Forum Index
»
Jobs and Careers
List of Toxic Federal Agencies
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| Given all of the posts about DS and USAID, would I be crazy to consider applying to be a GEO overseas? I won’t be able to continue my current career at our new post. DH is military working out of an embassy for the first time. I am not sharing these posts with him. |
Anonymous
| Not to burst your bubble but VA OCHCO is dysfunctional with poor leadership |
Anonymous
Many IGs in my experience personify the phrase "who watches the watchers?" They pick and choose which laws to follow, especially in the HR arena, and use veiled threats to get the Agency to agree to do things that fall under Agency authority. It was very disheartening. |
Anonymous
Not crazy, but realize you are doing it to stay employed, gain a new skill, or for another reason. You also have a light at the end of the tunnel if you don't like it - your spouse will move and so will you. |
Anonymous
Do expand on your thought here, please! |
Anonymous
I second this, especially DOT OIG. I would go back in a heartbeat. |
Anonymous
The IG nominee is part of the fighting and drama. She did what you didn't like about your coworker - ran to the old IG - to get her way, get people pushed out she didn't like or agree with. And used her access to get herself ahead at their expense. That's hard to believe. she seems to to be rationale. admittedly, I don't work with her often. but she and the DIG has been the most pleasant of all those folks on the leadership team. Agree with the previous post, the GC and DIG at USAID OIG are excellent leaders and are trying their best! Are they really trying? Let's be honest about that. Many of my colleagues in the office of management had meetings with the former IG and the DIG (now acting IG) about the leadership abuse and mis-management in our division. I'll give them credit for demoting the former AIG of management (another friend of the former iG) out of SES. That seemed like a promising step forward. But they made him a foreign service officer and sent him overseas to live a lavish life. News flash, that is an upgrade, not a downgrade! Then they replace him with someone worse. We feel like they intentionally delivered us to the devil! They spent nearly a year searching for the perfect executive, and they hired the devil. And what makes this horrible is that there were other options. The former HR director acted in the deputy role. He was smart and charismatic. So no, we do not feel like they are trying. My colleagues in audit and investigations might feel differently since they are not the step children of the organization. No, we don't feel differently. many people praise the former IG, but her judgement on executives was off more often than not. Many of her executive hires or promotions did not have sufficient experience for the positions. Let's break this down! 1. Her first deputy IG was promoted to that role from a GS-15. He was a 15 for one year and then promoted to SES role (deputy IG) that was 3 levels from where he was as a 15. After serving in the role for two years, he was removed from the position because he couldn't handle it. To save face and spare him the embarrassment, the former IG created a new division for him (in 2018). Nobody knows what the division was supposed to do. It seemed to overlap with other offices. It doesn't matter now because the office was disbanded in 2021 and it never achieved any results. So much for efficiency and effectiveness! 2. the former IG's second deputy IG was a 15 for two years and promoted to SES. Once again, the role he was promoted into was 3 levels above his 15 role. I may not sit on the executive committee (thank goodness), but it's not hard to see that he struggles to manage them. In audit, we sent "feedback" to him and the former IG about the horrible practices of the former head of audit. They did NOTHING! They knew the former audit executive made decisions based on who he liked. He got away with it because he is friends with the former IG. I, too, am glad he followed her to Deloitte. 3. The former head of investigations was also promoted to SES by the former IG. He was promoted two levels above his 15 role and leap frogged a sitting executive in investigations. He ran investigations into the ground. I'll let my investigations colleagues provide examples of how he ran the unit into the ground. I only have second hand knowledge of it, but boy oh boy! 4. per a previous post, the GC went from 14 to SES in 3 years. Really?!!! I will say that many people have great things to say about her. My two interactions with her have been very pleasant, but she does sit on the executive committee. So it's hard to cut her slack when all these bad decisions are coming out. Did she dissent and was just out voted or was she convinced their decisions are good? 5. Most recently, the executive committee decided to make the principal deputy in audit the Acting AIGA. Another baffling decision! First, she should have never EVER been in the principal deputy role. In fact, how did she ever make the ranks of senior foreign service (SES equivalent for foreign service)? This is a mystery to everyone. She knows nothing and everything she touches has to be redone. She doesn't even seem to delegate effectively. I know from experience as she was once my director. The ONLY good thing here is that she is super nice. but they really couldn't have chosen a more clueless person. It's not like they didn't have choices. There are other executives in audit and they actually know something and come off as decent leaders. |
Anonymous
|
oops. my post got messed up. so I'll just post it like this. This is in response to the USAID OIG poster that wrote about the hiring of their office of management executive.
No, we don't feel differently. many people praise the former IG, but her judgement on executives was off more often than not. Many of her executive hires or promotions did not have sufficient experience for the positions. Let's break this down! 1. Her first deputy IG was promoted to that role from a GS-15. He was a 15 for one year and then promoted to SES role (deputy IG) that was 3 levels from where he was as a 15. After serving in the role for two years, he was removed from the position because he couldn't handle it. To save face and spare him the embarrassment, the former IG created a new division for him (in 2018). Nobody knows what the division was supposed to do. It seemed to overlap with other offices. It doesn't matter now because the office was disbanded in 2021 and it never achieved any results. So much for efficiency and effectiveness! 2. the former IG's second deputy IG was a 15 for two years and promoted to SES. Once again, the role he was promoted into was 3 levels above his 15 role. I may not sit on the executive committee (thank goodness), but it's not hard to see that he struggles to manage them. In audit, we sent "feedback" to him and the former IG about the horrible practices of the former head of audit. They did NOTHING! They knew the former audit executive made decisions based on who he liked. He got away with it because he is friends with the former IG. I, too, am glad he followed her to Deloitte. 3. The former head of investigations was also promoted to SES by the former IG. He was promoted two levels above his 15 role and leap frogged a sitting executive in investigations. He ran investigations into the ground. I'll let my investigations colleagues provide examples of how he ran the unit into the ground. I only have second hand knowledge of it, but boy oh boy! 4. per a previous post, the GC went from 14 to SES in 3 years. Really?!!! I will say that many people have great things to say about her. My two interactions with her have been very pleasant, but she does sit on the executive committee. So it's hard to cut her slack when all these bad decisions are coming out. Did she dissent and was just out voted or was she convinced their decisions are good? 5. Most recently, the executive committee decided to make the principal deputy in audit the Acting AIGA. Another baffling decision! First, she should have never EVER been in the principal deputy role. In fact, how did she ever make the ranks of senior foreign service (SES equivalent for foreign service)? This is a mystery to everyone. She knows nothing and everything she touches has to be redone. She doesn't even seem to delegate effectively. I know from experience as she was once my director. The ONLY good thing here is that she is super nice. but they really couldn't have chosen a more clueless person. It's not like they didn't have choices. There are other executives in audit and they actually know something and come off as decent leaders. |
Anonymous
| True, USAID OIG could be FUBAR. The OIG community as a whole holds itself to high standards but not this office. USAID OIG is a hot mess of blind careerists, cliques, and clueless managers. I wish I could call the IG Hotline on some of the stuff I see. |
Anonymous
Since Cal Scovel left, DOT OIG is a totally different place! The DAIGI is a climber who knows little about the mission and is extremely toxic. I’d stay away from DOT OIG, unless you are an auditor, that leadership bench has remained stable for many years. |
Anonymous
You could make a hotline complaint, but that probably wouldn’t go very far since that goes to Investigations and the DAIGI would squash it as disgruntled employees. If you have actual, solid, proven by evidence complaints, I’d recommended sending a letter to the Congressional committee’s that oversee USAID and also to the CIGIE Integrity Committee. CIGIE’s committee reviews complaints against OIG execs, it is led by 2 IGs and overseen by the FBI. You could also send a complaint to GAO. DHS OIG was investigated by both and it didn’t turn out very well for them, they are still in shambles. If the issues are just gripes and disagreement on how they are managing the agency, I’d recommend finding a new place to work because sometimes you just have to leave what you perceive as toxic because your thoughts there will not change for the better, regardless of who is in charge. I’ve been there, done that, and never looked back. |
Anonymous
100% A lot of the complaints amount to people not liking that a certain decision was made. Fine. Maybe a better one could be made or there are multiple options that are good or bad, but was the choice unethical? Illegal? Did you just not like it? Usually it amounts to the last one. If you know your leadership was violating the law, policy, or regulation AND YOU PROVIDE WITNESS NAMES AND WHERE TO GET PROOF, even a reluctant DAIGI will move that forward. Saying someone hires people you don't like and doesn't take your advice is not a punishable offense; providing a generic sky is falling and everyone is corrupt complaint also won't go far. |
Anonymous
Just had to say I miss Cal Scovel. Wasn’t at DOT OIG, but I knew him and he was one of the good IGs. And so nice, too. Like, surprisingly nice for DC. |
Anonymous
| The statistical agencies can be toxic. |
Anonymous
You are right. USAID OIG Senior leadership decisions are not exactly illegal. "Unethical" is really hard to prove. There is always a justification for every decision. For example, all those senior leaders hired by the former IG was done through panels. While she made the final decision, she can hide behind the panel sending those names forward. But we are not dumb. we know how this works. That's why nobody actually files the hotline complaint. It's rubbish...and it's all subtle. The appearance of these decisions and actions is another thing, but OIGs only use the appearance argument against the auditee, not internally. The former IG knows some of her executive hires were really bad. If not, two of them would not have been demoted/removed from their position and another chased out the door. And now her bad decision to hire AIGM is wrecking havoc on the organization. The point that multiple posters are making is that the leadership decisions made have led ZERO IMPROVEMENTS. ZERO! And morale continues to decline. As another poster said, 5 years of survey results show the dissatisfaction. The lack of real leadership is driving the organization into the ground. BTW, you sound like one of our lackluster executives. If by chance this is true, then answer this: why can't we keep good talent? Every good employee leaves this organization after 2-3 years, if they make it that long? the good employees that do stay are mostly foreign service. They are stuck stick it out for the FS benefits. We've had quite a few employees leave after being here just a couple of months, especially in the management office. You know this organization is toxic. You know that our management office and their leaders are trash. Don't act like you don't know the truth! |