Report: Major Cuts to U.S. Government Statisticians Threaten Credibility Of Key Federal Data

A new outside review for the American Statistical Association warns that steep staff reductions, funding constraints and political interventions have placed the integrity of U.S. federal statistics at risk. The report documents dramatic workforce losses at multiple agencies and describes disruptions to data collection and research used to guide policy and public understanding.

Staffing Losses and Operational Impacts

The report found that one federal unit lost roughly 95% of its staff, while several other statistical offices saw declines ranging from about 25% to more than 40% this year. The nation’s largest statistical agency, the U.S. Census Bureau, lost at least 15% of its workforce. These reductions affected both long-serving staff with deep institutional knowledge and recent hires recruited to modernize agency methods.

Specific impacts identified in the report include:

• National Center for Education Statistics (NCES): Reportedly lost about 95% of its staff, halting most data collection earlier in the year; some outside contracts have been partially restored but with reduced scope.
• Social Security Administration — Office of Research, Evaluation, and Statistics: Workforce nearly halved, suspending important retirement and disability research.
• Energy Information Administration, Economic Research Service, and National Agricultural Statistics Service: Each lost roughly 25%–40% of staff, contributing to delayed or discontinued energy and agricultural reports and the cancellation of a farmworker survey.
• U.S. Census Bureau: At least a 15% reduction in staff, with potential implications for core population and economic statistics.

Concerns About Independence And Public Trust

Beyond staffing cuts, the report highlights measures that reduced safeguards around the political independence of statistical agencies. It cites unsubstantiated assertions that official data were biased, the removals of senior leaders at agencies such as the Bureau of Labor Statistics and NCES, unfilled leadership vacancies, and temporary placements of political appointees in roles previously held by career civil servants. The authors warn that such actions can erode public trust in federal statistics.

Nancy Potok, a former U.S. chief statistician who participated in the report, described the situation as 'dropping off the cliff' and called it 'really dire.'

Beth Jarosz, vice president of the Association of Public Data Users (not part of the report team), said: 'The statistical system is still functioning, but the threats are very serious.' She pointed to canceled data products and reductions in data collection for measures such as consumer prices.

Responses And Context

The Office of Management and Budget, which houses the U.S. chief statistician who helps coordinate federal data activities, did not respond to an emailed request for comment about the report. Mark Calabria, named U.S. chief statistician in July, acknowledged at a forum that 'everything in government is embedded in politics and is embedded in accountability,' and emphasized that the key objective is to make sure 'the data gives you the right answer.'

The report’s authors also noted a 'sparsity of information' about some impacts because agencies often declined to provide detailed data to outside researchers, possibly out of caution or communication restrictions.

Why This Matters

Federal statistical agencies produce the data that inform economic policy, social programs, public health responses and private-sector decisions. The report concludes that significant staffing and procedural changes, combined with actions that appear to weaken independence, risk delaying or degrading essential statistics and undermining public confidence in those data.

Source: American Statistical Association (outside report).