D.C. Public Safety Agencies Spent Nearly $220 Million on Overtime, Auditor Finds

Four Washington, D.C., public-safety agencies spent nearly $220 million on overtime during fiscal year 2025, according to a July 22, 2026, review by the Office of the D.C. Auditor. The finding puts recurring labor costs and staffing capacity under scrutiny as District officials consider how to maintain required coverage without relying so heavily on overtime.

The review examined the Metropolitan Police Department, the Fire and Emergency Medical Services Department, the Department of Corrections and the Office of Unified Communications. The auditor found that staffing gaps, employee leave and other absences, required operational posts and management practices all affect the amount of overtime needed to keep services running.

Where the overtime money went

MPD accounted for the largest share, with nearly $134 million in FY2025 overtime. FireEMS incurred more than $50 million, DOC more than $30 million and OUC $3.8 million, according to the auditor’s review.

The figures do not establish that every overtime payment resulted from mismanagement. The auditor distinguished between incidental overtime, such as coverage for unforeseeable events or unusual emergencies, and structural overtime used when regular staffing and available work hours are insufficient for routinely scheduled duties.

Staffing availability affected coverage

The auditor’s analysis found that vacancies were only part of the issue. Leave, limited employee availability, training and the number of workers required to cover operational posts also affected the District’s recurring overtime needs.

The Department of Corrections provided the clearest example of the staffing calculation. For the operational posts analyzed, the auditor calculated that DOC needed 1,762 correctional officers to fill the posts and related security functions, compared with 704 employees employed in the reviewed workforce. The comparison is a post-coverage analysis, not a statement about DOC’s total workforce across every job category.

The auditor said the gap was large enough that overtime alone could not fill all posts. Agency representatives also told the auditor that some posts were left unfilled to reduce the number of staff assigned to individual shifts. That finding illustrates how staffing levels can affect both overtime costs and operational capacity, though it does not prove that every DOC post was unfilled or that coverage was inadequate in every instance.

FireEMS shows why headcount alone is not enough

FireEMS presented a different staffing picture. The auditor calculated that the department had approximately 95% of the positions needed for its analyzed 24/7 operational posts, yet it still incurred more than $50 million in FY2025 overtime.

The auditor said the department’s overtime was substantially higher than expected from the post analysis and relief-factor calculations alone. Possible contributors include leave, training, fluctuating service demands and periods when staffing must rise above baseline levels for major emergencies, special events or other operational needs. The report said FireEMS should examine those drivers more specifically over time.

The contrast shows why total headcount is not the only measure of staffing capacity. The number of posts, employee availability, scheduling practices, specialized qualifications and demand for service all affect how much regular staffing is available before overtime is required.

Auditor points to workforce and overtime controls

The auditor concluded that District agencies should routinely monitor relief-factor trends, leave usage and workforce size because personnel costs account for a large share of public-safety agency budgets. The report also pointed to additional hiring, improved employee availability, stronger workforce planning and closer management of discretionary overtime as possible ways to address structural costs.

For agencies with high levels of leave without pay or employees recorded as away without leave, the auditor identified a need to assess whether staff can return to work or whether employment actions are necessary. For FireEMS, the report suggested examining wellness, workload and morale issues associated with high average sick-leave use. It also said MPD could revisit managerial controls used to limit discretionary overtime.

The auditor further suggested that the Office of the City Administrator or the Department of Human Resources could convene a District-wide working group to track relief factors and develop management strategies. Those are proposed steps, not reforms already completed or savings guaranteed by the report.

For District taxpayers, the issue is both financial and operational. Reducing recurring overtime could ease pressure on agency budgets, but reducing overtime without adding regular staffing or improving availability could affect the ability to fill police, fire, emergency communications and corrections posts. The FY2025 review provides a cost and staffing snapshot; its longer-term significance will depend on whether District agencies adopt the suggested changes and whether future overtime falls without weakening public-safety coverage.

Sources

• D.C. Public Safety: Too Much Overtime, Too Few Staff? — Office of the D.C. Auditor
• DC public safety agencies spent nearly $220M on overtime, auditor finds — WTOP News