US Government Technology Workforce

Overview

The US federal government's capacity to develop, deploy, and govern AI systems depends on its ability to attract and retain technical talent. This page documents the specific organizations, programs, staffing levels, and funding that constitute this capacity — and how dramatically it changed in 2025.

The story has three phases: a decade-long buildup of civic tech capacity (2014-2024), rapid destruction of much of that capacity under DOGE (early 2025), and nascent rebuilding efforts (late 2025-2026). The implications for AI governanceCruxAI Governance and PolicyComprehensive analysis of AI governance mechanisms estimating 30-50% probability of meaningful regulation by 2027 and 5-25% x-risk reduction potential through coordinated international approaches. ...Quality: 66/100 are significant: the same government that needs to oversee increasingly powerful AI systems lost much of its technical workforce in 2025, and the replacement programs prioritize different skills and relationships than what was dismantled.

For the broader analytical framing, see State Capacity and AI GovernanceConceptState Capacity and AI GovernanceThis article argues that government capacity to implement AI policy is critically lagging behind AI development, creating an existential risk through institutional erosion rather than just technica...Quality: 75/100.

The Civic Tech Ecosystem (2010-2024)

Founding Organizations

A network of organizations emerged over a decade to build federal technology capacity:

Code for AmericaOrganizationCode for AmericaNonprofit founded in 2010 by Jennifer Pahlka to help government agencies improve digital service delivery. Pioneered the model of bringing technology talent into government for tours of duty. Works... (founded 2010) pioneered the model of bringing technology talent into government, working with 100+ agencies. Founder Jennifer Pahlka later served as U.S. Deputy CTO and helped establish USDS.¹

U.S. Digital Service (USDS)OrganizationU.S. Digital Service (USDS)White House technology unit founded in 2014 following the Healthcare.gov rescue. Brings top technologists into government for fixed terms to work on critical digital services. Renamed to "U.S. DOGE... (founded 2014) was created as a White House unit following the Healthcare.gov rescue. It brought top technologists into government for fixed terms, growing to ~230 employees by late 2024. Over its history, USDS deployed 700+ term-limited technology experts across 31 federal agencies.²

18FOrganization18FGSA digital services team founded in 2014 providing agile development and user-centered design to federal agencies. Built open-source tools and trained government technologists. 85% of departing st... (founded 2014) operated within GSA as an internal technology consultancy. It charged agencies $250/hour and was largely self-funding. Critically, 85% of departing 18F staff in 2023 moved to other government technology positions — it served as a training pipeline, not just a service provider.³

Nava PBC (founded 2014) demonstrated that public benefit corporations could build government technology with mission-driven focus, born from the same Healthcare.gov rescue effort.

U.S. Digital Response (founded 2020) deployed volunteer technologists during COVID, co-founded by Pahlka, showing the potential for rapid civic tech mobilization during crises.

Talent Pipeline Programs

Several fellowship programs feed technical talent into government:

Horizon Institute for Public ServiceOrganizationHorizon Institute for Public ServiceNonprofit fellowship program placing AI, biotech, and emerging technology experts into federal agencies, congressional offices, and think tanks. Founded by Remco Zwetsloot (ex-CSET) and Joan Gass. ... (founded 2022) has placed 150+ early- and mid-career professionals into emerging technology policy roles across federal agencies, congressional offices, and think tanks. Founded by Remco Zwetsloot (ex-CSETOrganizationGeorgetown CSETCSET is a $100M+ Georgetown center with 50+ staff conducting data-driven AI policy research, particularly on U.S.-China competition and export controls. The center conducts hundreds of annual gover...Quality: 43/100) and Joan Gass, it was seed-funded by Open PhilanthropyOrganizationOpen PhilanthropyOpen Philanthropy rebranded to Coefficient Giving in November 2025. See the Coefficient Giving page for current information.Quality: 52/100 ($2.9M) and received $11.8M from Good Ventures in 2023. Fellows receive $113,000/year. Uniquely, it covers all three placement types: executive branch, Congress, and think tanks. 90%+ of alumni transition to full-time policy/government roles.⁴

TechCongress (founded 2016) has placed 123 fellows into congressional offices, with bipartisan placements across Democratic and Republican offices. Recruiting up to 20 for 2026.⁵

U.S. Digital Corps (founded 2022) places early-career technologists in federal agencies across five tracks: software engineering, data science, product management, design, and cybersecurity. The 2024 cohort included 70 fellows, with 95% retention among the inaugural 2022 cohort.⁶

Presidential Innovation Fellows (PIF) brings mid-to-senior technologists into the executive branch for 1-2 year terms at GS-15 equivalent salary.

The 2025 DOGE Disruption

Timeline

The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) initiative dismantled much of this capacity in weeks:

• January 20, 2025: Trump signed an executive order renaming USDS to the "U.S. DOGE Service," moving it from OMB to the White House Chief of Staff. Existing employees were "re-interviewed."⁷
• February 14, 2025: Several dozen USDS employees fired via email ("USDS no longer has a need for your services"). Estimates range from 29-50 terminated.⁸
• February 25, 2025: 21 additional USDS employees resigned in protest, stating DOGE demands "are not compatible with the mission" and they refused to "jeopardize Americans' sensitive data."⁹
• February 28, 2025: 18F eliminated entirely. GSA TTS Director Thomas Shedd emailed staff at 1:00 AM informing them their positions were terminated. ~85 employees laid off.¹⁰
• May 2025: 80 former 18F employees filed a class-action appeal with the Merit Systems Protection Board, claiming the shutdown was retaliation for political beliefs and whistleblowing about DOGE's improper access to government systems.¹¹

Scale of Impact

USDS staffing fell from ~230 to an estimated 50-89 employees. 18F went from ~85 to zero. But the disruption extended far beyond civic tech:

• 317,000+ federal employees left government service in 2025 — the largest peacetime workforce reduction on record. The civilian workforce fell from ~3.015 million to ~2.744 million.¹²
• 17,000+ IT and telecommunications workers departed (8,910 via deferred resignation, 435 via RIF).¹³
• The IRS lost ~25% of its workforce, including about a quarter of its tech employees.¹⁴
• Workers under 30 fell from 8.9% to 7.9% of the federal workforce — the youngest workers left fastest.¹³

Policy Changes

Alongside workforce cuts, the administration shifted AI policy orientation:

• Biden's EO 14110 (the most comprehensive US AI governance order, requiring safety evaluations and reporting frameworks) was revoked on January 20, 2025.¹⁵
• NIST's AI Safety Institute was renamed to the "Center for AI Standards and Innovation" (CAISI) in June 2025, dropping "safety" from its name and shifting focus to national security risks and competitiveness.¹⁶
• A December 2025 executive order preempted state AI regulations in favor of a federal framework.

Rebuilding Efforts (Late 2025-2026)

U.S. Tech Force

By September 2025, the acting head of the U.S. DOGE Service acknowledged "we need to hire and empower great talent in government" and "there's not enough tech talent here."¹⁷ In December 2025, the administration launched the U.S. Tech Force:

• Target: 1,000 technologists per annual cohort
• Salary: $150,000-$200,000 (GS-13/GS-14)
• Terms: 2-4 year temporary contracts
• Focus: Software engineers, data scientists, AI specialists
• Partners: ~20-30 private companies including Palantir, Meta, Oracle, xAI, Microsoft, Apple, Nvidia, and OpenAI
• First candidates released to agencies in March 2026.¹⁸

A separate Science Fellows Program targets 250 hires in Spring 2026.

Horizon Institute Expansion

Horizon InstituteOrganizationHorizon Institute for Public ServiceNonprofit fellowship program placing AI, biotech, and emerging technology experts into federal agencies, congressional offices, and think tanks. Founded by Remco Zwetsloot (ex-CSET) and Joan Gass. ... continues expanding despite the disruption. Its model is somewhat insulated from executive branch workforce reductions because it places fellows into Congress and think tanks as well as agencies. 2026 plans include the largest fellowship class yet, an inaugural AI Policy Leaders Network cohort, scaling the Career Accelerator to 100+ participants/year, and a new partnership with the Texas legislature for state-level tech policy fellowships.⁴

AI Talent Act

The bipartisan AI Talent Act (H.R. 6573, introduced December 2025) would establish agency-level tech and AI talent teams, enable skills-based hiring, allow agencies to share qualified candidate lists, and create a central OPM team for pooled hiring.¹⁹

Federal AI Spending and Contractor Ecosystem

Federal AI spending is growing rapidly even as the internal workforce shrinks:

• Federal AI R&D: $3.3 billion in FY2025 ($1.95B core AI + $1.36B crosscut)²⁰
• DoD AI: $13.4 billion requested for FY2026 for autonomy and AI systems²¹
• Total federal IT budget: ≈$75 billion for FY2025

The gap between spending and internal capacity pushes work to contractors. Key players include:

• Palantir: $10 billion, 10-year Army Enterprise Agreement (July 2025); increasingly described as "unavoidable in AI infrastructure" for federal agencies²²
• Booz Allen Hamilton: $1.6 billion DIA contract for counter-WMD intelligence; tripled its venture fund to $300 million targeting government AI investments
• Accenture Federal Services: Named Palantir's preferred implementation partner for US government; training 1,000 professionals on Palantir platforms

Structural Challenges

Several structural factors make federal tech talent recruitment persistently difficult:

Demographics: Over 40% of federal IT professionals are now eligible for retirement, creating a "silver tsunami." Only ~7% of the federal workforce is under 30, compared to ~22% in the private sector.²³

Compensation gap: Tech Force offers $150-200K, competitive for early career but well below the $300-500K+ that senior AI/ML specialists command in the private sector.

Hiring speed: Federal hiring processes typically take months. Security clearance requirements add more time. The private sector can hire in weeks.

Institutional knowledge: The experienced technologists who understood both government operations and modern technology practices — the core competency of USDS and 18F — cannot be replaced by early-career recruits from the private sector, regardless of their technical skills. USDS historically preferred technologists with 10+ years of experience for good reason.

Key Uncertainties

Can capacity be rebuilt? The civic tech ecosystem took over a decade to establish and was significantly disrupted in months. Whether the replacement programs (Tech Force, expanded fellowships) can recreate comparable institutional capacity is unclear.

Contractor dependency: As internal capacity shrinks and spending grows, government becomes increasingly dependent on contractors for AI work. This raises questions about conflicts of interest, vendor lock-in, and whether government retains sufficient expertise to be an informed buyer.

Political sustainability: Government tech capacity has been buffeted by political transitions — built under Obama, maintained under Trump 1.0, expanded under Biden, disrupted under Trump 2.0. This volatility makes it difficult to build durable institutions.

Scale adequacy: Ezra Klein has estimated government needs ~300 excellent AI experts in advisory, regulatory, and auditing roles.²⁴ Tech Force's 1,000 target is larger but focused on different (more junior, more implementation-oriented) roles. Whether either number is adequate for governing transformative AI systems is debatable.

Horizon and EA-adjacent programs: The Horizon Institute's EA funding connections have drawn media scrutiny.²⁵ Whether this creates political vulnerability or perception issues for the program's continued growth is an open question.

Sources