Is Trump's overhaul improving government? I'll gather current performance data and competing assessments to compare.
Whether the Trump administration is improving the US government depends on how "improving" is defined and measured. Assessments are divided:
What the Administration Says It Has Achieved
The administration frames its work as making government leaner and more efficient through the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE):
•Workforce reduction: The White House states it "shrunk the federal bureaucracy by 10% in 2025". Other reporting notes the government has "shed roughly 271,000 civilian positions in the past year". The Office of Personnel Management said a reduction of "more than 23,000 positions reflects the administration's early efforts to streamline government".
•In-office work and accountability: The administration says the "percentage of federal employees working in-office increasing 30% in the second quarter of 2025" after ordering bureaucrats back into the office. OPM announced "major reforms to federal employee performance management aimed at restoring accountability and improving government service" and later said it was delivering a "more accountable and effective federal workforce".
•Deregulation and savings: The White House claims "Government efficiency efforts have saved an estimated $215 billion, equivalent to $1,335 per U.S. taxpayer" and that it has had the "Best Deregulation Year in History", having "blown far past the target 10-to-1 deregulatory ratio". An independent analysis found that in the first six months of the second term, "fully implemented deregulatory actions containing some measurable economic impact have accounted for an estimated $86 billion in total regulatory cost savings and 52.2 million hours in paperwork reductions".
What Critics and Watchdogs Say
Critics argue the changes have harmed effectiveness, accuracy, and institutional checks:
•Disputed savings and costs: The Associated Press found that "nearly 40% of the savings listed were bogus". The Government Accountability Office found the public tally was "rife with errors" and recommended displaying "data quality issues and limitations". In September 2026, GAO found the administration "paid outgoing employees an estimated nearly $7 billion to not work as it encouraged them to leave the federal service".
•Oversight and institutional impact: Days after taking office, Trump "dismissing nearly 20 inspectors general, whose very jobs are to combat waste, fraud and abuse" raised concerns about a "politicized inspector general community".
•Research and agency capacity: One analysis found the administration "Cut or froze over $3 billion in previously approved research grants" from NIH and NSF. Another assessment described the first six months as a "haphazard yet comprehensive evisceration of basic government institutions" from "mass firing of federal workers to the effective shuttering of entire agencies".
How the Public Views It
Public opinion is split and has shifted over time:
•Less than a month into the second term, Pew Research found the public "evenly divided": "41% say Trump's administration will improve the way the federal government works, and 42% say it will make things worse".
•A year in, the same pollster found "Trump's approval rating stands at 37%, down from 40% in the fall", with approval described as "low by historical standards".
In summary, supporters point to a smaller workforce, reduced regulation, and claimed cost savings as signs of improvement, while opponents point to watchdog findings on erroneous savings claims, loss of oversight, and cuts to scientific and agency capacity as signs of worsening government performance.