Andy’s story is an all too familiar one for many executives leaving federal service.

Andy — not his real name — found what he thought was the perfect fit in the private sector after leaving federal service earlier this year. It was with a big company, in a sector he was intimately familiar with and the opportunities across the federal sector were growing.

But less than a year into his new position, Andy is joining the ever growing number of former federal employees who are hanging out their own shingle as a consultant.

“There was a little bit of a mismatch in expectations, probably both on my part and on the company’s part. I thought the role I would fill would make use of my background and skills at a policy level. But the company was looking for someone who was more technical and could help out at the tactical level,” said Andy, who requested anonymity in order to talk about his experience with a federal contractor. “Too many times people in these private sector companies don’t actually understand how to leverage government executives and government executive expertise.”

Andy’s story likely will be repeated by hundreds of federal executives over the next year.

If you’ve spent any time on LinkedIn over the last month, you may have seen what seems to be a constant stream of executives leaving federal service. Whether they’re retiring or they took the deferred resignation program or it’s just through normal attrition, the exodus of federal executives feels more acute than ever before.

Just take a look at the numbers:

There are 551 fewer Senior Executive Service (SES) members in 2026 than in 2025, according to the Office of Personnel Management’s new workforce data website. The number of SESers dropped to 7,336 as of Jan. 8, 2026, from 7,887 in August 2024.

Meanwhile the pipeline of people at the General Schedule, or GS-14 and GS-15 levels, who are in line to become SESers, also saw significant one-year reductions.

The reduction of employees at the GS-14 level comes after years of growth. For example, in 2019, agencies had 117,600 GS-14s, but the 8,000 drop between 2024 and 2025 basically erases all the growth since 2023.

The changes to employees at the GS-15 level are less dramatic, but still erases growth, albeit smaller growth, since 2021.

The reduction of senior leaders isn’t all that different than what agencies saw across the board last year. There are 219,000 fewer federal employees in 2025 than in 2024.

Interestingly enough, OPM says the median age of the federal worker remains at 47 years old, but the percentage of federal employees who are eligible to retire dropped to 13.5% from 15%. The Small Business Administration and NASA have the largest percentage of employees, more than 25% respectively, who are eligible to retire.

OPM says 105,858 retired from federal service in 2025. The Defense Department saw the largest number of employees leave via retirement at 31,689, while the departments of Veterans Affairs, Homeland Security, Agriculture, Justice, Treasury and Health and Human Services all saw more than 6,000 employees leave via retirement.

Pipeline of future leaders narrows

Concerns over the impending retirement wave isn’t new. Good government groups and employee organizations have been highlighting their concerns for decades. But with the combination of retirements, employees taking the DRP, the administration firing probationary employees and people just plain quitting, there is more concern than ever about the pipeline of current and up-and-coming federal managers.

Michelle Sutter, the director of the Senior Executives Association board, spent over 15 years in government before leaving last year under the DRP. Sutter said the one-year reductions in SESers, as well as GS-14s and GS-15s, is worrisome for several reasons.

“In conversations with our members, a consistent theme that we hear is that we have executive-level employees that are literally, at times, doing the jobs of three to four people, and that’s unprecedented, because it tells us that regardless of whether you’re at the operational level or the executive level, you’ve got people functioning in roles sometimes that are outside of their daily operations that they would normally do,” Sutter said in an interview with Federal News Network. “The effect of this is it puts stress on the leaders. It makes it difficult to focus on mission delivery. If you’re having a tough time focusing on mission delivery, it makes it difficult to provide services to the American people. It also creates a stressful situation and leads to burnout because leaders are in a position where it’s difficult to lead effectively when you’re trying to manage daily operations, doing multiple roles yourself, and then you’re expected to lead teams and manage programs and make sure that you meet the needs of the agencies.”

Sutter said GS-14s and GS-15s, who are more at the operational level, are facing similar challenges.

While these GS-14 and GS-15s may now have more opportunities to step into acting or temporary roles that would help them prepare to move into the SES, burnout, cuts to training and education opportunities and the need to deal with constant change remain a big challenge for these employees.

Sutter said the pipeline of senior managers who are ready to move into the SES has also been narrowed.

“We need to really focus on our career senior executives. I think over the next year, success is really going to depend on stabilizing leadership teams being disciplined about the use of different roles, whether they be acting or permanent, and really investing in executive development and recognizing that executive effectiveness is critical to mission delivery,” Sutter said. “This is not about routine federal leadership as it was in the past. How agencies support career executives now will absolutely shape continuity, performance and leadership capacity well beyond the transition.”

Sutter added that SEA was pleased to see OPM coming out with new training and education programs. She said SEA hopes agencies have the funding and give employees the time to take advantage of these courses.

Advice for those joining the private sector

For those executives jumping on the wave of leaving federal service, the private sector may be just as challenging. But the experiences of Andy and others demonstrate what executives need to consider as they move into industry.

“The job market is pretty tough for a lot of people today. It’s flooded. It’s kind of a buyer’s market at the moment,” Andy said. “It’s easy to say, you really need to make sure that, that you’ve got the right fit. But for somebody who really needs a job and needs the income, that may be easier said than done. But I would say, ideally, you really should be conscious about that fit aspect. The one thing that I found as I talked to other government executives, who had worked with industry, is they made a similar comment that they thought part of the challenge was that a lot of times people in these companies don’t actually understand how to leverage government executives and government executive expertise.”

Tim Teal, the CEO and founder The Bellwether Group and a former National Security Agency and U.S. Cyber Command official, posted some solid advice on LinkedIn about what federal executives should keep in mind as they are leaving government.

Teal said most of the exits he’s seen were not about competence. They were about mismatched expectations. “The executive thinks they are there to advise and shape strategy. The company expects immediate impact,” he said. “In government, authority is derived from role, statute, and mission. In industry especially government contracting sector, authority is derived from revenue, margin and growth.”

Another rule of thumb Teal highlighted was about reputation. He said if you think your reputation will protect you from layoff or other challenges, you are incorrect. Teal said reputations open doors. Performance keeps them open.

“The most successful former government leaders I know didn’t cling to status. They learned the business. They tied their value to outcomes. And they never confused respect with immunity,” he wrote to Federal News Network in an email. “The biggest mistake I see is people negotiating the title before they understand the business. If you do not know how the company makes money, who buys from them and where they are hurting, you are walking in blind. Don’t accept roles with vague charters. If no one can clearly explain what success looks like in six months, that role probably will not last six months.”

As for Andy, who is now going out on his own as a consultant, he said while his experience was definitely eye opening, he doesn’t blame the company or himself for things not working out. But he does offer one piece of advice: “Trust your gut. I did have some sort of ticklish feelings in my gut, like, that’s not the answer that I was looking for.”

The post A sea of challenges opens up with 105,000 feds retiring first appeared on Federal News Network.

© Amelia Brust/Federal News Network

Federal employees who are looking to join the Senior Executive Service may soon see changes from the Trump administration, as it looks to reform the training programs that are meant to prepare feds for SES positions.

New proposed regulations from the Office of Personnel Management outline the agency’s plans for changing the requirements, timeframe and content of SES “candidate development programs.”

If implemented, federal employees interested in joining the SES would see a shorter timeline for completing the development program, more rigorous requirements to fulfill, and more consistency in the training content — regardless of which agency they work for.

Overall, OPM stated the agency is looking to drive a “shift in the culture of the SES” through the proposed changes, while also emphasizing the role of SES members in executing the Trump administration’s policy agenda.

“By increasing program standards and training requirements, an SES [candidate development program] will better equip program participants to excel in senior leadership roles and effectively implement the president’s agenda,” the Dec. 18 proposed rule noted.

Candidate development programs generally help prepare career federal employees for roles in the SES. But currently, the programs are inconsistent across government, according to OPM. Different agencies set different training requirements for potential SES members. Some agencies simply don’t have an SES candidate development program to begin with.

“Inconsistencies … have yielded mixed results across participating agencies,” OPM officials wrote. “That variability has resulted in different training and development experiences … and leads to some programs that are more effective than others in preparing their leaders.”

Specifically, OPM is proposing to create a standardized and governmentwide version of the SES candidate development program. By using a consistent training template, OPM said the program will be more streamlined and lead to consistent metrics that can be compared across agencies and over time.

On top of standardizing and revising the content of SES candidate development programs, OPM also proposed shortening the timeline for participants to complete the program. The plan is to bring the timeframe down to 9-12 months in most cases, rather than the 1-2 years candidates currently get to complete the program.

“This length of time involves considerable expense and resources to ostensibly turn ‘almost ready’ talent into ‘ready now’ talent,” OPM wrote. “Decreasing the program cohort duration allows for a more expedited timeline of identifying near ready talent and preparing them fully to fill SES vacancies.”

Along with shortening the timeframe, OPM is also looking to increase the required training hours in the development program, from 80 hours up to 100 hours. Candidates would also have to complete at least 10 hours of “coaching and mentoring,” as well as at least one “developmental assignment” lasting about four months.

OPM said the added requirements would “enhance and broaden the candidate’s experience, increase his or her knowledge, and maximize his or her understanding of the overall functioning of the agency, so the candidate is prepared for a range of agency positions at the SES level.”

Jenny Mattingley, vice president of government affairs at the Partnership for Public Service, said she generally sees OPM’s increased focus on the SES candidate development programs as a positive change. Although there have been discussions for more than a decade on possible reforms to the programs, she said over time, not many changes have moved forward.

“Anything that starts thinking about how to make the programs more consistent, more robust, and how to ensure you’re getting qualified folks into the Senior Executive Service — that’s a good focus,” Mattingley said in an interview with Federal News Network. “But it will still take a while just see that play out. Agencies are going to have to re-evaluate their programs make them fit with OPM’s standards — and then actually send people through it.”

Currently, SES candidate development programs are largely inconsistent, both within and across agencies, Mattingley said. Some employees who join the SES have completed a development program, but many simply apply for a senior-level position without any further training. At the same time, some employees who complete a candidate development program may not end up joining the SES.

Mattingley said it will be important to track how much agencies ultimately invest in their training and development programs. That includes investments in developing entry-level employees at the start of the leadership pipeline, she added.

“This is not a new idea,” Mattingley said. “People have been trying to reform the SES for many years, but agencies didn’t implement it in the way or at the scale that I think people hoped that would happen.”

In its new proposal, OPM said development programs are a “crucial” tool for agencies, as they assemble succession management in their workforces and prepare “high-potential” employees for the SES.

“These programs aim to cultivate leaders equipped with a governmentwide perspective and the competencies necessary to tackle complex challenges,” OPM wrote. “Through the introduction of more stringent … certification requirements, OPM aims to enhance training and development for aspiring SES and accelerate the placement of well-prepared leaders to ensure leadership continuity.”

OPM’s new regulations build on initial guidance from May, which told agencies to begin changing how they hire and develop SES candidates. That same guidance also directed agencies to update their SES candidate development programs to align with “new administration priorities.”

Many of the changes for the SES also come in response to an executive order President Donald Trump signed on his first day in office, calling for restored “accountability” in the SES.

The proposed regulations are open to public comments until Feb. 17. OPM is looking for feedback in particular on additional research it should consider, if there should prescribe time requirements for specific topic areas, the benefits of expanding assessments in the development program, and where there have been similar “promising practices” in the private sector.

Marcus Hill, president of the Senior Executives Association, expressed support for efforts to improve consistency and rigor in the training standards, but cautioned that SES candidate development programs should remain non-partisan and be able to transcend presidential administrations.

“SES candidate development programs play a vital role in preparing leaders who can serve any administration with professionalism, integrity and readiness,” Hill said. “We encourage OPM to implement these changes in a way that preserves agency flexibility, avoids unnecessary administrative burden and ensures that high-quality leadership development is accessible across the federal government, including at smaller and resource-constrained agencies.”

The post OPM proposes overhaul of SES candidate development programs first appeared on Federal News Network.

© Getty Images/iStockphoto/Terminator3D