The TALENTS Act (H.R. 6700) establishes a statutory Presidential Management Fellows (PMF) Program administered by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). OPM will run an annual competition, name finalists, and agencies will appoint Fellows into two‑year Schedule D excepted‑service appointments with specified development, rotation, mentoring, and training requirements; successful Fellows may be converted to the competitive service.
The bill also creates or continues Federal Executive Boards in named metropolitan areas, gives OPM oversight of those boards, and sets reporting and governance rules. For practitioners, the bill matters because it prescribes concrete timelines, minimum training and rotation lengths, certification procedures tied to conversion, and a significant near‑term expansion of fellowship slots that will affect agency hiring, budgets, and regional personnel planning.
At a Glance
What It Does
Creates a statutory Presidential Management Fellows Program managed by OPM: OPM selects finalists, agencies appoint Fellows to two‑year Schedule D terms, agencies must deliver individual development plans, at least 80 hours of formal interactive training per year, and one 120–180 day developmental rotation. The bill also establishes Federal Executive Boards in specified metropolitan areas and vests OPM with oversight and reporting requirements.
Who It Affects
Recent advanced‑degree graduates (degree completed within two years or completing by Aug. 31 of the competition year), OPM, agency Chief Human Capital Officers and Executive Resources Boards, regional agency leaders who participate on Federal Executive Boards, and agency budget/planning offices that must fund rotations and training.
Why It Matters
It converts a longstanding flagship leadership pipeline into statute with defined obligations and timelines, forces agencies to absorb operational costs for expanded cohorts, and centralizes certification and conversion processes that determine which Fellows enter the competitive service.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill makes the Presidential Management Fellows Program a statutory program run by the Director of OPM and defines core terms (advanced degree, agency, agency PMF coordinator, Executive Resources Board (ERB), Fellow, metropolitan area, and others). OPM runs an annual competition, selects finalists through a structured assessment that permits veterans’ preference, and publishes the finalist list to agencies.
Agencies may appoint finalists to two‑year Schedule D excepted service appointments (GS‑09/11/12 or equivalent). OPM determines the number of finalists each year; the bill requires a ramp‑up so that, for fiscal years 2026–2031, the number of Fellowship positions equals 200 percent of the pre‑enactment fiscal year’s number.
Agencies must establish an eligibility period for appointments and may extend a Fellow’s appointment for up to 120 days in rare circumstances.Every Fellow gets an Individual Development Plan (IDP) within 90 days, a mentor assigned within 90 days who is outside the Fellow’s chain of command, and at least 80 hours per year of formal interactive training (excluding mandatory yearly trainings). Agencies must provide at least one developmental rotational assignment of 120–180 days with a different supervisor and may offer additional short‑term assignments of 30–180 days.
Executive Resources Boards evaluate Fellows near the program end and, if they certify a Fellow met requirements, the Fellow becomes eligible for conversion into the competitive service. The bill also allows moves between agencies without breaking service, sets a reimbursement rule for placement fees if a move happens in the first 180 days, and prescribes that Fellows are in excepted service group II for RIF purposes.Separately, the Act establishes or continues Federal Executive Boards in a specified list of metropolitan areas, requires bylaws and a one‑year chair term, mandates annual work plans and reports to OPM with specific due dates, and authorizes OPM to supervise, convene conferences, and issue additional guidance to those Boards.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The Director must ensure each fiscal year from 2026 through 2031 that PMF positions equal 200% of the number of positions in the fiscal year before enactment (a statutory near‑term doubling requirement).
Eligibility is limited to individuals who completed an advanced degree within the two years before the application announcement or who expect to complete such a degree by August 31 of the academic year of the competition.
Agencies must provide each Fellow at least 80 hours of formal interactive training per year that maps to the Fellow’s IDP; required annual trainings (security, ethics) do not count toward that 80‑hour minimum.
Each Fellow must receive at least one developmental rotational assignment of between 120 and 180 days in a different work unit led by a different supervisor; short rotations of 30–180 days are also permitted.
Executive Resources Boards must evaluate Fellows and decide on written certification at least 45 days before program end and must notify Fellows of certification decisions at least 30 days before completion—certification triggers conversion eligibility.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Definitions that shape scope and eligibility
Section 2 sets the operative definitions that determine who counts as eligible and what offices participate. It imports regulatory definitions for 'advanced degree' and permits the Director to deem a master's certificate an advanced degree for program purposes. It expressly includes the Government Publishing Office within 'agency' and creates operational roles—agency PMF coordinator, principal area/regional officers, and special representatives—so agencies without regional structures must still designate senior officials for Board participation.
OPM authority and required expansion of fellowship slots
Section 3 gives the Director sole authority to run the PMF, determine the annual number of finalists based on CHCO Council input, and establishes a statutory ramp: for FY2026–FY2031 the Director must ensure fellowship positions equal 200% of the number in the fiscal year before enactment. Practically, that forces OPM and agencies to plan for a large cohort increase and creates immediate hiring and budgetary implications for agencies that host Fellows.
Competition, eligibility windows, and selection mechanics
Section 4 requires an annual announcement and competition, limits application to those within two years of an advanced degree (or completing by Aug. 31), allows multiple applications but strips finalist status if a finalist reapplies, and mandates a rigorous structured assessment process with statutory allowance for veterans’ preference under Title 5. OPM must publish the finalist list for agencies to use during their appointment window.
Appointment terms, pay grade options, and part‑time rules
Section 5 authorizes two‑year Schedule D excepted‑service appointments and requires agencies to use the specific excepted service appointing authority. Agencies may appoint Fellows at GS‑09, GS‑11, or GS‑12 (or equivalents) and designate the appointment as a trial period. The section allows limited part‑time schedules (up to 180 days) if they do not jeopardize completion of Program requirements and permits single 120‑day extensions for rare circumstances.
Individual Development Plans, required training and rotations, and certification
Section 6 compels agencies to approve an IDP within 90 days and to assign a mentor outside the Fellow’s chain of command within 90 days. Agencies must provide at least 80 hours per year of formal interactive training tied to the IDP (excluding mandatory security/ethics training), deliver at least one 120–180 day developmental rotation with a different supervisor, and may assign short‑term rotations of 30–180 days. ERBs must evaluate Fellows and determine certification in writing at least 45 days before program end; certified Fellows become eligible for competitive service conversion.
Interagency moves and placement reimbursements
Section 7 allows Fellows to move between agencies during their appointment without breaking service so long as the receiving agency meets Program participation requirements and appoints the Fellow immediately. If a move happens within the first 180 days of the appointment, the original agency may request reimbursement of one‑quarter of the placement fee from the receiving agency, creating a modest financial disincentive for early transfers.
Federal Executive Boards: locations, governance, reporting
Sections 11 and 12 list metropolitan areas where Federal Executive Boards will operate (over two dozen cities), require written designations of agency representatives, mandate bylaws subject to OPM approval, set one‑year chair terms, and prescribe an annual work plan due July 1 and an annual report due January 1 to OPM. OPM can dissolve, merge, or create Boards and must include a PMF analysis in a report to Congressional oversight committees every three years.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Recent advanced‑degree graduates: The bill creates a clear, sizable pathway into federal management positions with structured training, mentoring, and a route to competitive‑service conversion.
- Agencies seeking early‑career leaders (CHCOs and hiring managers): Agencies get a statutory stream of trained candidates and formal mechanisms (rotations, IDPs, mentors) to groom talent for leadership and succession.
- Regional offices and Federal Executive Boards: Boards gain statutory standing, resources for regional coordination, and explicit duties (work plans, reports) that can increase local interagency collaboration and visibility.
- OPM and central HR planners: OPM gains control over cohort size, assessment standards, and national oversight—tools to shape the federal pipeline and to synchronize agency needs.
Who Bears the Cost
- Agencies (hiring managers and budget offices): Agencies must fund onboarding, 80+ hours/year of formal training, rotational assignments, mentors, and potential conversion hires, and absorb placement and operational costs for an expanded cohort.
- OPM (administrative capacity): OPM must scale assessment operations, publish finalist lists, oversee ERBs, and manage statutory reporting without an explicit authorization of appropriations in the bill.
- Executive Resources Boards and regional staff: ERBs carry evaluation and certification duties and must meet new reporting and governance requirements—work that consumes local staff time and coordination resources.
- Fellows and supervisors: Fellows operate under a trial period and a strict certification process that can result in non‑conversion; supervisors must document development and rotations within tight timelines.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central tension is between scale and quality: the Act mandates a fast, sizable expansion of fellowship slots to replenish the federal leadership pipeline, but it also binds agencies to meaningful development, rotation, and certification standards that require time and money. Expanding quantity without dedicated funding risks diluting the program’s developmental rigor or shifting costs to under‑resourced agencies, while strict standards without capacity will bottleneck conversions and frustrate both Fellows and hiring offices.
The bill imposes a rapid expansion requirement without specifying new appropriations or direct funding mechanisms, which creates a practical implementation gap: agencies and OPM must absorb assessment, training, rotation, and conversion costs within existing budgets unless Congress provides supplemental funding. That gap will shape how aggressively agencies recruit and convert Fellows and may lead to uneven execution across departments.
The certification and conversion architecture places substantial authority at the ERB level, which could produce inconsistent outcomes across agencies or regions because ERBs vary in composition, resources, and local priorities. Cross‑agency conversions and the modest placement fee reimbursement for early transfers create patchwork incentives that could encourage some agencies to offload Fellows rather than invest in conversions, especially where budget or organizational change makes conversion difficult.
Finally, the statutoryization of Federal Executive Boards strengthens local coordination but also adds reporting and governance overhead with limited clarity on staffing and resourcing, raising questions about duplication with existing regional structures and about the enforceability of OPM directives absent funding.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.