The federal government shed 256,000 employees between December 2024 and January 2026, representing an 11 percent decline across 22 major agencies, according to a Government Accountability Office report released June 17, 2026. The workforce reduction was driven by executive orders in 2025 aimed at cutting federal employment and restricting hiring across most positions.
The scale of the separation was substantial. Nearly 378,000 federal employees separated from agencies during 2025, with only about 127,000 hired, leaving a net loss of more than 250,000 positions. The departures came through multiple mechanisms: voluntary resignations and retirements, incentive programs encouraging workers to leave, and formal reductions in force.
The reductions did not affect agencies uniformly. The Department of Education saw the steepest cuts, with workforce declines exceeding 45 percent. The departments of Agriculture and Interior, both with health and safety missions, experienced about 30 percent staffing losses. By contrast, the Department of Homeland Security and Department of Veterans Affairs had among the lowest separation rates, at roughly 11 percent each. Eighteen of the 22 agencies analyzed experienced workforce declines greater than 10 percent.
Probationary employees—those in their first one to two years of federal service or newly promoted into supervisory roles—bore a disproportionate impact. According to the GAO, probationary employees separated at an average rate of 19 percent during 2025, compared with 15 percent of all federal employees. At the Department of Agriculture, nearly 42 percent of probationary employees separated, versus about 30 percent of other staff. The Department of Energy saw 34 percent of probationary workers depart, compared with 19 percent overall.
The Trump administration’s workforce reduction strategy began with hiring freezes and voluntary separation incentives in early 2025, then escalated to formal reductions in force. In January 2025, the Office of Personnel Management directed agencies to determine whether to retain employees in probationary status. Thousands of probationary workers were subsequently terminated. A federal judge later ruled that OPM had unlawfully directed agencies to fire probationary employees en masse, though the broader reduction continued.
The GAO found that about 78.6 percent of probationary separations were classified as voluntary, while 17.8 percent resulted from reduction-in-force actions or other terminations. The remaining 3.6 percent transferred to other agencies. These proportions mirrored separation patterns for all federal employees.
Historically, probationary terminations could only occur due to poor performance or misconduct. In 2025, the administration expanded the grounds for probationary dismissal. OPM issued a final rule allowing agencies to terminate probationary employees based on organizational needs, agency goals, and whether dismissal would advance the “efficiency of the service,” in addition to performance and conduct. Probationary employees lost most appeal rights, able to challenge terminations only on grounds of partisan politics, marital status, or procedural failure.
According to GAO director of strategic issues Dawn Locke, the early-career impact raised concerns about future federal hiring. “Executive orders and OPM guidance resulted in the separation of more than 50,000 early-career individuals,” Locke said, even as the Office of Personnel Management launched a separate initiative three months later to strengthen recruitment of early-career talent. “It’s a bit difficult to understand the reasoning behind these actions,” she added.
The workforce reductions raised questions about the federal government’s ability to maintain service delivery and address long-standing mission-critical skills gaps. Federal agencies have struggled for decades to fill specialized positions and retain expertise in technical fields. Locke said the impact on agencies’ capacity to meet their missions remained uncertain. “It’s hard to imagine that these reductions have not exacerbated the skills gap problem,” she stated. “However, without the reduction-in-force or reorganization plans that these agencies are supposed to have by now, it has not been possible for us to truly determine impacts or what this all means for meeting mission needs.”
Geographic variation in separations was also evident. States including Montana, Idaho, and Utah saw between 31 and 40 percent of federal employees separate across select agencies. Southern states such as Texas and Florida experienced lower separation rates of 15 to 20 percent. The GAO noted that workforce losses were concentrated in regions where federal agencies maintain significant operations, with particularly steep separations in less populous states.
Sources
- U.S. Government Accountability Office — GAO report (GAO-26-108583) on federal agency workforce changes from July 2025 to January 2026, published June 17, 2026; confirmed 256,000-employee net decline across 22 CFO Act agencies and detailed agency-specific separation rates
- Federal News Network — June 12, 2026 article citing GAO findings on probationary employee separation rates (19% vs. 15% overall), agency-level impacts, geographic variation, and interview with GAO director Dawn Locke on early-career workforce losses and skills gaps
- U.S. Government Accountability Office — GAO report (GAO-26-108557) on federal workforce changes and executive actions that reshaped probationary period regulations in 2025
