List of Toxic Federal Agencies

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Grab your popcorn!

I remember at USAID OIG 2 Assistant Directors in the same division had an AFFAIR and a BABY - BOTH were PROMOTED. Senior management threw a baby shower and put it in the newsletter. You can’t make this up!

Moral decreased and this was toxic bc one of the ADs was a bully and staff would tell the other AD about their experience not knowing that other AD was her boyfriend.

Management did an internal review and was very reluctant to move them and didn’t for a whole year.

Please name the specific policies that were violated? You sound like a gossip. The sex life of your coworkers or supervisors is none of your business.

Those folks consulted GC and HR before proceeding. Mgt didn’t move them because it found they did nothing inappropriate. Can’t always trust the rumors…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Grab your popcorn!

I remember at USAID OIG 2 Assistant Directors in the same division had an AFFAIR and a BABY - BOTH were PROMOTED. Senior management threw a baby shower and put it in the newsletter. You can’t make this up!

Moral decreased and this was toxic bc one of the ADs was a bully and staff would tell the other AD about their experience not knowing that other AD was her boyfriend.

Management did an internal review and was very reluctant to move them and didn’t for a whole year.

Please name the specific policies that were violated? You sound like a gossip. The sex life of your coworkers or supervisors is none of your business.

Those folks consulted GC and HR before proceeding. Mgt didn’t move them because it found they did nothing inappropriate. Can’t always trust the rumors…

Lol. You prove the point that USAID OIG management is not bright!

[Anonymous]

Today at USAID OIG, we had an all hands meeting. The leadership made a commitment to improve the organization. They must know about this blog by now...

Their pledge sounded very good, but we've heard this before. The former IG promised us for four consecutive years that it would get better. it got progressively worse. We need action!

It does seem that they "handled" the wicked witch of the west (AIGM). Congrats to my office of management colleagues. But to be clear, this is NOT ENOUGH!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:USAID OIG people, do you agree the FS leadership are a bigger problem than CS? In my corner it’s not even close.

The FS leadership at USAID OIG is weak. But the worst executives are the CS. Let's rank them:

The worst:
-AIGM (incompetent and always angry)
-AIGA (he left last month. Was blatant with his favoritism. Decisions never had merit. an overall coward)

Bad:
-PDAIGA (current and former. neither are smart. the current is pleasant to interact with. the former took care of her buddies which is how we got bad people in manager roles)
-Counselor to the IG (what does he actually do? everything he leads goes south quickly)
-all FS audit directors (current and former. lack technical competence. were put in place by former PDAIG. she met her husband through one audit director. so do you ever think she'd hold him accountable?)

Half Decent:
everyone else

this is about right. The comments about audit leadership is definitely spot on. The former AIGA and former PDAIGA are trash and I wouldn't even let the DC rats eat that trash. The audit directors are barely a step above them. They basically act like all their staff don't know how to do the work. There may be a little truth to this, but what's worse is that they don't know to do the work either. Imagine the blind leading the blind. But 100 percent of the blame is on the staff.

[Anonymous]

Good heavens. You guys are cattier than the dudebros at Econjobrumors when they start b tching about SEC divisions.

[Anonymous]

NIH grants offices but mainly the lead one.

[Anonymous]

FDA OGD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Good heavens. You guys are cattier than the dudebros at Econjobrumors when they start b tching about SEC divisions.

Haha, so true…
Management/leadership across the board is generally bad, but for staff to say this is like the pot calling the kettle black. I’ve been in Audit for 10+ years there and the Foreign Service staff are like lord of the flies! They compete for non positional promotions so tear each other down nonstop. That’s how you’re Bree here so why would the internally promoted directors be any better? The toxicity isn’t just management and many in FS feel stuck due to different pension and cushy lifestyle.

It also wasn’t until a couple years ago that there was any real attempt to hold people accountable for performance, so some of the bullying and hostile work environment you might hear about comes from crappy nonworkers finally being called to the carpet and they don’t like it. To survive, you kind of have to keep your head down or ally with some feudal group. It’s pretty bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NIH grants offices but mainly the lead one.

Why? usually grant offices are very organized with a selection panel and proper ways of doing things. Is it favoritism to certain companies or else?

[Anonymous]

Someone listed Dept of Ed as toxic. This couldn’t be further from the truth. Ed has the most competent, intelligent, committed GC in the government. The career leaders there are amazing and stand out from leaders at the other agencies I’ve worked for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good heavens. You guys are cattier than the dudebros at Econjobrumors when they start b tching about SEC divisions.

Haha, so true…
Management/leadership across the board is generally bad, but for staff to say this is like the pot calling the kettle black. I’ve been in Audit for 10+ years there and the Foreign Service staff are like lord of the flies! They compete for non positional promotions so tear each other down nonstop. That’s how you’re Bree here so why would the internally promoted directors be any better? The toxicity isn’t just management and many in FS feel stuck due to different pension and cushy lifestyle.

It also wasn’t until a couple years ago that there was any real attempt to hold people accountable for performance, so some of the bullying and hostile work environment you might hear about comes from crappy nonworkers finally being called to the carpet and they don’t like it. To survive, you kind of have to keep your head down or ally with some feudal group. It’s pretty bad.

I'm an auditor at USAID OIG. Most people would consider me the beneficiary of the former AIGA's "blatant favoritism." And everyone would be 100 percent correct. I played the game. You have to if you want to make moves. It's life and I won't apologize for that. It is very true that many of our auditors are "crappy." At the same time, I worked with a couple of the "crappy" ones. I can say they actually did try, but a narrative was already written for them. And it wasn't a good narrative. So no amount of effort was going to change that. I witnessed an Assistant Director give bad direction to a "crappy" auditor. The former AIGA and PDAIGA called out the mistake at a milestone meeting and the AD sat quiet (we all did) and let the staff person take the heat for the bad guidance given to them. This wasn't just one occasion. This happened multiple times with this particular AD. This AD was also reward annually at the USAID OIG awards ceremony. in 2019, that AD was reassigned out of audit altogether. But that was only because we got a new executive (DAIG) who asked tough questions and saw what was going on. Before that everyone just accepted the AD's word on the "crappy" auditor's performance. So how is staff supposed to overcome this? We have some rotten managers. so the posters that noted that are spot on. It has gotten better, buttony of the old guard is still there and in very influential positions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good heavens. You guys are cattier than the dudebros at Econjobrumors when they start b tching about SEC divisions.

Haha, so true…
Management/leadership across the board is generally bad, but for staff to say this is like the pot calling the kettle black. I’ve been in Audit for 10+ years there and the Foreign Service staff are like lord of the flies! They compete for non positional promotions so tear each other down nonstop. That’s how you’re Bree here so why would the internally promoted directors be any better? The toxicity isn’t just management and many in FS feel stuck due to different pension and cushy lifestyle.

It also wasn’t until a couple years ago that there was any real attempt to hold people accountable for performance, so some of the bullying and hostile work environment you might hear about comes from crappy nonworkers finally being called to the carpet and they don’t like it. To survive, you kind of have to keep your head down or ally with some feudal group. It’s pretty bad.

I'm an auditor at USAID OIG. Most people would consider me the beneficiary of the former AIGA's "blatant favoritism." And everyone would be 100 percent correct. I played the game. You have to if you want to make moves. It's life and I won't apologize for that. It is very true that many of our auditors are "crappy." At the same time, I worked with a couple of the "crappy" ones. I can say they actually did try, but a narrative was already written for them. And it wasn't a good narrative. So no amount of effort was going to change that. I witnessed an Assistant Director give bad direction to a "crappy" auditor. The former AIGA and PDAIGA called out the mistake at a milestone meeting and the AD sat quiet (we all did) and let the staff person take the heat for the bad guidance given to them. This wasn't just one occasion. This happened multiple times with this particular AD. This AD was also reward annually at the USAID OIG awards ceremony. in 2019, that AD was reassigned out of audit altogether. But that was only because we got a new executive (DAIG) who asked tough questions and saw what was going on. Before that everyone just accepted the AD's word on the "crappy" auditor's performance. So how is staff supposed to overcome this? We have some rotten managers. so the posters that noted that are spot on. It has gotten better, buttony of the old guard is still there and in very influential positions.

Wow. Who would want to work with coworkers who won't stand up for someone else? No sense of teamwork or integrity. I hope that changes. I'm glad that DAIG made some changes and hope you guys who let a coworker twist do too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good heavens. You guys are cattier than the dudebros at Econjobrumors when they start b tching about SEC divisions.

Haha, so true…
Management/leadership across the board is generally bad, but for staff to say this is like the pot calling the kettle black. I’ve been in Audit for 10+ years there and the Foreign Service staff are like lord of the flies! They compete for non positional promotions so tear each other down nonstop. That’s how you’re Bree here so why would the internally promoted directors be any better? The toxicity isn’t just management and many in FS feel stuck due to different pension and cushy lifestyle.

It also wasn’t until a couple years ago that there was any real attempt to hold people accountable for performance, so some of the bullying and hostile work environment you might hear about comes from crappy nonworkers finally being called to the carpet and they don’t like it. To survive, you kind of have to keep your head down or ally with some feudal group. It’s pretty bad.

I'm an auditor at USAID OIG. Most people would consider me the beneficiary of the former AIGA's "blatant favoritism." And everyone would be 100 percent correct. I played the game. You have to if you want to make moves. It's life and I won't apologize for that. It is very true that many of our auditors are "crappy." At the same time, I worked with a couple of the "crappy" ones. I can say they actually did try, but a narrative was already written for them. And it wasn't a good narrative. So no amount of effort was going to change that. I witnessed an Assistant Director give bad direction to a "crappy" auditor. The former AIGA and PDAIGA called out the mistake at a milestone meeting and the AD sat quiet (we all did) and let the staff person take the heat for the bad guidance given to them. This wasn't just one occasion. This happened multiple times with this particular AD. This AD was also reward annually at the USAID OIG awards ceremony. in 2019, that AD was reassigned out of audit altogether. But that was only because we got a new executive (DAIG) who asked tough questions and saw what was going on. Before that everyone just accepted the AD's word on the "crappy" auditor's performance. So how is staff supposed to overcome this? We have some rotten managers. so the posters that noted that are spot on. It has gotten better, buttony of the old guard is still there and in very influential positions.

Wow. Who would want to work with coworkers who won't stand up for someone else? No sense of teamwork or integrity. I hope that changes. I'm glad that DAIG made some changes and hope you guys who let a coworker twist do too.

Different poster... but you must not work at USAID OIG. If you did, you would know it would be career suicide for an employee to even respectfully disagree with this crew of managers and leaders. There is a very long list of folks who attempted to speak out and got sidelined. The former AIGA's ego was so fragile. You were only safe with him if you agreed with his positions. Some of us gave anonymous feedback on the former AIGA to the former IG (his friend) at her request. She told him and gave up our identities. All of a sudden our ratings dropped. we were assigned to teams with problem employees as a form of punishment and fault was found with everything we did going forward. So you learned to either stay quiet or help your colleagues on the side. This leader got nothing but constant praise from there former IG. He was given free reign to do whatever he wanted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good heavens. You guys are cattier than the dudebros at Econjobrumors when they start b tching about SEC divisions.

Haha, so true…
Management/leadership across the board is generally bad, but for staff to say this is like the pot calling the kettle black. I’ve been in Audit for 10+ years there and the Foreign Service staff are like lord of the flies! They compete for non positional promotions so tear each other down nonstop. That’s how you’re Bree here so why would the internally promoted directors be any better? The toxicity isn’t just management and many in FS feel stuck due to different pension and cushy lifestyle.

It also wasn’t until a couple years ago that there was any real attempt to hold people accountable for performance, so some of the bullying and hostile work environment you might hear about comes from crappy nonworkers finally being called to the carpet and they don’t like it. To survive, you kind of have to keep your head down or ally with some feudal group. It’s pretty bad.

I'm an auditor at USAID OIG. Most people would consider me the beneficiary of the former AIGA's "blatant favoritism." And everyone would be 100 percent correct. I played the game. You have to if you want to make moves. It's life and I won't apologize for that. It is very true that many of our auditors are "crappy." At the same time, I worked with a couple of the "crappy" ones. I can say they actually did try, but a narrative was already written for them. And it wasn't a good narrative. So no amount of effort was going to change that. I witnessed an Assistant Director give bad direction to a "crappy" auditor. The former AIGA and PDAIGA called out the mistake at a milestone meeting and the AD sat quiet (we all did) and let the staff person take the heat for the bad guidance given to them. This wasn't just one occasion. This happened multiple times with this particular AD. This AD was also reward annually at the USAID OIG awards ceremony. in 2019, that AD was reassigned out of audit altogether. But that was only because we got a new executive (DAIG) who asked tough questions and saw what was going on. Before that everyone just accepted the AD's word on the "crappy" auditor's performance. So how is staff supposed to overcome this? We have some rotten managers. so the posters that noted that are spot on. It has gotten better, buttony of the old guard is still there and in very influential positions.

Wow. Who would want to work with coworkers who won't stand up for someone else? No sense of teamwork or integrity. I hope that changes. I'm glad that DAIG made some changes and hope you guys who let a coworker twist do too.

Different poster... but you must not work at USAID OIG. If you did, you would know it would be career suicide for an employee to even respectfully disagree with this crew of managers and leaders. There is a very long list of folks who attempted to speak out and got sidelined. The former AIGA's ego was so fragile. You were only safe with him if you agreed with his positions. Some of us gave anonymous feedback on the former AIGA to the former IG (his friend) at her request. She told him and gave up our identities. All of a sudden our ratings dropped. we were assigned to teams with problem employees as a form of punishment and fault was found with everything we did going forward. So you learned to either stay quiet or help your colleagues on the side. This leader got nothing but constant praise from there former IG. He was given free reign to do whatever he wanted.

This makes my blood boil. And the sad reality is that the former AIGA would have never been more than a GS-13 without the former IG. The lesson for us all is it’s ok to be mediocre as long as you are friends with someone in power and are willing to risk their career for you.

[Anonymous]

USAID OIG people, I lost connection during the all hands tuesday. Can anybody give a readout pls? It’s kind of on topic for this discussion, lol.