Exclusive: Probe finds Women in Global Health had ‘toxic’ environment

It’s been a whirlwind 11 months for the U.S.-based nonprofit Women in Global Health, which has been mired in accusations of racial discrimination and toxicity and rocked by a series of resignations and terminations, including that of its co-founder. The organization, which was founded in 2015 to challenge “power and privilege in global health,” started out with volunteers but grew rapidly in recent years and now has an annual budget of $3.7 million and 58 chapters globally, accounting for about 6,500 members. But a whistleblower complaint from seven Black women put the microscope on its own practices and exposed the organization to serious allegations including bullying, harassment, racial discrimination, toxic work environment, bias, and lack of equal pay. A subsequent investigation into the leadership of its co-founder and then-executive director, Dr. Roopa Dhatt, was followed by her dismissal in May. Around the same time, a man was appointed as interim board chair, after the previous chair stepped down. The irony of a man leading the board of an organization intended to elevate women sparked outrage from many within the global chapters. This multilayered upheaval leaves the organization’s future on shaky grounds and has damaged morale. At its core were “deep, deep troubles that had been brewing for some time,” a former board member told Devex, saying the organization had grown too quickly without the proper rules in place. Devex obtained a copy of the findings of the investigation commissioned by the board last year which gives greater insight into the underlying currents beneath the upheaval. It found the organization had a “toxic” work environment and evidence of a “white supremacy culture” — which the investigator, Mirna Martinez Santiago, defined as traits such as power hoarding and a sink-or-swim mentality. “Many of you felt the need to make yourselves ‘smaller’ to placate other people’s egos,” wrote Santiago to whistleblowers, and “made to feel like the ‘help’— there to assist other people’s successes, but never to own any successes yourself.” But Santiago found other allegations, such as bullying and harassment, to be unfounded. “I have spent my life working with and for women to achieve gender equality which will benefit women and benefit everyone and it requires consistent vulnerability and a need to balance the urgency for change with creating a context where everyone feels like they belong and can contribute to the movement,” Dhatt told Devex, adding that she took the whistleblower complaint seriously. “I don’t always get that balance right and remain open to the ways I can grow as a leader,” she added. The complaint Dhatt has been praised by many for tirelessly building the global movement from the ground up — which included putting her own funds into the organization, working on a voluntary basis, and taking a pay cut in one of the early years. "Building a global health movement from scratch is hard," Dhatt said. "For the first 5 years we had no money and no paid staff. After that we had some money but we grew WGH in the toughest of conditions in the pandemic when many women in our movement, including me, were on the frontlines in covid wards by day and building a fast growing movement in our so called ‘spare time.’” But, in some ways, WGH may have grown too quickly, a former board member told Devex. “Sort of like overnight, nearly, there were 50 to 60 chapters around the world — and there was no real quality control in relation to the chapters,” the person said. While some former board members said they raised concerns to Dhatt and made efforts to strengthen governance, they said they were met with resistance. And then came last August, when whistleblowers sent the board a complaint. They alleged “disempowering, humiliating and pernicious” behavior from senior leadership, and “an extremely high-pressure, demanding and relentless work culture.” The whistleblowers wrote about the dismissal of an associate, allegedly for poor performance, after she requested maternity leave, which was denied because it was a "very busy” time. Another whistleblower claimed she worked 16- to 20-plus-hour days for a year-and-a-half and reached out for reduced hours and support but was told the next day her position would be “phased out.” Another, the mother of a newborn, said she was overburdened with duties after her country was hit by a disaster, leaving her with limited communications access. Dhatt denied her request to work part time for a month because the organization needed someone full time, the whistleblowers wrote, but the position was later interimly filled by someone in the global north who was approved for a holiday of several weeks. “Black women are not given the opportunity or the appropriate time to adjust to the organizational expectations, and are not mentored, nurtured or capacitated to meet the expectations,” they wrote. “The same does not occur with brown or white women in the Organization, who are given multiple opportunities to learn from mistakes, grow into their roles, thrive and be promoted to higher positions of responsibility.” Toxicity The board hired Santiago to investigate. She found a toxic environment — which she defined as aggressive leadership, cliquish behavior, microaggressions, unrealistic workloads, low pay, and an atmosphere of fear, among other things. Santiago also found evidence of a “white supremacy culture” — which she defined as a focus on perfectionism, fear of reprisal, urgency, defensiveness of existing structures, power hoarding, a sink-or-swim mentality, and emphasis on quantity over quality, among other things. She wrote that many organizations, particularly American ones, “fall victim” to this, even when led by people of color. Santigo wrote that racial bias was possibly occurring in the organization but racial discrimination was unlikely. She didn’t find evidence of racially tinged comments and the organization denied discriminatory intent. But she noted she wasn’t given enough time to investigate areas such as dismissals or pay across racial lines but recommended the organization do so. Santiago also documented what appeared to be retaliation. After one whistleblower complained about senior leadership, pay, and access to support, management claimed she was “threatening” and “aggressive” and shut down her access to the organization’s portal and her personal work email, Santiago wrote. Her pay was also withheld for a period. Santiago reviewed over 2,000 pages of emails and didn’t find grounds to justify those actions against her. Santiago found accusations of bullying and harassment were unfounded, and wrote that instead, it appears Dhatt was demanding, micromanaging, and used communication shortcuts. Santigo wrote that senior fellow Ann Keeling, who joined in 2017, appeared to act as “de facto” co-executive director under an undefined agreement that “allows her to do pretty much anything she feels fit to do within the organization.” Between Dhatt and Keeling, the organization appeared to suffer from “Founder’s Syndrome,” Santiago wrote, where leaders are “paralyzing progress through micromanagement.” Santiago didn’t advise removing Dhatt or Keeling from the organization, but recommended Dhatt undergo training and “the opportunity to improve in her role.” She also recommended space be created between Dhatt and the line consultants to avoid micromanagement. Some former board members, in conversations with Devex, stressed the challenges of running an organization in a fiscally insecure landscape. Many donors provided earmarked funding, making it harder to move beyond short-term contracts and address operational inefficiencies. “It’s the intense work culture of an organization with a startup-based mentality that was strapped for cash,” a former board member said. And not everyone agreed with the investigation’s findings. Rachel Thompson, a former senior adviser to the organization, who resigned after Dhatt’s dismissal, told Devex it was the “most fulfilling job” she’d had, working with “inspiring, kind and supportive colleagues.” Another volunteer, who worked with the organization from 2018 to 2020, said Dhatt is an “amazing transformational leader” who knows how to “positively influence those around her to want to invest in the vision.” Dhatt and Keeling declined to comment on the substance of the whistleblower complaint and subsequent findings of the investigation. The board meeting The months that followed were plagued by upheaval. Last December, after Santiago’s investigation, a board meeting was held with eight of 13 members, chaired by the former president of the U.N. General Assembly, María Fernanda Espinosa. But there have been conflicting messages about what happened at that meeting. In May, Dhatt sent a letter to chapter members saying: “The board hired lawyers who hired an independent woman investigator. I participated in a six-month, confidential, thorough investigation. All complainants were interviewed. At the end of the process, the complaints were not substantiated and the board, based on the lawyers’ and the investigator’s opinion, closed the case.” But Julia Lalla-Maharajh, who served as interim executive director after Dhatt’s dismissal, wrote to chapters on behalf of leadership and the board that there were “multiple false statements” in Dhatt’s letter. “The investigation was completed in October 2023. It did not clear the former Executive Director. The Board did not affirm their confidence in the Executive Director at the December 2023 meeting. Remedial action was requested by the Board but not implemented by the ED,” Lalla-Maharajh wrote. The resolution the board passed acknowledged that “the investigator did not find sufficient evidence to support complainants’ allegations as a matter of law and therefore have concluded the investigation at this time.” However, Santiago's investigation wasn't a legal one and the language “as a matter of law” simply referred to potential legal implications, a former board member said. The board was advised there would likely be no legal basis for employment-related liability in most cases because the whistleblowers were contractors. But the board was looking beyond legality at other implications in areas including fiduciary, human resources, and management, former board members said. “The report clearly does not absolve Roopa,” the former board member said. Four former board members Devex spoke with who were at the December meeting were in agreement that the board found that the whistleblowers’ complaint was partially substantiated by Santiago's investigation. Another former board member, Sandra Oyarzo Torres, said she wasn’t as involved in the investigation as some of the others, but that a lawyer said there wasn’t enough proof to move forward with the complaint. And so recommendations at that point were related to how to improve management skills and governance, she said. The board aimed to use the December meeting to chart a path forward. "The board developed and shared an action plan with Dr. Dhatt outlining steps for her to begin addressing the findings from the independent investigation. But Dr. Dhatt expressed resistance to many and showed little intention of implementation," a former board member said. Meanwhile, Dhatt, in a letter she wrote to WGH chapters in May, said in the wake of the investigation, she “engaged intentionally in my own learning journey as a leader” and worked to improve the organization’s culture. She said she shared her own “organizational effectiveness and excellence plan” with board members in December. But a former board member said this plan “deflected the most significant recommendations the board had asked the organization, and her, to take on.” Another said that after this meeting it was clear there were important divergences among some board members and Dhatt in what approaches to move forward with in improving governance, and what to prioritize. Several board members resigned around that time — either from frustration, or because they had other commitments, a former board member said. Then in January, Dhatt emailed six remaining members telling them they were no longer on the board. She told them the organization had undergone an independent governance audit that found the board had too many members and their terms had expired. In order for it to be in compliance with its bylaws, she said the board’s composition would need to change. But according to three former board members that Devex spoke with, this audit was neither overseen by nor shared with the board — and some board members questioned whether their removal was in compliance with the bylaws. One characterized this as a “specious” breach. But not every former board member had issues with the dismissal. Oyarzo Torres told Devex she wasn’t bothered by it. This left only Espinosa, who had already announced she would resign at the December board meeting, and the board’s secretary, who resigned not long after the January email to the six board members. The dismissal An entirely new three-person board was created in the first quarter of this year, made up of Sheba Meymandi, Shirley Bejarano, and Alistair Dunne, who is Keeling’s nephew. But complaints kept coming in. In April and May, several letters of staff concern and another complaint were sent to this new board, which reviewed evidence that pointed to “significant and immediate organisational risks,” Lalla-Maharajh wrote to chapter members. The board then planned for a “respectful leadership transition,” which wasn’t possible due to Dhatt’s “refusal to engage,” she wrote. “Over the months prior to May, it had become increasingly clear that there had been multiple failings by Dr Dhatt to uphold the standards expected of her by the organization. The Board reviewed the evidence and as a result, reluctantly took the decision to terminate her contractual engagement,” the organization told Devex. In her May letter to the chapters, Dhatt wrote that before her dismissal she advocated for “a complete management audit as an organizational health check to support our learning and capacity-building efforts as an organization. I proposed a review of the board, my performance, and the performance of the leadership team. I was alarmed at the resistance I was met with.” She wrote that she was terminated without cause, her access to the electronic system was quickly cut off, and the board was “operating without any degree of transparency.” “Women leaders, especially women of color, often operate under a microscope and face backlash when they succeed in making change,” she told Devex. Women in Global Health told Devex that Dhatt cut short the conversation when the board terminated her contract. After this conversation, the board sent an email stating the contractual grounds for its decision to dismiss her, and Dhatt was offered a channel for further communication, it said. “If a Board had serious concerns about an [executive director’s] performance then fair process would be to suspend them pending an investigation which would enable them to answer allegations made,” Keeling, who resigned in protest, wrote to Devex. The board chair, Meymandi, who oversaw Dhatt’s dismissal, resigned because of severe illness, which was “attributable in part to stress caused by the process,” Lalla-Maharajh wrote in a letter to chapters. Bejarano also resigned. The organization told Devex it had to find a chair replacement quickly. Jeffrey Mecaskey was appointed on an interim basis, and he has experience supporting “challenging organisational transitions,” it wrote. This has left two men on the board — Mecaskey and Dunne. “If there's anything I wish is that this very, very unhappy story becomes not a blame game but becomes a lesson for other organizations. … Beware of the ‘Leader Syndrome.’” --— Former Women in Global Health board member The board then announced another investigation into the organization’s work dating back to 2021 in areas including accountability and management. Then, over 40 chapters wrote the board expressing concerns over inadequate communications around the abrupt leadership changes, stating they don’t support a male chair, and asked for distributed power. Amid this, several whistleblowers have been “hounded by unpleasant and disparaging messages” after sharing their complaint with global chapter heads in May, a whistleblower told Devex. The Washington, D.C. chapter sent them an email saying there could be “legal implications” for sharing their complaint — to which the whistleblowers responded they have the right to share their stories. The D.C. chapter declined Devex’s request for comment. A cautionary tale Women in Global Health has since restructured its leadership to no longer include an executive director. Lalla-Maharajh resigned. Responsibilities are now shared across a five-person team, and Ghanaian Irene Alaya Adogboba was appointed as coordinating director. The organization is recruiting more board members, including a chair. While senior leadership previously led board recruitment, chapter members can now submit applications and a chapter panel is developing a short list. It’s also appointed two women-owned enterprises to lead its investigation into past operations and plans to discuss findings with chapters in November. And while the past 11 months have shaken the organization’s core, it is important it survives this as it plays a crucial role in combating gender inequity that other organizations haven’t filled, a former board member said. “Roopa is an incredible advocate. But there comes a point where all organizations need fresh leadership and new ways of thinking,” the person said. And, hopefully, these experiences serve as a case study, another former board member said. “If there's anything I wish is that this very, very unhappy story becomes not a blame game but becomes a lesson for other organizations,” this person said. “Don't underestimate governance. Don't underestimate team building, accountability — all of these things. Beware of the ‘Leader Syndrome.’”