Former Federal Employees Report Capacity, Expertise Risks Across Agencies

A nonrandom survey conducted by the Accountability and Reform Research Consortium (ARRC) gathered responses from more than 2,000 former career federal employees who left government on or after November 5, 2024, and represented 55 agencies. The survey addresses a gap in agency exit data: researchers said agencies generally had not asked departing employees at scale why they left or how they experienced their separations. Its findings provide a reported account of workforce exits, not a representative census of all departing federal employees, and should be interpreted with that limitation in mind.

Among respondents, perceived political influence was the leading reported reason for leaving. Nearly half included politicization among their three primary reasons for separating, while compensation and career advancement—conventional retention considerations—ranked near the bottom. The researchers reported similar politicization scores across several political-ideology groups, including slightly liberal, moderate, slightly conservative, and other respondents. That result suggests the concern was not confined to one surveyed ideological group, though the nonrandom sample does not establish how prevalent these views are across the entire federal workforce.

The survey also challenges the idea that most exits were experienced as voluntary. Nearly three-quarters of respondents said their departures involved pressure, incentives, or involuntary separation. On a zero-to-one measure of perceived coercion, respondents who were laid off averaged 0.75, compared with 0.17 among those who retired as planned. The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) has emphasized that most 2025 workforce separations were voluntary, including through the deferred resignation program; the survey adds former employees’ reported experiences to that discussion rather than resolving the difference in how separations are characterized.

For government contractors, the main relevance is indirect but operational: reported reductions in expertise and agency capacity can affect the government personnel responsible for requirements development, technical reviews, approvals, oversight, and contract administration. The survey reports concerns about reduced public services, growing backlogs, and increased error risks. As survey co-lead Gary Hollibaugh put it, “By and large, people were saying that there was going to be a dramatic reduction in capacity in the agencies that were being left behind, not only in terms of the expertise that was going out the door, but also with the ways that the actual handoffs were being handled.” These are reported concerns, not measured contract delays, but they are useful context for program and capture teams assessing execution dependencies.

• ARRC collected responses from more than 2,000 former career civil servants across 55 agencies; the survey was nonrandom.
• Respondents had left federal service on or after November 5, 2024.
• Perceived political influence was the top reported reason for separation; nearly half named it among their three primary reasons.
• Nearly three-quarters said their departure involved pressure, incentives, or involuntary separation.
• Reported coercion averaged 0.75 for laid-off respondents and 0.17 for those who retired as planned, using a zero-to-one scale.
• Respondents reported loss of expertise, reduced public services, and risks of increased backlogs and errors.
• Contractors supporting affected agencies should assess dependencies on government reviewers, contracting personnel, technical authorities, and program-office staff; allow for potential review or approval delays without assuming a specific impact.
• Program teams can strengthen transition plans, document decisions and assumptions, and make handoffs more resilient to turnover or gaps in institutional knowledge.
• The findings may point to experienced former federal employees available in the labor market, but identify no specific hiring initiative, contract vehicle, solicitation, or procurement opportunity.
• The U.S. Office of Personnel Management has characterized most 2025 separations as voluntary, while the survey records many respondents’ accounts of pressure or involuntary departure; these are distinct perspectives on the exits.