employer cover photo
employer logo
employer logo

Henry M. Jackson Foundation

Is this your company?

Henry M. Jackson Foundation reviews

3.5

65% would recommend to a friend

(674 total reviews)

Joseph Caravalho

73% approve of CEO

49% positive business outlook

Henry M. Jackson Foundation has an employee rating of 3.5 out of 5 stars, based on 674 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have a good working experience there. The Henry M. Jackson Foundation employee rating is in line with the average (within 1 standard deviation) for employers within the Management & Consulting industry (3.7 stars).

Reviews by job title

674 reviews
3.0
Oct 5, 2015
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

HMJF lends personnel support to very relevant projects, including vaccine development and other, which is very gratifying to work with. The company only exists because the government cannot/does not want to hire more federal employees neither the military has high level scientists dedicated to the projects they are suppose to carry out. Since you can be let go very easily, contractors are convenient. Overall, the benefits are in line with the market. Depending on where/who you work with, you will have good learning opportunities and maybe market exposure.

Cons

The quality and conditions of your employment with HMJF is highly dependent on who you directly work with, since HR does not take care of maintaining an unbiased environment. Annual reviews are forgotten, employees' feedback are not valued, neither the fairness of supervisor's assessment is questioned. As others pointed out, HR is there to take care of the company, not in the best interest of the employees. For the most part, they are incompetent or simply do not care. Do not expect HR to intervene on your behalf for promotions, salary raise or any other opportunity.

3.0
Sep 2, 2015

Research Assistant

Anonymous employee
Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Great benefits. Good flexible work hours. Good work/life balance. Follows federal holiday/schedules via OPM.

Cons

Poor salary increases. Some managers/supervisors (in headquarters and in the laboratory) do not have good management skills. Hierarchy above all else. No room for growth.

1.0
Jun 30, 2025

Review

Recommend
CEO approval
Business Outlook

Pros

Some Flexibility in Work Hours. In some departments, there may be flexibility in terms of work hours or remote work arrangements, which can be an attractive feature for individuals seeking a better work-life balance.

Cons

Ineffective Leadership at CPDR Center One of the biggest drawbacks at HJF, particularly at the CPDR center, was the ineffective leadership. Leadership from both HJF and the NCI lacked transparency and consistency, which created confusion and frustration among staff. Key decisions were often made without input from the team, and there was little to no clear direction or support for staff trying to meet objectives, particularly in research. Lack of Support and Guidance for Research Despite being in a research-focused organization, there was a significant lack of support for employees trying to carry out their work. Resources were insufficient, and when concerns were raised about the lack of materials or assistance, they were largely ignored or dismissed. This made it difficult to meet the expectations set by management and resulted in inefficiencies that could have been avoided with proper support. Unfair Work Environment Due to Favoritism A prevalent issue at the CPDR center was the favoritism shown toward certain employees. This favoritism undermined team morale and led to a toxic work environment where performance and merit were secondary to personal relationships. Staff who were favored received preferential treatment, while others, regardless of their dedication or work quality, were overlooked or unsupported. Disruption of Work Ethics by Newly Recruited Staff With the arrival of newly recruited staff from NCI, there was a noticeable shift in work culture and ethics within the CPDR center. Their lack of understanding of the center's established work ethic, combined with poor leadership oversight, led to a breakdown in collaboration and an overall decline in professionalism. The introduction of these new staff members seemed to erode established standards and create confusion about expectations. Limited Opportunities for Growth or Advancement Despite working in a research environment, there were few opportunities for professional growth or advancement at HJF. Training and mentorship were lacking, and there was no clear path for career progression. When I sought opportunities to advance my skills, those requests were often dismissed, and I found myself stuck in a role without any meaningful opportunities to grow or develop professionally. Inefficient HR and Lack of Resolution When I raised concerns about management practices and the work environment, the Human Resources (HR) department was ineffective in addressing those concerns. HR often failed to take any meaningful action or offer support, and in some cases, their responses seemed biased and dismissive. This lack of accountability made it feel like issues were ignored rather than resolved. Toxic and Divisive Atmosphere The overall atmosphere at the CPDR center was divisive and toxic. The absence of clear leadership and the presence of cliques within the team led to a lack of cooperation and trust. It felt like certain individuals were prioritized based on personal relationships, rather than their actual performance or contributions, which further damaged team cohesion.

Viewing 13 - 15 of 674 Reviews

Glassdoor has 731 Henry M. Jackson Foundation reviews submitted anonymously by Henry M. Jackson Foundation employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Henry M. Jackson Foundation is right for you.