National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard said Wednesday she will cut about 40% of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence’s (ODNI) workforce and close several offices as part of a restructuring plan called “ODNI 2.0.”
In a news release, Gabbard said the initiative will reduce ODNI’s staff from about 1,850 to 1,300 by September 23.
She said the move will save taxpayers over $700 million a year and allow ODNI to focus on its role in providing guidance to the intelligence community.
Created after the Sept. 11 attacks, ODNI was established to integrate intelligence from 18 agencies and ensure that information for the president and policymakers remains timely, accurate, and apolitical.
Two decades later, Gabbard said the office has become “bloated and inefficient.”
“The intelligence community is rife with abuse of power, unauthorized leaks of classified intelligence, and politicized weaponization of intelligence,” said Gabbard. “ODNI and the IC must make serious changes to fulfill its responsibility to the American people and the U.S. Constitution by focusing on our core mission: find the truth and provide objective, unbiased, timely intelligence to the President and policymakers.”
The restructuring eliminates the Foreign Malign Influence Center, the National Counterproliferation and Biosecurity Center, and the Cyber Threat Intelligence Integration Center. Their functions, monitoring disinformation campaigns, proliferation threats, and cyberattacks, will be absorbed by other intelligence bodies.
The National Intelligence University is reportedly set to join the Defense Department’s National Defense University, after approval from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
“This effort aligns with President [Donald] Trump’s focus on increasing efficiencies across the government and will enhance the quality of our educational programs,” Gabbard and Hegseth wrote in an Aug. 11 memo reviewed by New York Post.







The article makes it sound as if these 550 personnel will retire and not be replaced, their workload being picked up by other agencies (still being paid for by the taxpayers) or by contractors (more expensive, paid for by taxpayers and no government vetting).
Any attempt to reduce costs by reducing manpower results in more costs.