4,000 gone: Inside NASA’s brain drain

“This was my dream job. What do I do next?”  

           —Ronald Gamble, Cosmic Origins Program Scientist 

“We're talking about NASA, maybe the greatest organization that humans have ever devised. Destroying that? Ridiculous. Just ridiculous.” 

           —David Draper, former Deputy Chief Scientist

“If I didn’t have the option to leave for Canada, I’d be so nervous about the uncertainty.” 

           —Danielle Simkus, former OSIRIS-REx Science Team Member

“It’s just slash and burn.” 

           —Michael Garcia, former Program Scientist

Roughly 4,000 NASA employees — over 20% of the agency — have left in the past six months. Some were fired or retired early. Many took voluntary buyouts. In all cases, the root cause was the same: orders from on high to prepare for devastating budget cuts. 

Now, many of NASA’s most experienced workers are gone. This means that they are, for the first time, able to speak out about the brain drain and its impact on the agency. 

What follows are exclusive interviews between The Planetary Society and several ex-NASA scientists, as well as one researcher whose job is currently on the chopping block. Though each of their stories is different, they paint a common picture: one of pointless waste, discarded expertise, and haphazard decisions. They warn of trends that threaten NASA’s global leadership and its plans to return humans to the Moon. They describe a wound that will take generations to heal.

Here is what these scientists told us, in their own words.

Ronald Gamble, Cosmic Origins Program Scientist & Founder and Director of Cosmic Pathfinders Program

Ronald Gamble is a theoretical astrophysicist who specializes in black holes, studying their powerful bursts of radiation for hints of new physics. He is also the founder of Cosmic Pathfinders, a space science career development program, for which he earned a NASA Agency Honors Medal. Technically, Gamble is a “co-op scientist” at NASA: his job title is under the University of Maryland College Park, but his work is entirely funded by NASA. 

On June 27, 2025, Gamble received a letter notifying him that his funding would be terminated on Oct. 1. That date was later pushed back to Dec. 31. Either way, if that funding goes, he goes. 

How did you find out you might lose your job?

When I first got my letter, I actually sat on it for two weeks. I didn't really click on that email. I thought, maybe this is something different. Maybe it's just, "Hey, this is what we know." But no, I opened it up, and it was the "I regret to inform you…” 

It was a shock. This was my dream job. What do I do next?

How would you describe the impact these departures are having on NASA?

Cataclysmic. Stage five hurricane.

It’s not just the science — it’s the community. The transfer of knowledge is a huge part of it. What if everybody leaves? Do we share notes? Do we not? Is there a notebook I can pass around? We're not going to get that. We're missing those hallway conversations. That back of the napkin calculation that turns into James Webb — we're not getting that if we're not there.

Have any of these decisions felt thought-out?

It's been pretty chaotic. Every day, day in and day out, we’re hearing about something else that’s just nonsensical. 

Why are they doing this?

What advice would you give an early-career astronomer right now?

You have to be even more dynamic now. A lot of people are going the machine learning route, some will be looking into the finance industry. I really feel for these students. And I wish I could just throw a billion dollars at the problem.

What can people do about this now?

We’ve got to call our senators, call our people in Congress. The best thing you can do is share this information. Tell your friends, tell your network.

David Draper, former Deputy Chief Scientist

David Draper worked at NASA for 26 years. As Deputy Chief Scientist, he provided unbiased scientific evaluations to other senior NASA leaders and facilitated connections between different parts of the agency. Seeing the writing on the wall early, he put in for retirement on Jan. 28. On March 10, weeks before his official retirement date, his position was abolished along with the entire Office of the Chief Scientist. Draper was still allowed to retire, unlike the rest of his colleagues.

Has anything surprised you about the departures?

There's exactly one thing I'm surprised about — exactly one — and that is only how quickly it all happened.

How have the departures changed NASA’s culture?

That was the next generation of leaders. And now they're all chopped off. They're all gone. And the folks who are left don't have that experience. They needed those people to bring them up to that level.

NASA's fundamental identity has been stripped away. The secret sauce has been poured down the drain.

How would you describe the impact this will have on the U.S.?

It's just catastrophic. Nothing short of catastrophic.

There is no brand on the planet better than the NASA meatball. It is the best brand in the world, and we have just thrown it into the gutter. It is a way of putting our money where our mouth is when we Americans talk about democratic values, liberty, and freedom.

Folks growing up thinking: this is what we do. We go to other planets. You don't think about it every day, but you grow up knowing: you live in a place that can go to other worlds. And to have that tacit, unspoken thing — that I live in a country where we go to other planets — to all of a sudden realize, whoa, we're not that country anymore?

It's hard for me to not have anything but despair, frankly, for what's happening to the agency.

How has this impacted the rest of your life?

I saw what was coming and got out in time.

After the election, during the Thanksgiving break that followed, my wife and I sat down and really had a heart-to-heart and realized that it would be a tremendous gamble for us — for our life in retirement — to hold on and hope for the best. Because if I were to lose my job and not be able to get out from under the mortgage I had, that would be it. My life would be over, financially. Complete ruin. 

I have it so much better than so many of my friends and colleagues, so I can't complain.

I'll be okay. We're not going to have the kind of retirement that I thought, but we're going to be okay. 

Some of my colleagues are not. It breaks my heart.

What next?

I am not going to give up. I am going to do everything I can to try to pull this beast back from the edge. We, the people, have to take matters into our own hands here. We've got to try to put this country right.

Danielle Simkus, former Research Scientist & OSIRIS-REx Science Team Member

Danielle Simkus worked for seven years at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland: three as a NASA Postdoctoral Program Fellow, and four as a Research Scientist. She studied pieces of other worlds, including rocks brought back by the Apollo astronauts and the OSIRIS-REx mission, to look for the building blocks of life in space. 

Simkus left her position on July 15 and moved back to Canada, where she is a citizen.

Do you think you would have lost your funding if you’d stayed at NASA?

If I didn’t have the option to leave for Canada, I’d be so nervous about the uncertainty. I'd be worried that I wouldn't have funding beyond a few months down the road. I feel like everyone's living in this limbo state where they're just wondering, “Do I have a job next year? Do I have a job at the end of 2025?”

Was leaving NASA a hard decision to make?

It was actually a very easy decision. I never doubted that it was the right decision.

Did any one thing clarify your desire to leave?

NASA is a very supportive and welcoming environment, but all of a sudden it felt like we were being managed, not really able to say certain things or work freely. 

Are other people you know leaving NASA?

Every week, even still, I hear updates from my colleagues about one more person leaving. And it's sad, because I understand why they're leaving. Often they are nearing the end of their career, and they don't feel like they would feel comfortable staying and supporting these new priorities. 

A lot of key scientists and researchers and management level personnel are leaving. All this expertise is leaving. But then the early-career scientists are left feeling stuck and lost.

How would you describe the culture at NASA, before you left?

People have now realized, yeah, it can be that bad.

What advice would you give a younger version of yourself?

I put all my energy and passion into my career, but if I knew that the current climate was going to continue long-term, then I wouldn't recommend it to myself: to just follow my dreams of research. It just feels like there's way too much uncertainty right now.

Michael Garcia, former Program Scientist

Michael Garcia effectively worked “on loan” to NASA from the Smithsonian Institute for 13 years. He served as a project scientist for the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope and went on to lead the Astrophysics Pioneers program, which is dedicated to organizing low-cost, high-impact missions. NASA did not actively choose to let Garcia go, but lacked the personnel to process the paperwork that would have kept him hired.

Has anything surprised you about the departures?

What surprised me was that initial budget request, which basically said, we, America, are never going to launch another space telescope. We're going to turn off 95% of the ones we have in orbit. We are getting out of that business, we don't want to ask those questions anymore. That was just shocking to me, and I think to everybody at NASA as well. And it should be shocking to the American public.

We're on the edge of answering this age-old question, “Are we alone?” We've been asking it for thousands of years, and we now have the tools to do it — to actually answer that question. This budget is not going to let America answer that question.

We're right on the edge. America's right on the edge. And we can do it, but we're not going to do it with this budget.

It's sad to see.

What’s the main factor dividing those who are leaving NASA from those who are staying?

The people who are leaving tend to be the more experienced ones. I think people who are more senior staff see the writing on the wall and just say, “With our budget being cut by 70%*, do I really want to stay here and do this?” 

*The President’s Budget Request for FY26 proposes to cut NASA’s Astrophysics Division by 70%, and the entirety of NASA science by 47%.

What advice would you give an early-career astronomer right now?

I would say keep your options open…or move to Canada or France or England. Right now, it looks like America is getting out of this business.

What does the culture feel like at NASA now?

Morale is incredibly low. People try to see the light at the end of the tunnel, but in general, morale is — in the 13 years I've been there — the lowest I've ever seen it.

Have any of these decisions felt thought-out?

In my opinion, they're happening with no thought at all. It's just slash and burn. 

My standout example is the Pandora mission, which is going to look at stars hosting exoplanets. It's a half-meter optical and infrared telescope for $20 million. Done in the way NASA used to do business, that would have cost at least $200 million, if not $400 million. That mission is the kind of thing that this administration says they want to do. It's low cost. It's using commercial products. It's accepting of higher risk. And the budget for its parent program for next year, under the President's proposal, is zero.

What can people do about this now?

The real sad thing here is that so much damage has already been done. We've lost a ton of really good people. It takes generations to recover from that kind of thing.

Write your congressperson. Just think about what's happening. Don't stick your head in the sand. Ask yourself the question, do you want America to lead in space science? Do you want America to be the country that discovers life on another world? Do you want another country to do that?

I'm glad I joined the Planetary Society — I have to support this group. I should have joined years ago.

Editor’s note: Some quoted statements have been lightly edited for length and clarity, with approval from our sources.