Pew Charitable Trusts Reviews

Where to begin... basically, all the other reviews you'll read here are true. It's taken me a year to post this because that's how long it took to re-assimilate from the culture of fear. In retrospect, I'm beginning to believe that Pew is just an experiment: Put all the mice in a very shiny cage with nowhere to hide. Pressure the mice to perform. Punish them when they do. Periodically reorganize the cage completely, shuffling beloved senior mice out of the cage in the process and hoping the others won't notice. (They do.) Some specifics: - What I mean by a "culture of fear": Employees are not trusted at all. Everything must go through at least five layers of approval. Even then, there will be reasons to be slapped on the wrist... maybe someone used an adjective in a press interview or wore shoes that exposed both toes and heels. (These are not exaggerations in the slightest.) - Extremely top heavy, with a very vertical structure. Junior employees learn very quickly that they are junior and, as such, not worthy. This extends to all areas of work - including seating. For instance, only senior associates get a cube next to a window. - The ambiance, while pretty, is oppressive. Literally glass doors, when there are doors. (Only one person's office has one.) Meeting rooms like fishbowls. People tasked with running around making sure employees only have one plant and aren't draping their jackets over their chairs or leaving scuffs on the floor. (Again, not kidding.) - Benefits on the decline. The stated reasoning for this was that Pew was too far ahead of the nonprofit pack. However, many of us (myself included) took substantial pay cuts because of the good benefits package. - Arbitrary and inconsistent career advancement policies. Employees are told they can be considered for a promotion after two years. For most, that is true. However, promotions have happened at the senior management level for very new employees. - High turnover. - The two above bullets combined result in junior employees working in multiple positions at once with no possibility of being promoted while doing so. For me, this resulted in working on 5-10 projects for years, only to be promoted to work for just a few of them (dropping the rest). - Extremely complex protocols through tons of different channels.

Believe what you read here and really think about whether you want to come work at Pew. The word is out on the street and the negative reviews are 100% true. So true that the president asked her IT and HR leadership “if they could just get rid of Glassdoor and make it go away.” People warned me not to work here, but I, of course, thought “every place has its dysfunction, right?” Pew however, is the craziest and meanest environment you will ever find yourself in. Don’t be seduced by the fact that Pew has a lot of resources and that, as a result, you can really make a difference. It’s not the case. You will not be able to navigate the heavy bureaucracy or erratic decision making in order to get your work done. And the president is so frugal that you will not be able to use the resources effectively to achieve your project goals. This is why so many ambitious and talented people leave. I started with a cohort of 15-20 people a couple of years ago and every single person that I started with (ranging from admins to directors) has quit. Trust me this is not atypical. Rebecca Rimel is only concerned with two things: her external reputation and the board. She has no regard for the program work or Pew’s mission and values. I can’t tell you the countless times that I have bore witness to the president forcing her staff to undertake wasteful and ineffective projects that are not strategic, at the expense of existing work. She makes emotional, last minute and ill-informed decisions, rather than fully evaluating the actual goals and costs of her proposed projects and ideas. And none of the senior leadership has the guts to stand up for their work or challenge these bad decisions because they are terrified of her. The president regularly and indiscriminately fires people, merges programs, spends large amounts of money on pet projects, cuts effective and high-performing portfolios all because she has trouble managing staff or erratically decides one day that she doesn’t like someone or a board approved piece of work. I guess it’s easier to waste the Trusts’ investment in good work and people, rather than learn how to be an effective and confident leader. Worst of all, the board is oblivious to everything because the president carefully orchestrates every communication and meeting. In addition, the president tries to force her staff and external partners into doing what she wants by relentlessly hounding people into submission (all while hypocritically preaching the Pew motto “to be polite and trust the people”). This has gotten so out of hand that Pew’s negative reputation now precedes it with stakeholders, policy makers and funders - to the point where prominent figures refuse to be in the same room with the Pew president or program leaders, key partners refuse to work with the institution and funders refuse to direct resources to our campaigns. This doesn’t even include the army of former employees who were/are so disgusted with Pew that they are out there telling people and organizations about what a terrible institution Pew is to work for and partner with. No wonder HR is having trouble recruiting good candidates. Don’t think that you can keep your head down and remove yourself from this craziness either. You can’t. The demoralizing management practices extend to senior management, by fostering a state where everyone is consumed with posturing for power and attention, and where a culture of “mean” is not only tolerated, but rewarded. I’ve never seen so many high-achieving, dedicated and passionate people be made to feel worthless and insecure. People are managed from their weaknesses and not their strengths. What’s even more ineffective is the fact that it takes forever to get your work approved. And everything has to be approved by the president, who requires a 4 week review time. This is for both planned and urgent/time sensitive projects that arise in the media or congress. Plus, the only way the president or any of her senior managers communicates is through memos, rather than conversation. If you have an idea or a concern, you have to put it in a memo that will then get edited by no less than five people before it can actually be sent to its intended audience. Lastly, instead of being the chief internal and external ambassador for Pew, Rebecca Rimel chooses to spend the majority of her time reviewing staff contracts, many for as little as $5,000 and obsessively scouring the various Pew websites. It’s not normal for a CEO to insist on spending 95% of their time signing every contract and every letter that gets sent out (every single one) instead of being out and about on behalf of the institution. This is just the tip of the iceberg. Please take this small purview into the insane world of Pew seriously and spare yourself the worst career decision that you will ever make. Stay where you are or go somewhere else – just don’t come work for Pew.