employer cover photo

Pacific Health Group

Engaged employer

Pacific Health Group Reviews

1.5

8% would recommend to a friend

(16 total reviews)

9% positive business outlook

Pacific Health Group has an employee rating of 1.5 out of 5 stars, based on 16 company reviews on Glassdoor which indicates that most employees have a poor working experience there.

Reviews by job title

16 reviews
1.0
24 Apr 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

The mission is meaningful and certain employees genuinely care about the work and communities served.

Cons

This is a leadership-driven culture issue. The “co-CEO” structure lacks alignment, consistency, and accountability. Direction and priorities shift frequently, and it is often unclear who owns decisions. Leadership often feels reactive rather than strategic. There is constant pressure and high scrutiny, with little room for mistakes. Communication is frequently critical rather than constructive, creating a punitive environment where public callouts are normalized and recognition is rare. Trust is lacking from the outset. Employees are hired for their expertise but are quickly made to feel their perspectives are not valued. Ideas are dismissed, expectations remain high, and support is limited, creating confusion and discouragement. Micromanagement is excessive. Employee activity is closely monitored, including time at a computer and even brief breaks, reinforcing a lack of trust. Training and onboarding are inconsistent and insufficient. Employees are expected to perform at a high level immediately, with little guidance. When gaps arise, they are often dismissed rather than addressed. Although feedback is said to be welcome, it is not safe to give. Questioning decisions or asking for clarity can feel risky, especially when answers are inconsistent or frequently change. Favoritism is evident. Some individuals are protected despite poor performance, while others are held to extreme standards or let go for minor issues, creating inconsistency and eroding trust. Work expectations are unsustainable. Salaried employees are expected to be constantly available, with little respect for boundaries, contributing directly to burnout. Turnover is high and appears normalized rather than treated as a serious signal of underlying issues. Patterns persist, with blame often placed on employees instead of addressing systemic causes. HR is not perceived as a neutral or employee-supportive function and largely operates in alignment with executive leadership. Concerns raised are more often justified or deflected than objectively reviewed, which discourages employees from speaking up. These challenges appear to stem from leadership at the top of the HR function, not the broader HR team. While some HR team members genuinely try to support employees, they do not appear empowered to do so. Rather than providing independent perspective or holding leadership accountable, HR leadership tends to reinforce executive viewpoints, even when consistent feedback and ongoing turnover point to leadership as the root cause. The lack of acknowledgment or course correction in response to these patterns significantly undermines trust in the function. Turnover within HR itself further reinforces this concern and should be recognized as a clear indicator of deeper leadership and cultural issues within the function. Overall, employees operate under constant pressure with minimal support, high scrutiny, and low psychological safety. It is difficult to find employees who feel genuinely supported, secure, or able to sustain long-term success in this environment. It is also likely that feedback like this will be dismissed or explained away rather than meaningfully considered, despite the consistency of these patterns.

1.0
25 Mar 2026

Not worth it

Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Steady pay, eventual benefits, company provided equipment.

Cons

Management is focused far more on deliverables and metrics for grant/investment compliance than client care. Tons of busy work and unnecessary meetings that could be emails. I was told to do several unethical things by management while working there. My specific work tasks changed constantly as did platforms for documentation and communication, my proficiency was expected to be oddly scattershot and unclear and definitely not what was discussed in my interview process. I was hired as a therapist and by the time I hit 5 months at the company I had a total SIX client appointments. This put a huge gap in accumulating my clinical hours for licensure and was a bait & switch by management to coerce me into roles I never agreed to fill, including being instructed to perform in-person tasks as a remote employee.

1.0
6 Feb 2026
Recommend
CEO approval
Business outlook

Pros

Great benefits such as pto/ sick time/ holiday pay.

Cons

Working at Pacific Health Group for 17 months as a Lead Care Manager was one of the most mentally and emotionally exhausting experiences of my career. During my first year, the company showed appreciation toward employees and occasionally rewarded good work. However, after that first year, the entire culture shifted. The organization became almost exclusively driven by revenue, quotas, and insurance billing rather than quality member care or employee well-being. There are constant monthly changes, new roles created without clear purpose, and little to no consistent structure. Expectations change frequently, documentation styles change, and productivity goals increase without realistic consideration of workload or time. After completing my first year, I formally requested a performance review and wage evaluation from both management and HR. I was either ignored or repeatedly told it would be “revisited,” which never happened. As a result, I never received the yearly raise that had been promised. I originally held an administrative position but ultimately demoted myself to an LCM role due to lack of role clarity and being continually pushed to perform multiple jobs without proper compensation, training, or boundaries. Lead Care Managers are expected to complete: • 15 in-person visits per week (often 1–2 hours each plus commute time) • Around 50 calls per week • Extensive documentation • Insurance-focused administrative work These expectations are not realistic or sustainable. Quality of care has become secondary to meeting numbers and processing claims. This makes it nearly impossible to provide the level of care members truly need. PHG serves members with extremely complex medical, mental health, and substance-use needs. Many require social-work-level support, yet LCMs are not trained social workers and are not compensated accordingly. Still, we are expected to function as social workers daily. Out of my own pocket, I spent over $5,000 across my time there helping members with basic needs because the system is so slow and limited. Management turnover is constant. Managers frequently come and go, and internal promotions are rare. New managers are often hired externally and presented as overly optimistic while frontline staff are already burnt out. After I began advocating for myself and speaking up about unrealistic workloads and being treated unfairly, I was placed on a performance review by my previous manager and a newly hired manager who aligned with each other. This felt retaliatory rather than supportive. Overtime is rarely approved unless it directly benefits the company. At the same time, workloads make it nearly impossible to complete documentation within scheduled hours. I regularly worked off the clock just to keep up. On my final day, I was removed from all company systems and communication platforms before my shift even ended, without notice. This prevented me from completing documentation and closing out my day properly. The company presents itself as supportive on the surface, but behind the scenes employees are treated as disposable. I would not recommend this company to anyone seeking a stable, ethical, member-centered care environment. My current employer, by comparison, is far more balanced, realistic, and focused on patient outcomes rather than just numbers. Unless major structural and cultural changes occur, I do not see PHG being sustainable long-term.

Viewing 1 - 3 of 16 Reviews

Glassdoor has 16 Pacific Health Group reviews submitted anonymously by Pacific Health Group employees. Read employee reviews and ratings on Glassdoor to decide if Pacific Health Group is right for you.