employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Winrock International

Is this your company?

Sad – Really Sad!!! - Anonymous employee Winrock International Employee Review

1.0
May 20, 2016
Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

My pay and benefits are pretty good for a non-profit. 10 percent 401k pension contribution is one of the highest.

Cons

It’s really sad Winrock’s reputation is going down the drain with staff, contractors, funders, and suppliers. Formal non-compliance complaints from our biggest funder and law suits from contractors and staff are at a record high while new business is at a record low. The “Leaders” have managed to blame everyone but themselves for the sad results the past year. How much longer can they keep saying they just need to fire one more long-term staff or hire one more job-hopping friend or consultant. The real reason for all the problems are the vindictive bullies and pompous self-promoters who don’t have a clue on how to lead Winrock.

Explore other reviews about Winrock International

5.0
Oct 23, 2025
Anonymous contractor
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

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.

Cons

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

2.0
Jul 22, 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

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

Cons

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.

See reviews by: Helpful|Rating|Date|All