Federal researchers highlighted hiring gains and wellness initiatives, but deeper numbers reveal a workforce facing retirements, resignations, and thousands of deaths in federal custody
This newsletter is supported by readers like you. Paid subscribers have access to the full archive.
By Annie Dance | Lake Lure News | Cops & Congress | News & Commentary
RUTHERFORDTON, N.C. — Buried beneath charts, technical reports, and repeated instructions to “visit our website” for additional information, a recent Department of Justice webinar offered an unusually detailed look at the state of federal law enforcement during the final years of the Biden administration.
The June 2 Bureau of Justice Statistics presentation was intended to showcase newly released federal law enforcement data. Instead, it raised a series of questions.
Why are experienced officers leaving federal service?
Why are smaller federal agencies continuing to lose personnel?
Why has the federal government devoted increasing attention to wellness programs while facing mounting retirement concerns?
And what do federal detention death statistics reveal about conditions inside some of the nation’s largest custody systems?
The answers are scattered throughout multiple Bureau of Justice Statistics reports discussed during the webinar.
Taken together, the data paint a picture of a federal law enforcement system that continued growing on paper while confronting significant long-term workforce challenges.
According to Bureau of Justice Statistics researchers, federal agencies employed more than 130,000 full-time law enforcement officers in 2023, the latest year for which data was available.
Officials highlighted what they described as positive hiring numbers.
Federal agencies reported hiring more than 10,500 officers while recording fewer than 9,000 separations.
“This does mean that overall there were more hires than there were separations, which is good,” a presenter said.
That figure became one of the webinar’s primary talking points.
But the same presentation revealed another reality.
“The smallest agencies, those with 50 or fewer, (were) actually seeing a net reduction in staff,” the presenter acknowledged.
The finding suggests that while large agencies continued expanding, some smaller federal agencies struggled to maintain staffing levels.
The webinar did not explore why those agencies were losing personnel.
Yet the broader separation data offers clues about the challenges federal law enforcement faces.
According to the report, retirement accounted for 44% of all separations. Another 24% involved voluntary resignations.
Together, those categories represented more than two-thirds of all departures. Federal researchers repeatedly returned to the retirement issue.
“The wave of potential retirements in federal law enforcement is one that is of major concern across the federal government,” one presenter said.
That concern appeared throughout the webinar. Officials discussed future research projects designed to better understand workforce retention, employee departures and recruitment challenges.
What researchers did not discuss in detail was why nearly one-quarter of all departing personnel chose to resign voluntarily.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics survey does not identify specific motivations behind resignations.
As a result, the webinar offered little insight into whether those departures were driven by retirement planning, workplace culture, compensation concerns, promotion opportunities, agency priorities or other factors.
Several current and former law enforcement officials who spoke with Cops & Congress after reviewing the findings pointed to morale concerns, bureaucratic expansion and frustration with agency leadership as issues they believe contributed to departures during the Biden years.
Those views are not measured by the federal survey and cannot be independently verified through the data itself.
What can be verified is that federal researchers consider retention a growing concern.
The webinar repeatedly highlighted plans to collect additional information about why officers leave federal service.
At the same time, federal officials devoted substantial attention to another topic: wellness programs.
Researchers described officer wellness as a major area of interest throughout the federal government.
“This is a major area of interest for the federal government as we want to understand more about how to support our federal officers and where we’re lacking in those areas,” a presenter said.
According to the report, nearly every responding federal law enforcement agency offered at least one formal wellness program.
Officials highlighted resources for expectant mothers, childcare programs, counseling services, peer support networks, and mental health initiatives.
The emphasis on wellness stood out because it consumed a significant portion of the presentation.
Researchers repeatedly discussed plans to gather more information on wellness initiatives in future surveys.
“We’re going to try and ask more questions about officer wellness,” another presenter said.
Some findings raised questions about how extensively agencies evaluate officer mental health. Only 6% of federal law enforcement agencies reported regularly requiring scheduled psychological evaluations.
Forty-eight percent reported having policies allowing temporary collection of service weapons when concerns arise regarding suicide risk or self-harm.
Eighty-five percent reported maintaining response protocols following on-duty critical incidents.
The findings suggest federal agencies have expanded wellness-related programs while continuing to vary significantly in how they monitor mental health risks.
The webinar also offered a detailed look at federal detention deaths.
According to researchers, detention-related deaths differ substantially from arrest-related deaths. Most occurred among individuals who had been incarcerated for extended periods.
“The majority, almost over 70%, had been in the detention facility for more than one year before their death,” a presenter said.
Researchers reported that illness and other non-homicide causes accounted for the majority of detention-related deaths. The data also identified three agencies responsible for most federal detention deaths.
“The majority of deaths are driven by three agencies, the Bureau of Prisons, the Marshal Service, and CBP (Border Patrol / Immigration), ” the presenter said.
The findings indicate that federal detention deaths are concentrated within a relatively small number of agencies responsible for managing large inmate and detainee populations.
Drug offenses represented the most common underlying criminal charges among individuals who died while in custody, followed by weapons offenses and sex-related crimes.
Researchers emphasized that many of those who died were serving active sentences and had spent significant periods in detention before their deaths.
Throughout the presentation, one theme appeared almost as frequently as the statistics themselves.
Officials repeatedly directed viewers to Bureau of Justice Statistics reports and agency websites for additional information.
“There are many additional findings,” one presenter said.
“We have far more findings in our report on our website.”
The comments reflected the depth of information collected by the federal government.
They also highlighted a challenge facing taxpayers, lawmakers and journalists attempting to understand federal law enforcement.
Many of the government’s most important findings remain buried inside lengthy technical reports that receive little public attention.
The June webinar provided a rare public summary of those findings.
What emerged was a portrait of a federal law enforcement system that grew overall during the Biden years but simultaneously faced a retirement wave, significant voluntary departures, increasing focus on employee wellness and continuing scrutiny over deaths occurring in federal custody.
As the Trump administration sets new priorities for federal law enforcement, those statistics offer one of the clearest pictures yet of the workforce, detention system, and institutional challenges it inherited.
The data answers some questions. It also raises many others.
You may read the transcript in the player above and/or on my DocumentCloud. The reports may be accessed on the BJS website and/or on my DocumentCloud.
—
🏛️ All those mentioned are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Learn more about this newsletter, ethics policy, how you can help shape this work, and support it. Follow on X and Facebook. Send constructive criticism, fan mail, and tips with public documents for future stories: CopsandCongress@gmail.com
