United States Office of Personnel Management
United States federal government agency From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
United States federal government agency From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The United States Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is an independent agency of the United States government that manages the United States federal civil service. The agency provides federal human resources policy, oversight, and support, and tends to healthcare (FEHB), life insurance (FEGLI), and retirement benefits (CSRS and FERS, but not TSP) for federal government employees, retirees, and their dependents.[2]
Official seal | |
 Official wordmark | |
| Agency overview | |
|---|---|
| Formed | January 1, 1979 |
| Preceding agency | |
| Jurisdiction | U.S. federal government |
| Headquarters | Theodore Roosevelt Federal Building 1900 E Street, NW Washington, D.C., US |
| Employees | 2,448 (2021)[1] |
| Annual budget | $329,755,000 (2021) |
| Agency executive |
|
| Website | opm |
OPM is headed by a director, who is nominated by the President.
The United States Civil Service Commission was created by the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act of 1883. The commission was renamed as the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB), and most of commission's former functions—with the exception of the federal employees appellate function—were assigned to new agencies, with most being assigned to the newly created U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) on January 1, 1979, and Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1978.
On January 1, 1979, the Office of Personnel Management was established with the dissolution of the U.S. Civil Service Commission following the passage and signing of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 into law by then President Jimmy Carter(43 FR 36037, 92 Stat. 3783).[3]
The United States Office of Government Ethics, responsible for directing executive branch policies relating to the prevention of conflicts of interest on the part of Federal executive branch officers and employees, was formerly a part of OPM, until being spun off as an independent agency in 1989.[4]
In 1996 the investigation branch of the OPM was privatized, and USIS was formed.[5] In 2014, after several scandals, OPM declined to renew its contract with USIS and brought background investigations back in house under the short-lived National Background Investigations Bureau.[6] In 2019, the responsibility for conducting federal background checks changed hands again when NBIB was dissolved and its functions given to the Defense Security Service, part of the Department of Defense, which was reorganized into the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency for the purpose.[7]
In July 2013, Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-Texas) introduced the Office of Personnel Management Inspector General Act.[8] The bill would increase oversight of OPM's revolving fund. Farenthold introduced the bill as a response to accusations of fraud and concerns about security clearance background investigations.[9] The bill would fund the expenses for investigations, oversight activities and audits from the revolving fund.[10] The bill was in response to a find that between 2002 and 2012, OPM's revolving fund had tripled, totaling over $2 billion, or 90% of OPM's budget. In February 2014, President Obama signed the bill into law.[11][12] The fund's history goes back to the early 1980s, where it was used for two main activities: training and background investigations for government personnel.[13]
In April 2015, hackers working on behalf of the Jiangsu State Security Department, a provincial branch of the Chinese Ministry of State Security spy agency obtained access to 22.1 million SF-86 records of US federal employees, contractors, and their friends and family.[14][15][16] Representing one of the largest breaches of government data in U.S. history, information that was obtained and exfiltrated in the breach included personally identifiable information such as Social Security numbers, as well as names, dates and places of birth, and addresses.[17][18][19]
New updates regarding this security breach came to light on September 24, 2015. The agency then indicated that additional evidence showed that 5.6 million people's fingerprints were stolen as part of the hacks, more than five times the 1.1 million originally estimated. The total number of individuals whose records were disclosed in whole or part, including Social Security numbers and addresses, remained at 21.5 million.[20]
Between 2018 and 2019, as part of a larger initiative to restructure the executive branch, President Donald Trump (R) submitted a proposal to congress to merge OPM into the General Services Administration (GSA) while returning the federal personnel policy-making components under the direct authority of the Executive Office of the President of the United States to the Office of Management and Budget in the White House. House Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA), chairman of the Subcommittee on Government Operations under the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, was the fiercest critic of the proposal. During a congressional hearing, Connolly claimed: "The administration wants to take over the merit policy-making functions and put them into the highly politicized environment of the White House itself, away from direct congressional oversight and inspector general review." Political pressure against the proposal peaked when a provision barring the President from transferring any function, responsibility, authority, service, system or program that is assigned in law until 6 months after the completion of an "independent report" issued by the federally-chartered National Academy of Public Administration was added to the 1,120 page bill S-1790, a.k.a. the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020.[21][22][23][24]
In January 2025, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) appeared to launch a controversial "deferred resignation" program, offering federal employees the option to resign effective September 30, 2025, while continuing to receive pay and benefits until that date. The program was announced through an email titled "Fork in the Road", framed as part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to reduce the size of the federal workforce.[25]
The proposal faced immediate backlash from federal employees and unions. The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) warned workers against accepting the offer, citing concerns over potential benefit disputes and unclear legal protections.[26] Legal experts also raised concerns about the unprecedented nature of the program, questioning its compliance with federal employment laws.[27]
Reports later revealed that aides associated with Elon Musk had been granted access to OPM's IT infrastructure and had taken steps to lock out career civil servants from key government computer systems. This raised concerns about whether federal workforce decisions were being influenced by private individuals with no formal government role.[28]
Government watchdogs and lawmakers have demanded transparency, questioning whether Musk's associates had legal authority to oversee federal operations. The involvement of outside individuals in federal decision-making raised ethics and security concerns, particularly as the administration pushed significant workforce reductions.[29]
Simultaneously, OPM faced scrutiny over a newly deployed email system designed to send mass communications to federal employees. A lawsuit filed by two anonymous federal workers alleged that OPM failed to conduct a Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) before launching the system, potentially exposing sensitive government communications.[30]
Critics warned that the system lacked basic encryption protections, making it vulnerable to spoofing, phishing, and unauthorized access. Some federal IT departments reportedly advised employees to flag all messages from the new system as potential phishing attempts due to authentication concerns.[31]
The cybersecurity controversy further exacerbated concerns over OPM's security posture, especially given the agency's history with the 2015 OPM data breach, which compromised personal records of over 21 million federal employees.[32] As of early 2025, OPM had not confirmed whether the vulnerabilities had been mitigated, and the lawsuit remained ongoing.
According to its website, the mission of the OPM is "recruiting, retaining and honoring a world-class force to serve the American people."[33] The OPM is partially responsible for maintaining the appearance of independence and neutrality in the administrative law system. While technically employees of the agencies they work for, administrative law judges (or ALJs) are hired exclusively by the OPM, effectively removing any discretionary employment procedures from the other agencies. The OPM uses a rigorous selection process which ranks the top three candidates for each ALJ vacancy, and then makes a selection from those candidates, generally giving preference to veterans.
OPM is also responsible for federal employee retirement applications for FERS and CSRS employees.[34] OPM makes decisions on federal employee regular[35] and disability retirement cases.[36] OPM also oversees FEHB and FEGLI, the health insurance and life insurance programs for Federal employees. However, it does not oversee TSP, which is handled by the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board (FRTIB), a separate independent agency.
OPM implements Diversity, equity, and inclusion in line with Executive Order 13583 and Executive Order 13985.[37]
Source: OPM's Agency Leadership Through Time[38]
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
