• Skill gaps are worsening as IT-experienced staff exit the agency, with a 9% workforce drop since January amid federal downsizing and 17% of FDIC staff retirement-eligible
• With a 3 year training and examination process, the agency faces readiness challenges
• Resolutions division saw 20% attrition; a quarter may retire within a year
• The report criticizes inaction on harassment and misconduct, and the FDIC urged to rethink staffing, training, and supervisory capabilities

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation is facing a talent drain that may compromise its ability to supervise banks and manage financial crises, according to a blistering new report from the agency’s Office of Inspector General.

The report details a troubling combination of attrition, skill loss, inadequate crisis planning, and unresolved internal misconduct, raising fresh concerns about whether the agency is equipped to handle its core responsibilities in an era of rising systemic risk.

The watchdog’s findings land at a precarious time for the FDIC, which is undergoing restructuring amid the Trump administration’s aggressive downsizing of federal agencies. 

Since January, the FDIC’s workforce has shrunk by 9%, dropping from 6,400 to 5,950 employees, due to resignations, retirements, transfers, and the termination of probationary staff.

Compounding the issue, 17% of remaining personnel are eligible to retire within the year — including high-ranking figures such as the Director of the Division of Risk Management Supervision and directors at the agency’s three largest regional offices.

The report warns that the FDIC’s shrinking pool of examiners jeopardizes its ability to meet statutory obligations.

“With fewer examiners but the same responsibility to conduct statutorily required exams in 2025, it may be difficult for the FDIC to complete these examinations by the end of the year,” the report said. 

The loss is particularly acute in technical roles. Examiners with advanced IT skill sets, which are crucial for assessing operational and third-party risks at large institutions, are among those departing.

Their exit leaves the agency increasingly unprepared to evaluate complex systems and emerging threats in bank operations, fintech partnerships, and crypto-related services. 

In the Division of Resolutions and Receiverships — the group responsible for bank failure responses — attrition has reached 20%, and one-quarter of the remaining staff are expected to retire within a year.

Within the division focused on complex institutions, the agency has already lost 10% of staff, including many from the Resolution Readiness Branch, which plays a key role in crisis response planning.

Given that new examiners require roughly three years of training to receive their commission, the FDIC faces a steep climb to restore lost capacity.

The report also criticizes the FDIC’s handling of workplace culture. A December inquiry revealed over one-third of employees had witnessed or experienced harassment, while the agency lacked consistent policies on penalties or reporting requirements. 

Senior leaders were often unaware of misconduct allegations due to failures in escalation protocols.

Although Acting Chairman Travis Hill emphasized a commitment to cultural reform in the agency’s concurrent annual report, the OIG was blunt in stating that accountability remains insufficient and prior recommendations have not been adequately addressed.

Among the broader operational concerns, the report flagged the FDIC’s planning for large regional bank failures as immature and inconsistent.

It also highlighted the agency’s failure to assess the risks of increasing third-party reliance by supervised banks, particularly in anti-money laundering and crypto activities. Despite regulatory flags from peer agencies, the FDIC has yet to evaluate the extent of crypto-related exposures across its institutions. 

The Inspector General made clear that the FDIC must rethink its staffing, governance, and oversight approach if it is to fulfill its mission.

While the agency has launched reforms — including new whistleblower protections, anti-harassment training, and the creation of an Office of Professional Conduct — the report paints a picture of an institution in transition, grappling with its own structural weaknesses at a moment when its stability has never been more critical.