resign. Later that spring, some agencies offered employees a second opportunity to resign with severance. These opportunities, collectively known as the Deferred Resignation Program, or DRP, were described by OPM Director Scott Kupor as a “step towards a smarter, leaner, more effective government.”
However, new analysis from the Partnership for Public Service suggests that, in many cases, the DRP accomplished the opposite. Agencies offloaded employees without considering how workforce reductions and the resulting loss of critical expertise aligned with agency goals:
- Positions have been backfilled across the workforce—20,557 employees who separated under the DRP can be matched to a new hire in the same agency subcomponent and occupational series.
- In many cases, agencies were hiring for roles while placing or preparing to place departing employees in similar roles on administrative leave.
- Specialized expertise has been especially impacted. When replacements join the government, they come in an average of 1.4 grades lower on the GS scale than those who left. This gap is exacerbated in some positions critical to public safety, including meteorologists and criminal investigators.
Paid to leave, then swiftly replaced
The level of attrition seen last year is unprecedented in recent history. This increase was largely driven by separations through the DRP, which accounted for 41% of departures in 2025.
The DRP was offered to nearly every federal employee, with limited exceptions for jobs involving immigration enforcement or national security and employees excepted by their agency.
Unsurprisingly, many of these positions were not dispensable. From nurses and attorneys to contact center representatives and security guards, there was seemingly little thought about which positions were truly essential.
The government has now begun to hire employees with skills similar to those who separated under the DRP. By June 2026, 20,557 employees had been hired in the same agency subcomponents and occupational series as prior DRP separations.
Case Study: IRS Staffing Shortages
The IRS lost 4,566 customer service representatives because of the DRP. Although the agency tried to rescind some offers due to concerns about “critical vacancies,” it remained short-staffed and received authorization to replace many of these positions.
Due to a combination of factors, including the government shutdown and new vetting requirements, the IRS did not meet its hiring goals. Moreover, even when replacements were hired, delays prevented new employees from being fully trained before tax season, further limiting the assistance they provided to taxpayers.
Compared with the 2025 filing season, the IRS saw its average hold time increase by 75%. The most popular phone line (Installment Agreement/Balance Due) had an average hold time of 45 minutes, up from 26 minutes in 2025, and only 31% of calls were answered by a representative, down from 46% in 2025.
Hiring while employees are on leave
After accepting the DRP, employees would wind down their work before being placed on administrative leave until the effective date of their departure, typically in September 2025.
In many cases, agencies were hiring while employees in similar positions had likely been placed on administrative leave. From February to August 2025, 8,642 employees were hired in subcomponents and occupational series associated with DRP departures before experienced employees had even left.
Case Study: Department of Agriculture Consumer Safety Inspectors
Last year, consumer complaints about meat, poultry and egg products increased by nearly 40% to a 12-year high. At the same time, the USDA allowed food safety inspectors to accept the DRP while the agency hired in the same places that these employees had worked. Between March and August 2025, we identified job postings for USDA consumer safety inspectors in 54 cities that later had an employee depart under the DRP.
Replaced employees lack experience
When new employees are hired, they tend to come with less experience. Some 63% have not worked in the federal government before, and among employees on GS-equivalent pay scales, new hires come in at an average of about 1.4 grades below those who left under the DRP in a given agency subcomponent and occupational series.
This gap in experience is exacerbated in many positions critical to public safety and the environment.
Case Study: The FBI’s Reduced Hiring Standards
To rebuild its workforce, the FBI has modified hiring processes “in ways that some current and former officials see as a lowering of long-accepted standards.” Many agents have been promoted without working in agency headquarters—something that was previously considered important to ensure employees had “a holistic view of bureau operations.”
Conclusion
In 2002, Congress passed the Chief Human Capital Officers Act, codifying a process for OPM to ensure agency buyout plans aligned with organizational objectives and mission-critical employees were retained.
Unfortunately, as our analysis demonstrates, the Deferred Resignation Program did not fully consider these factors. Many employees were paid to resign only to be replaced just months later, often at a more junior level.
While it is impossible to fully quantify this loss of institutional knowledge and capacity, one thing is clear: The DRP has made it harder for agencies across the government to serve the public.
Data and methodology
Workforce data is sourced from OPM’s Federal Workforce Data site, and food inspector job postings are sourced from an archive of the USAJOBS historical job announcement dataset. All calculations include only permanent career employees. Separations and accessions data excludes transfers.
The Partnership used artificial intelligence tools to support its data analysis.
Learn more about the Partnership’s Government for a New Era initiative, which seeks to develop practical, bold reforms for a more effective, responsive and accountable government.