Tapping out - Anonymous employee Winrock International Employee Review

Exceptional CEO and CFOO and great staff. While these are trying times in the International Development Sector, Winrock will get through this phase to grow again and help communities around the world.

Reduction in Donor budgets is impacting all organizations in the sector, so there may be less employment opportunities and tight budgets.

Winrock Great has great benefits along with pay to be a non-profit.

Top 5 of many. 1. The organization is extremely top-heavy, resulting in a very high indirect cost rate (over 60%). A significant portion of funding is spent on U.S.-based labor and benefits, while a relatively small amount reaches local communities. 2. The organizational culture is toxic. Employee concerns and complaints often go unaddressed, and there is a perception that senior leadership prioritizes its own interests over those of staff and program outcomes. There are also concerns about nepotism. 3. Several key leadership positions appear to lack the competence needed to effectively manage the organization. This includes the CEOs (past and present), the Global Director of Programs formally ARW VP , Procurement director, and Awards Management leadership. Many other staff members are relatively new, resulting in limited institutional knowledge. 4. Although the organization states that it is committed to working with Arkansas businesses and farmers, it has eliminated most of its Arkansas-based program staff and qouote told them they are looking for "technical experts", making that commitment difficult to reconcile with its staffing decisions. 5. Last year, when several programs ended, the organization laid off many loyal employees with more than a decade of service, leaving staff who most of whom had been with the organization for five years or less. Not an issue however, at the time, U.S.-based employees did not receive severance, there were multiple issues related to employee benefits, and there were concerns that the organization sought to minimize benefit obligations for international staff. Six months later, several director-level and above promotions were announced, new senior leaders were hired, and the severance policy was reinstated. This created the perception that decision-makers prioritized taking care of themselves rather than supporting the long-serving employees who were about to be laid off.