Key Takeaways
- • The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) "Fork in the Road" resignation program cost taxpayers $6.7 billion in paid leave for approximately 140,000 federal employees who accepted voluntary departures between February and September 2025, according to a Government Accountability Office report.
- • Administrative leave across federal agencies surged 435% between 2023 and 2025, totaling $9.5 billion in cumulative payroll expenses, with DOGE's deferred resignation initiative responsible for the majority of this increase.
- • OPM Director Scott Kupor contests the GAO analysis, framing the $9.5 billion one-time expense as generating a claimed $40 billion annual taxpayer savings through permanent workforce reduction of 270,000 employees—representing a 400% return on investment by his calculation.
- • Data reliability concerns persist across federal agencies, with the GAO noting inconsistent administrative leave reporting methodologies that may impact accuracy; this issue has been documented in prior reports dating to 2014.
Summary
The "Fork in the Road" email campaign, distributed in February 2025 to approximately 2 million federal workers, offered eligible employees the opportunity to voluntarily resign while retaining full salary and benefits through September 30, 2025. Nearly 140,000 employees accepted this offer. While civilian salaries represent only 5.5% of the federal budget, DOGE prioritized this area for initial cost reduction efforts. The program reduced the federal workforce by 270,000 positions according to OPM Director Scott Kupor's accounting.
OPM Director Scott Kupor has publicly disputed the GAO's framing of these costs as wasteful expenditure. In a recent statement to Fortune, Kupor characterized the $9.5 billion outlay as a one-time expense that generates $40 billion in projected annual savings following the permanent removal of workforce positions from government payroll. By this analysis, Kupor asserts the initiative delivers a 400% return on investment to taxpayers. This represents a central tension in evaluating the program's fiscal impact: whether to assess immediate costs or long-term savings projections.
The GAO acknowledged methodological limitations in its analysis, noting that accuracy may be compromised by inconsistent reporting standards across federal agencies regarding how administrative leave is recorded and categorized. This data standardization issue has persisted across multiple administrations; a 2014 GAO report identified similar discrepancies between the Department of Defense and the U.S. Agency for International Development, prompting recommendations that the Office of Personnel Management establish uniform guidance for leave reporting.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.