U.S. Government Accountability Office Reviews | Glassdoor

U.S. Government Accountability Office Reviews

Updated December 12, 2018
165 reviews

Filter

Filter


3.5
StarStarStarStarStar
Rating TrendsRating Trends
Recommend to a friend
Approve of CEO
U.S. Government Accountability Office Comptroller General Eugene Louis Dodaro
Eugene Louis Dodaro
89 Ratings

Employee Reviews

Sort: PopularRatingDate

Pros
  • "work/life balance is incredible" (in 52 reviews)

  • "Great work-life balance in terms of alternative work schedules, telework, and generally working a 40 hour week" (in 12 reviews)

Cons
  • "The work can move very slowly, and the organization is on the whole slow to change and risk-averse" (in 12 reviews)

  • "Introverted peers in work environment can appear a bit isolated" (in 8 reviews)

More Pros and Cons

  1. "Financial Auditor"

    StarStarStarStarStar
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Comp & Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Current Employee - Anonymous Employee
    Current Employee - Anonymous Employee
    Recommends
    Positive Outlook
    Approves of CEO

    I have been working at U.S. Government Accountability Office full-time

    Pros

    In the first 5 to 8 years of your career, you'll make about 20k more than your public accounting friends. You'll work only 40 hours and anything over (at most a month) is compensated with OT.

    Cons

    Experience is often based on mission team (department).
    Raises after 2 years are minimal (however the raised within those first 2 years are substantial)


  2. "Great and Highly Effective Government Agency"

    StarStarStarStarStar
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Comp & Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Current Employee - Senior Analyst in Dallas, TX
    Current Employee - Senior Analyst in Dallas, TX
    Recommends
    Positive Outlook
    Approves of CEO

    I have been working at U.S. Government Accountability Office full-time (More than 10 years)

    Pros

    Great diversity policies and people values.

    Cons

    Not a lot of room for creativity.

  3. "Program Analyst Intern"

    StarStarStarStarStar
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Comp & Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Former Employee - Anonymous Employee
    Former Employee - Anonymous Employee

    Pros

    Got to work with Senior Managers. Took classes both at the GAO and on the Hill to learn more about the Bureaucratic process. Cool work

    Cons

    Extremely slow paced. The GAO doesn't really keep up pace with the rest of the environment in DC.

    Advice to Management

    Speed it up, and make promotions a little more merit based.


  4. "Good place to work, but pay does not keep pace with the rest of the government"

    StarStarStarStarStar
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Comp & Benefits
    Current Employee - Senior Analyst (IIB) in Washington, DC
    Current Employee - Senior Analyst (IIB) in Washington, DC
    Recommends
    Approves of CEO

    I have been working at U.S. Government Accountability Office full-time (More than 10 years)

    Pros

    Strong dedication to diversity and inclusion. Good work life balance. Important work.

    Cons

    Pay doesn't keep pace with the rest of the government.

    Advice to Management

    Pay people better


  5. "Analyst"

    StarStarStarStarStar
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Comp & Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Current Employee - Anonymous Employee
    Current Employee - Anonymous Employee

    I have been working at U.S. Government Accountability Office full-time

    Pros

    Excellent benefit package and work life balance

    Cons

    None to speak of now

    Advice to Management

    NA


  6. "Interesting work, but Government bureaucracy"

    StarStarStarStarStar
    Current Employee - Anonymous Employee
    Current Employee - Anonymous Employee

    Pros

    Good responsibility for interns early on, and opinions are valued as well as your professional development

    Cons

    Obviously working for the gov machine isn't the most exciting thing for millennials, and I found the work environment to be very boring when work was slow. Culture is more geared toward people in mid- to upper-level positions.


  7. "One of the best places to work in the federal government"

    StarStarStarStarStar
    • Work/Life Balance
    Former Employee - Anonymous Employee in Washington, DC
    Former Employee - Anonymous Employee in Washington, DC
    Recommends
    Positive Outlook
    Approves of CEO

    I worked at U.S. Government Accountability Office full-time (More than 3 years)

    Pros

    Good work-life balance, many great opportunities for variety of projects, lots of promotion potential

    Cons

    Not many - very wonderful place to work. Dynamic and interesting work.

    Advice to Management

    Continue to support staff at all levels and keep maintaining the high industry standard

  8. Helpful (3)

    "Senior Health Care Analyst, IIB"

    StarStarStarStarStar
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Comp & Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Current Employee - Senior Research Analyst in Washington, DC
    Current Employee - Senior Research Analyst in Washington, DC
    No opinion of CEO

    I have been working at U.S. Government Accountability Office full-time (More than 10 years)

    Pros

    This agency is honest and fact based. The work focuses on fact finding and following standard auditing procedures which, on the positive side, help keep the level of work consistent and of high quality. There are opportunities to move between various topics--Medicare, Medicaid, Military Health and other topics.

    The hours and working conditions are very family friendly and, under most managers, easy going. A telework program allows employees to work from home and flexible schedules allow you to determine what hours you will work.

    Federal leave and benefit programs are generally very good.

    The pay is better than non profit or think tanks, though not on par with consulting firms or private sector entities.

    Cons

    While you are able to indicate preferences on what you will work on, you do not have autonomy in choosing projects. Project and staff availability are often more important than experience or interest and, as a result, you can get assigned to work on anything that is needed at the time. Projects often take about a year, so this is not insignificant.

    Quality of managers varies. The Analyst-In-Charge and Assistant Directors, which oversee day to day operations of the project can vary in quality and flexibility. Some are over-engaged (micro-managers) and others are so checked out you may feel that you don't have enough support in your work.

    Promotions are few and far between and so it is not easy to move up, especially once you achieve the Senior Analyst level. Annual compensation increases depend on federal policy, and may not keep pace with other government jobs and often do not keep pace with the private sector.


  9. "Great place to work"

    StarStarStarStarStar
    Current Employee - Anonymous Employee
    Current Employee - Anonymous Employee

    Pros

    The boss is the best. Trump really listens to what you have to say.

    Cons

    Non disclosure agreements prohibit me from saying anything bad.


  10. Helpful (5)

    "Analyst"

    StarStarStarStarStar
    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Comp & Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Current Employee - Analyst in Washington, DC
    Current Employee - Analyst in Washington, DC
    Doesn't Recommend
    Negative Outlook
    Disapproves of CEO

    I have been working at U.S. Government Accountability Office full-time (More than 5 years)

    Pros

    -flexible schedules
    -collaborative environment
    -high quality analysts/coworkers

    Cons

    -size of mission teams do not reflect the amount and importance of work they do; this leads to burnout of staff on the understaffed teams that are inherently driven by mandates and CGAs; this also means that these teams don’t get to lead jobs they’re should be leading, which leads to a lot more matrixing late in the job, which also leads to staff burnout; these teams have insane workloads, which lead to people routinely working 10-30 hours per week overtime, but staff can’t claim those hours to get compensated for it
    -too many people in management positions (top heavy)
    -not all assistant directors should be managing people
    -the comptroller general only want to maintain the status quo instead of progressing the agency
    -we aren’t conforming to the 21st century - we don’t have good technology (at least 10-15 years behind other government agencies) which impacts workload
    -more concerned about hiring new people than they are about taking care of the employees we have; this leads to high attrition
    -pay is not equivalent to GS scale (about $10-20k less than other IG equivalents). They hired an “independent” contractor to conduct a compensation study; the methodology was flawed bc it accounted for NGO salaries as 25% of their developed market salary (NGOs only account for 10% of all US jobs), and NGOs are inherently low salaries, bringing down the total; they also used DC as the basis for all the salaries across GAO (I.e. the field offices, which account for 50% of staff), even though they know DC is the most underpaid category and has surpassed other cities in cost of living.
    -don’t promote people based on merit, but rather on demographics
    -we are pay for performance, but your merit-based raise only differs by 0.4% between getting all “sustained” versus getting all “exceptionals” (I.e. highest category) in the competencies; this is not a huge incentive to do high-quality work.
    -student loan repayment is less than $2k per year, and they make you sign a 3-year commitment
    -have a “people values” initiative that’s only talk. If you really valued your people, you would pay them comparable to other government agencies and give them a livable salary for DC

    Advice to Management

    -need to reassess staffing levels
    -need to rebalance the number of managers to staff, too top heavy
    -create a promotion track for people who can manage jobs, but not necessarily manage people
    -need to pay DC staff what they are worth; stop hiring new employees and reward the ones you have by paying them appropriately
    -promote people on merit; roll promotion cycle into the performance review cycle. We spend 8 months on these two periods
    -create real incentives for people; for example, up the student loan repayment amount to what it was years ago - $6k per year. Make it comparable to the number of commitment years