I submit numerous Freedom of Information Act calls. In order to distribute financial revelations in searchable databases, I have tracked hundreds of national political appointees and have been requesting staff lists from both Trump administrations.
The Office of Personnel Management, which has a wealth of data on employees in the federal government, is the source of a lot of that information. However, that company’s FOIA division was thrown into conflict as Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency began to slash its workforce in early 2025.
The agency’s process of collecting information has since evolved into something more Kafkaesque, one that sent me between three apparently abandoned email mails and two websites in early July. In addition to the fact that my once-routine requests then languish for months, simply requesting documents has developed into its own kind of barrel game.
A former Foi expert at OPM told me in an email in February 2025 that” they just let the full Private team go,” referring to public records office staff. The practitioner was removed the following day.
Before the Trump administration and Depends destroyed the offices that handled these requests, this is how the process worked: You may give a straightforward message with a word description of the documents you want. That’s it.
It didn’t think you would receive the information you wanted at all or in the quickest way possible. However, it was a straightforward approach that frequently succeeded.
More than 600 government information specialists ( staffers who enforce FOIA and the Privacy Act ) have resigned or been fired since the start of the second Trump administration, according to OPM data. Twelve data experts left within OPM, of which seven were fired. ( There was just one new employee during that time. )
The original FOIA professional, who I spoke with over the phone, claimed that the office’s operations were hampered by the cuts and threatened the legal requirements.
Over 1,600 FOIA requests were still on OPM’s delay at the end of the fiscal year 2025, which is seven times the number as it was at the end of the same year in 2024. The agency’s regular processing time for a basic demand decreased to over 84 days, which is twice as long as the previous year.
In fact, I noticed that my records requests were getting more and getting turned more and more toward online portals. When I attempted to obtain human resources data from OPM in the middle of July, this was the case. When I clicked “log in,” a communication read,” Something went wrong while processing your action.” If the issue persists, please call admin@ains.com for help.
I sent the email address, but it returned when I opened it. It turns out that the company’s brand is no longer called AINS; it is now known as Opexus. Opexus has been accused of having violated lax cybersecurity standards after two of its employees were charged with deleting and compromising government data and has received more than$ 50 million in federal contracts, according to a Bloomberg report. ( One entered a guilty plea in April, and the other received a guilty verdict in May ) Opexus claims to practice FOIA requests for 80 % of national institutions on its site.
A Epic public liaison is supposed to assist with requests and explain the procedures for records, but the OPM website also contained contact information. I received an automated response stating that I am no longer at OPM when I emailed the handle. Please call FOIA@opm.gov if you need help with a Epic issue.
I did it, too. I received yet another computerized information right away. This one instructed me to send my plea to the National FOIA Portal, a cross-government website that allows you to send an FOIA request to any organization.
I did that as well. After that, I finally received a reply acknowledging my request, which was from the same OPM portal that was displaying an error whenever I attempted to use it.
I reached over to Opexus aid explaining that I was a FOIA customer and that the OPM site wasn’t functioning. I was stymied by the lack of reaction from the company itself. Someone contacted me and said,” I have escalated this issue to our engineering team,” and I received a response from me. When I called Stephen back a few days later to say that the OPM executive was working with me to implement the required fix,” I have identified the root cause of the issue.” Additional inquiries on the help solution string didn’t receive any responses.
13 days after I submitted the support ticket to Opexus, I received a second answer asking me what problem I was getting. I explained to them that I was also receiving the same information. I attempted to log up in a few days later. The issue was resolved.
Opexus stated in a statement that a customer help topic was opened on July 10 as it became aware of the problem. That is the day I first opened one, coincidentally. The statement noted that on July 23, access to the site was restored, and that the problem did not stop OPM from receiving Foi requests through alternative response methods. The firm claimed that” there is no proof that user data was accessed, lost, or jeopardized” and that the problem was specific to OPM’s website.
Opexus acknowledged, in addition to the speech, how crucial continuous access to FOIA request systems is for the general public.
OPM did not respond to a request for comment.
I’m also waiting for the information.
Who You Adapt to My Foi Requests? is the following article. Someone? second appeared on ProPublica.
