USDA Lost One Fifth of Workforce, OIG Finds

The U.S. Department of Agriculture lost more than 20,300 employees between January 12 and June 14, 2025, the department’s Office of Inspector General reported on December 22. That figure represented roughly one fifth of the more than 110,300 people employed at the USDA at the start of the year, leaving deep and rapid reductions across nearly all subagencies.

The OIG compiled departure data tied to pay periods and separation records to measure workforce changes in the period described by the report as the first five months of the Trump administration. About three quarters of the departures occurred through an administration offered financial incentive program designed to shrink the federal workforce. The OIG compilation shows 15,114 employees accepted the voluntary resignation program during that interval. The remainder of separations registered as resignation, retirement, termination, or other exit pathways.

The staffing losses were concentrated unevenly by state and office. The OIG noted disproportionate impacts in Rhode Island, Maryland, Alaska and Vermont, while California and Texas recorded the highest absolute numbers of departures. The report found deep reductions across nearly every USDA subagency, though the public summary did not include a full ranked breakdown by program.

The department responded that it had been transparent about plans to optimize and reduce its workforce and to refocus on farmers and customers, and it said the bulk of the resignations were voluntary. USDA officials also said they had not stopped hiring for 52 roles identified as critical to core operations.

Senator Amy Klobuchar, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Agriculture Committee, warned of practical consequences. Losing nearly 20 percent of all USDA staff weakens the department’s ability to respond to challenges facing our farmers, leaves our food supply chains more vulnerable to threats like New World Screwworm and avian flu, and undermines efforts to drive the rural economy forward.

Scientists, former agency officials and lawmakers said the pace and scale of the reductions complicate the department’s capacity to carry out biosecurity and regulatory responsibilities. Surveillance, rapid response to animal and plant disease outbreaks, inspection and oversight of supply chain points and delivery of farm and rural assistance programs all depend on experienced personnel dispersed across states and regional offices. Staff departures concentrated in small states and rural offices can produce outsized gaps in local expertise and service delivery.

Public health experts caution that a thinner federal workforce increases reliance on state and local partners and on contractor networks, which may not be evenly distributed or prepared for large events. For rural residents who already face health care and infrastructure disparities, disruptions in USDA programs could slow recovery after disasters and reduce access to nutrition and agricultural support.

The OIG report is likely to prompt congressional oversight questions about the design and targeting of the incentive program, the decision making that identified positions as nonessential, and plans to backfill critical functions. Lawmakers and advocates say ensuring continuity in biosecurity, food safety and rural services will require transparent staffing plans, prioritized hiring for front line roles, and sustained attention to equity in where and how cuts are implemented.