CISA’s Critical Partnership Division Dismantled, Raising National Security Concerns

Major Restructuring Eliminates Key Cybersecurity Collaboration Teams

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) has undergone a significant restructuring that has effectively dismantled its Stakeholder Engagement Division, eliminating nearly all 95 positions in the unit responsible for coordinating critical infrastructure cybersecurity improvements with state and local governments, private industry, and international partners. The sweeping layoffs, which take full effect in early December, represent one of the most substantial reorganizations in the agency’s history.

Major Restructuring Eliminates Key Cybersecurity Collaboration Teams
Expert Reactions Highlight National Security Risks
Impact on Critical Infrastructure Partnerships
International Cooperation Efforts Severed
Industry Reactions and Concerns
CISA’s Response and Remaining Capabilities
Long-term Implications for Cybersecurity

According to multiple sources familiar with the matter who spoke with Cybersecurity Dive, the cuts will leave three of the division’s four core units completely without staff. These include the Council Management office, which facilitated meetings between government agencies and critical infrastructure operators; Strategic Relations, which supported partnerships with small businesses, academic institutions, and state/local governments; and International Affairs, which coordinated global cybersecurity cooperation and training programs.

Expert Reactions Highlight National Security Risks

Cybersecurity experts and former government officials have expressed serious concerns about the implications of these cuts. Michael Daniel, who served as President Obama’s cybersecurity adviser and now leads the Cyber Threat Alliance, warned that “these reductions continue a pattern of weakening the US government’s ability to carry out its cybersecurity responsibilities and hindering its ability to interact with the private sector.”

Daniel emphasized that the downsizing “runs the risk of leaving CISA blind to certain threats and trends and will also limit CISA’s ability to influence the private sector and communicate its priorities.” His concerns were echoed by industry leaders across multiple critical infrastructure sectors.

Impact on Critical Infrastructure Partnerships

The elimination of the Council Management staff threatens to severely disrupt CISA’s relationships with organizations in healthcare, energy, water, finance, and other vital sectors. These employees oversaw groups that brought together government and industry organizations responsible for protecting various infrastructure sectors, as well as committees that advised CISA leadership on emerging threats., as additional insights

One particularly significant casualty is the support for the National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC), which convened corporate executives and federal leaders for what officials described as uniquely productive conversations about improving collective cybersecurity resilience. A U.S. official who requested anonymity noted that telecommunications companies considered the NSTAC “a trusted venue” for important discussions.

International Cooperation Efforts Severed

The dismantling of the International Affairs team represents a major setback for global cybersecurity collaboration. According to sources familiar with the matter, SED staffers were overseeing projects to train other governments’ personnel and improve their technological capabilities, in some cases helping foreign partners build systems more resilient to cyberattacks.

Megan Stifel, chief strategy officer for the Institute for Security and Technology and a former international cyber policy staffer at the National Security Council, noted that the cuts would make it harder for the U.S. to enlist foreign help countering threats. “We can’t claim to be leaders internationally without a full bench of experts to help reduce risk across the government and our critical infrastructure,” she said.

Industry Reactions and Concerns

Critical infrastructure operators expressed alarm about the potential consequences. Errol Weiss, chief security officer for the Health Information Sharing and Analysis Center, called the cuts “a dangerous void,” noting that “the health sector is one of the most targeted and vulnerable, and this is exactly the wrong time to be pulling back federal support.”

A natural gas industry executive who requested anonymity said their group was concerned the layoffs could “have negative impacts to our national security,” adding that “a fully functional and staffed CISA is essential to ensuring the continued operation of the key programs and initiatives that pipeline operators rely on to secure their systems.”

CISA’s Response and Remaining Capabilities

In response to inquiries about the layoffs, Marci McCarthy, CISA’s director of public affairs, stated the cuts were “part of the ongoing realignment to get the agency back on mission” and emphasized that CISA “remains dedicated to safeguarding the nation’s critical infrastructure.”

The agency will retain its Sector Management unit, which oversees CISA’s work as a Sector Risk Management Agency for eight of the 16 critical infrastructure sectors, including chemical facilities, communications and information technology. Additionally, CISA’s Joint Cyber Defense Collaborative will continue tactical coordination with foreign partners during major cyber emergencies.

Long-term Implications for Cybersecurity

The restructuring appears to align with the Trump administration’s earlier budget proposals that sought to shrink the division’s responsibilities. The administration has characterized the changes as “shift[ing] CISA’s mission space to solely support the SRMA efforts and align[ing] with CISA’s priorities to strengthen critical infrastructure security while optimizing operational effectiveness.”

However, cybersecurity professionals warn that the loss of institutional knowledge and established relationships could have lasting consequences. As Weiss noted, “Losing the specialized personnel who manage those deep relationships means we lose institutional knowledge, trust built over years, and the agility needed to respond to sophisticated nation-state and criminal threats.”

The full impact of these structural changes on national cybersecurity preparedness may not be apparent until the next major cyber incident tests the agency’s reduced capacity for coordination and information sharing.