Pros
Beautiful office, smart clinicians and nice staff associates. Good benefits, generous PTO, monthly staff lunches, high-profile organization. FOUNDATION: Great mission, good fundraising ability, good hours. CLINICAL: Very smart, nice clinicians and staff associates. They do great work, and are leaders in their field.
Cons
Where to begin? I should've heeded the previous reviews, but they're absolutely accurate about CMI being a toxic environment. CMI execs/HR know very well about these reviews, but simply choose to disregard them (as I did, to my detriment). FOUNDATION: Management is untrustworthy (as is HR), unfocused (at the whims of the president), and unorganized. Many staffers don't have the skillsets needed for their jobs, but are hired because most others are scared away from applying (I now know why), or have some connection to the Board or donors. Executive leadership is poisonous: self serving, disorganized, and quick to blame others (usually junior staff). Management frequently is indecisive or doesn't want to take responsibility for projects, so if they are unsuccessful (in reality, or just in the president's view), they won't be blamed. Routinely, decisions are compelled to be made by consensus of a number of influential staff that have no expertise in that particular project. Another review mentioned having to work on 'emergency' projects that have become so because of poor planning by management -- this is absolutely accurate, and happens very often, if not weekly. Junior staff follows Executives' lead, and work in fear, seeking to avoid being blamed for something. Due to indecisiveness of executives, they lack real direction and leadership, and isn't able to grow. Junior staff has also become infamous for filing complaints with HR or management for any perceived slights. The president is an NYC socialite, obsessed with celebrities, and a bully, and sets the tone for the organization. It's a running "joke" amongst staff that he's feared, unreasonable, and obsessed with celebs. (there have been quite a few lawsuits found in the public record) YELLS (!) at staff... often. He's elitist, and tends to judge staff by their background/connections/school. (which is ironic, knowing his background). He often creates chaos when he gets an idea or a goal in mind (viable or not), and staff is compelled to make that a top priority, regardless of other projects. Extremely high staff turnover -- staff often talks about how people come and go quickly. Executive leadership has continued to change drastically for a number of years, due to the above.