David Richardson’s abrupt resignation as acting chief of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) after just six months has thrown the nation’s disaster response apparatus into deeper turmoil, capping a year marked by mass staff departures, policy upheaval, and mounting public criticism. Richardson’s exit, effective November 17, 2025, comes as FEMA faces renewed scrutiny over its faltering response to the catastrophic Central Texas floods last July—an event that claimed the lives of more than 130 people, including 27 campers and counselors at Camp Mystic on the Guadalupe River.
Richardson, a former Marine Corps artillery officer with tours in Iraq and Afghanistan and prior leadership of the Department of Homeland Security’s Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction office, stepped into the FEMA role in May 2025. Notably, he had no previous emergency management experience, a point that drew skepticism from both lawmakers and agency staff. According to The Associated Press, Richardson replaced Cameron Hamilton, who was dismissed after publicly opposing the Trump administration’s proposal to dismantle FEMA and shift more disaster recovery responsibility to the states.
During his brief tenure, Richardson’s leadership style quickly became a subject of controversy. In his first all-hands meeting, he warned staff, “Don’t get in my way... I will run right over you,” and asserted, “I, and I alone, speak for FEMA.” As reported by The Washington Post, he kept a notably low profile, was frequently inaccessible, and rarely engaged with staff—a pattern that proved disastrous when tragedy struck in Texas.
The July floods in Central Texas were a pivotal moment. As torrential rains triggered fast-moving waters that overtopped levees and swept through communities, FEMA’s response was hampered by delays at the highest level. According to The Post, Richardson was unreachable during the crucial first 48 hours of the disaster, as he was on a weekend trip with his sons. To make matters worse, his network password expired on July 3, leaving him without email access until the evening of July 6. Throughout the holiday weekend, FEMA officials scrambled to contact him for approvals needed under new, stringent budget policies imposed by DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, which required her personal sign-off for any expense over $100,000. The delays in leadership approval meant that deployment of FEMA’s 28 specialized search-and-rescue teams to Texas was significantly slowed—a fact that, as The Economic Times noted, contributed to the tragic loss of life.
Richardson’s absence and the agency’s sluggish response did not go unnoticed. In September, The Washington Post reported on internal messages and emails that confirmed he was difficult to reach, especially on evenings and weekends. Lawmakers quickly seized on the controversy, with Rep. Robert Garcia, the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, sending Richardson a letter demanding clarity on FEMA’s ability to “prepare for, respond to, and recover from disasters.” During a House committee hearing in July, when pressed on why he did not arrive on the ground until one week after the disaster, Richardson said he stayed in Washington, D.C., to “kick down the doors of bureaucracy,” but also admitted he was camping with his sons when the floods first hit and initially helped manage the response from inside his truck.
Richardson’s resignation is the second leadership shakeup at FEMA in 2025. His predecessor, Cameron Hamilton, was forced out after opposing the administration’s anti-FEMA agenda. As Hamilton wrote on social media, “Throughout my 2 decades of public service, I was constantly reminded of the reason to serve…the American people. They deserve our absolute best at all times.” Hamilton’s ouster and Richardson’s subsequent appointment were both seen as efforts by the Trump administration to align FEMA leadership with its controversial vision for disaster management.
The agency’s internal turmoil has been exacerbated by broader policy changes. Since President Trump’s return to office in January, FEMA has lost as much as a quarter of its workforce, according to The Washington Post, with the Government Accountability Office reporting that 18% of permanent full-time employees and 24 senior-level staffers had departed as of June. The administration has also slashed mitigation funding, imposed new requirements on preparedness grants, and denied several states’ requests for major disaster declarations. These moves, coupled with Noem’s tight grip on agency spending, have, according to dozens of employees cited by The Post, severely undermined FEMA’s ability to respond to emergencies and support national security operations.
Richardson’s resignation also comes at a pivotal moment for the agency’s future. The FEMA Review Council, a 12-member panel led by Noem and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, is set to deliver its final recommendations to the White House in November. The council was commissioned to evaluate FEMA’s performance during the Biden administration and to guide efforts to “fundamentally restructure FEMA, transforming it from its current form into a streamlined, mission-focused disaster-response force,” as DHS assistant secretary for public affairs Tricia McLaughlin stated. Trump has repeatedly argued that FEMA “should be eliminated as it exists,” and Noem has directed the council to “reimagine” the agency from the ground up.
Despite the controversy surrounding his tenure, the Department of Homeland Security credited Richardson with helping to identify “serious governmental waste and inefficiency.” In a statement shared by DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin, the department extended its “sincere appreciation to the Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Administrator, David Richardson, for his dedicated service and wish[ed] him continued success in his return to the private sector.”
With Richardson’s departure, FEMA chief of staff Karen Evans, a cybersecurity specialist with multiple senior DHS roles under her belt, will assume the role of acting administrator starting December 1. Evans’ appointment comes at a critical juncture: the agency is bracing for the release of the FEMA Review Council’s report and the potential for sweeping changes to its mission and structure.
As the dust settles, FEMA faces an uncertain future. The agency’s ability to respond to disasters has been called into question by lawmakers, disaster victims, and its own staff. The next administrator—who, by law, is required to have emergency management experience, though the Trump administration has so far circumvented this requirement by appointing temporary leaders—will inherit an agency in flux, with its workforce diminished and its mandate under threat.
For the communities devastated by disaster and for the nation as a whole, the stakes could hardly be higher. FEMA’s next steps will determine not only how the agency recovers from internal strife, but also how it meets its core mission: helping Americans in their darkest hours.
