5,200 Health Agency Jobs at Risk: FDA, CDC, and NIH Face Major Staff Reductions

Image: STAT

Thousands of employees across federal health agencies received unexpected termination notices over the weekend, with the Trump administration citing poor performance and changing agency needs. The move, which affects workers in drug inspection, AI development, maternal health, and disease response, has sparked concern over its potential impact on public health services.

Unexpected and Immediate Terminations

Termination letters landed in the inboxes of federal scientists, doctors, and public health professionals, informing them that their work was no longer needed. The cuts primarily affected probationary employees at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH), many of whom had previously received strong performance evaluations. Although their employment ended immediately, they were granted 30 days of administrative leave.

The letters from the Office of the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services used nearly identical language, stating: “"Unfortunately, the Agency finds you are not fit for continued employment because your ability, knowledge and skills do not fit the Agency's current needs, and your performance has not been adequate to justify further employment at the Agency." The terminations are set to take effect on March 14, 2025.

Many of the terminated employees expressed shock, particularly those with positive performance reviews.

Scope of Job Losses and Affected Positions

Senior officials initially suggested that up to 5,200 employees might receive notices, though updated reports indicate the number is slightly lower.

• At least 750 CDC employees were impacted, with two prestigious training programs—one embedding recent public health graduates in local health departments and another cultivating Ph.D. laboratory scientists—being gutted.
• Between 1,000 and 1,200 NIH employees were dismissed, including young investigators slated for leadership roles.
• About 700 FDA employees, including lawyers, doctors, and Ph.D.-level medical device reviewers, were cut.

While the CDC’s Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS)—the "disease detectives" who track outbreaks—was initially targeted, it appears to have been spared after an uproar from alumni. However, other vital roles were eliminated, including:

• Ph.D.-trained scientists assisting state and local outbreak responses.
• Medical device reviewers ensuring the safety of treatments for cancer and diabetes.
• Public health workers stationed at international airports to prevent the spread of infectious diseases.
• NIH grant administrators responsible for funding external medical research.
• FDA inspectors who approve life-saving medical devices.
• CDC Laboratory Leadership Service fellows, who develop diagnostic tests for emerging diseases.

Concerns Over Public Health and Future Workforce

Public health experts fear these layoffs will weaken the nation’s ability to respond to outbreaks and regulate essential medical products. The timing is especially alarming, coming in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic and amid concerns over a lethal strain of bird flu, which recently claimed its first U.S. victim in Louisiana.

Dr. Steve Monroe, a former senior CDC official, warned that cutting trained personnel could "hobble" outbreak response efforts, reducing the workforce available for future emergencies. Dr. David Fleming, chairman of an advisory committee to the CDC director, added: "A lot of energy and time has been spent in recruiting those folks, and that’s now tossed out the window."

Other experts highlighted potential risks to patient safety, as FDA job cuts could delay drug and medical device approvals. The NIH, which funds medical research, also saw major reductions in its grant administration workforce, potentially slowing the development of new treatments for diseases like cancer and heart disease.

Confusion and Legal Challenges

Many employees remain uncertain about their job status. Some who were told they would be terminated have yet to receive official letters, leading to anxiety among staff. Legal experts note that since most of those affected were in their probationary period, they have limited worker protections, making legal challenges difficult.

While the administration claims the cuts are part of a broader government restructuring effort, critics argue they may ultimately harm public health without saving taxpayer money. Some positions, such as those funded through FDA user fees paid by pharmaceutical companies, do not rely on taxpayer dollars.

Political and Industry Response

The cuts have triggered widespread backlash. On Monday, eight top health officials from the Biden administration, including the heads of the CDC, NIH, and FDA, issued a joint statement condemning the layoffs. They warned that gutting public health agencies would weaken initiatives such as the opioid crisis response and rural primary care expansion.

“These individuals are not numbers on a spreadsheet,” they wrote. “We owe them a debt of gratitude, not a pink slip.”

The dismissals have also unsettled graduate students and young professionals considering careers in public health. Dr. Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy at the University of Minnesota, said: "I just lectured to 42 graduate students this morning whose whole future at this point is not clear. Will they have jobs? Will there be public health employment in the future?"

The Laboratory Leadership Service, a CDC program designed to strengthen outbreak investigation capabilities, was hit particularly hard, with 20 out of 24 fellows being laid off.

Meanwhile, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the recently confirmed Health and Human Services Secretary, has expressed intentions to further shrink the federal workforce at public health agencies. NIH officials are concerned that senior employees could be the next target.

As concerns grow among lawmakers, industry professionals, and the public, the long-term consequences of these job losses remain uncertain, but many fear they could have lasting effects on the nation’s health infrastructure.

🤔 Nurses, share your thoughts in the discussion forum below.