Category Archives: Community / Volunteer Engagement

TV depictions of volunteerism

Leave a reply

In addition to being highly amused at how television dramas portray international aid workers, I’m even more amused by certain comments made on various TV shows, mostly about comedy, about volunteerism.

I’ve been collecting quotes regarding volunteering and community service from various TV shows for a few years now: I hear one, usually on a re-run, and run scrambling to Google to find it if it was too long to write down. I know there are TONS of hilarious quotes from The Simpsons regarding volunteering and community service, but I can never find them online later… Here’s one that I was able to find soon after I heard it:

Homer: Community service? But that’s work! What about jail?
Judge: Community service!
Homer: No, I want to go to jail. Free food, tear drop tattoos, library books that come to you. I’ll serve anything but the community!

I didn’t hear this one, but found it online; it’s from from The Vampire Diaries:

Pageant contestant: Just because my DUI made my community service mandatory doesn’t mean I was any less committed.

Another I didn’t hear myself, but found online; it’s from Scrubs:

Dr. Kelso: Attention surgical residents still hoping to have a job next year. The annual blood drive is upon us, and I will be needing a volunteer to greet our donors as the hospital’s new mascot, the friendly hypodermic needle, Mr. Prick… We’ll probably change the name.

But by far, I’ve found the most quotes online regarding volunteering from The Office, a show I so adore. The first three are from the character Dwight:

Volunteerism is important. Every weekend I volunteer at the local animal shelter, they need a lot of help down there. Last Sunday I had to put down 150 pets by myself.

And I did not become a Lackawanna County volunteer sheriff’s deputy to make friends. And by the way, I haven’t.

One more from The Office – an exchange between two characters:

Ryan: Jim. I wanted to apologize… for how I treated you last year. I lost sight of myself and now that I’ve quit the rat race I’ve realized there’s so much more to life than being the youngest VP in the company’s history. I’ve even started volunteering. Giving back to the community.

Jim: Well that’s great. You’re talking about your court ordered community service?

Ryan: I don’t need a judge to tell me to keep my community clean.

Jim: But he did, right?

The most hilarious depiction of volunteerism I’ve ever seen? The entire episode of “The Old Man“, where Jerry and his friends volunteer to help senior citizens. It’s priceless. I wish nonprofit organizations had permission to use it in volunteer orientations and trainings.

All this came to mind because Susan Ellis is focusing her March hot topic on jokes regarding volunteerism. It’s even more great stuff to make you laugh on a Friday.

What is “too much” from an online contributor?

2 Replies

When a nonprofit, NGO or government agency starts an online community or hosts an online event, they envision questions being asked and the staff or event hosts answering such, all in an oh-so-orderly fashion. No arguments, no disagreements – just a reasoned exchange of online information by all participants.

However, online communities and events rarely work the way organizers or hosts envision. These communities or events have hardly any messages at all or an overwhelming number of such. They may be inactive for days, weeks, even months, and then suddenly, a lively debate may break out that sends message numbers through the roof and makes the organization feel uncomfortable. And on many communities, only a small percentage of members regularly share information or engage in discussions; the rest of the members, often 90% of such, are lurkers, reading messages but rarely responding to such.

Most users still get online community messages via email, so remind members, more than once, how to manage email – specifically, how to filter community or event messages automatically into a folder within their email program. The people who get the most upset about a surge in messages are people who subscribe via email digest, where all messages are put into one single email, so encourage members to change their subscriptions to individual messages and to filter these into a folder of their own, which makes it much easier to find the messages each person will want to read and to delete the messages a user doesn’t want to read.

Remember that lively debates are a natural, important part of a successful online community or event. Don’t panic when they happen: let them happen, think about why people are saying whatever it is they are saying, keep everyone fact-based, and let them run their course. Step in only if

  • someone says something that is not fact-based,
  • if arguments get personal,
  • if people are repeating themselves,
  • if your policies are violated, or
  • if the argument reduces down to a back and forth between just one or two people.

You can tell people to take the argument off the group if you truly believe the argument has run its course with other members, or even dismiss someone from the group if he or she has violated policy – but be ready to quote from their messages and your written policy to clearly show the violation.

When should you suspend or dismiss an online community member? If that person:

  • uses inappropriate language or images, as you define such (be ready to cite specific examples in your dismissal; inappropriate is a really vague term!)
  • makes false or misleading statements even after being cited for such (again, be ready to quote examples)
  • posts off-topic even after being warned not to
  • violates confidentiality rules
  • encourages illegal activity (if you are worried that your community could be held liable if a community member does, indeed, engage in that activity and get caught or hurt)
  • violates copyright or trademark laws such that your online community could be held liable
  • misrepresents himself or herself (for instance, as running a nonprofit organization that turns out not to exist, or as being a staff person from an organization when, in fact, he or she isn’t)
  • chronically posts inaccurate information (claims an organization engages in activities that it actually doesn’t, claims there are certain rules and regulations about an activity when, actually, there are not, etc.)
  • contacts community members or event participants off-list and engages in the aforementioned activities
  • tries to stifle views different from himself or herself (again, be ready to cite specific examples of such, with quotes)
  • threatens anyone

 

You may also have rules about advertising a business, but be careful; if a vendor answers a question like “Where can I find volunteer management software” with “Here’s our company’s product…”, that’s actually a helpful answer. Allow the posting of business information if it is truly on-topic for your group. You may also have rules about when it is appropriate or inappropriate to share information from an online event or an online community outside of that event or community.

Some organizations panic when an online community member that isn’t an employee starts engaging in leadership activities on a group or within an event – when the non-staff person answers questions before the official moderator gets to them, frequently shares events and resources that are on-topic to the community, and otherwise posts on-topic, but posts more than the moderators or facilitators. Don’t panic when you end up with a “super user” – celebrate it! When someone starts exhibiting leadership on your online community:

  • write or call the person directly and thank him or her for the contributions
  • ask the person where he or she heard of the community or the event
  • ask the person why he or she feels so motivated to share

If the person responds to every post to a community, then do likewise: “Thanks, Mary, for that information. Does anyone else have something they would like to add or share?” That encourages others to share as well.

If you want to limit community members to a certain number of posts a day, per person, that’s fine, but that means your staff, including your moderator, has to abide by the same rule!

You may want to approach a super-user about becoming the official moderator, freeing up your staff time for other activities; however, make it clear, in writing, if, as moderator, the person would then be prohibited from sharing opinions. You may also want to invite the person to create and host a specific online event!

By all means, if the person posts inappropriately, per your written policies, tell the person. But don’t reprimand someone for being an active community member!

Also, don’t let one community member dictate what makes your online community or event a success; if one person complains that your community has too many messages, that doesn’t mean everyone feels that way. Survey your community at least once a year so you can get everyone’s opinion.

And a final note: no super-enthusiastic online contributor lasts; it may take a few months, but every super-sharer on an online community eventually slows down. It’s impossible to maintain that kind of unofficial enthusiasm on an online community.

train now for disasters later

Leave a reply

For almost 100 minutes, dozens of people took turns performing CPR and administering other first aid on a man crumpled on a freezing sidewalk in Goodhue, Minnesota, USA – population about 900, a town without a traffic light. It took almost 100 minutes for the May Clinic’s emergency helicopter to get to the fallen man. The first responders were volunteer fire fighters, police, and rescue squads, made up of both volunteers and paid staff, from neighboring towns. Their teamwork kept blood flowing to the man’s brain, making each rescuer a surrogate for his failing heart. And it worked: the man survived, resulting in what may be one of the longest, most successful out-of-hospital resuscitations ever.

The key to responding to a crisis successfully, whether its one person collapsing in front of you or an entire city collapsing around you, is training now for what might happen later. Getting training now in CPR and first aid, as well as disaster response (all available in the USA from your local chapter of the American Red Cross), can help later. What happened in Goodhue, Minnesota or in any disaster zone shows that: the people who are able to help immediately, the people who are able to make a real difference, are the people who made the time to register to volunteer, to get the necessary training, etc.

Whenever a disaster strikes, hundreds — even thousands — of people start contacting various organizations in an effort to try to volunteer onsite at the disaster site. The images and stories motivate these people to help immediately, in-person. But what most of these people don’t realize is that spontaneous volunteers with no training and no affiliation can actually cause more problems than they alleviate in a crisis or disaster situation. The priority in these situations is helping the people affected by the crisis or disaster, NOT giving spontaneous, unaffiliated volunteers an outlet for their desire to help.

During and after disasters, what’s desperately needed is equipment, supplies and expertise in disaster situations — that’s the priority. Disasters are incredibly complicated situations that require people with a very high degree of qualifications and long-term commitment, not just good will, a sense of urgency and short-term availability. Unless you have a formal affiliation with a recognized disaster relief organization, and training with that organization, you are probably going to be turned away if you want to help onsite.

If you have been moved by a disaster to help in some way immediately, please consider donating financially. Money is desperately needed in these situations to purchase food, up-to-date medicine, shelter, transportation for trained staff, and supplies. Disaster relief organizations cannot rely only on donations of these materials, and don’t have the resources in a crisis situation to go through them and make sure they are appropriate, clean, not expired, etc.; having finances means they can buy what they need, often in-country, and move much more quickly — and time is of the essence in these situations.

In addition to giving funds yourself, you can help by making sure friends and associates know how to give (you might be surprised how many people don’t know where or how to). A simple link on your own site or blog, a link at the end of your emails, an update on your status on FaceBook or MySpace or whatever, telling people how to donate financially, can be a huge help.

If you REALLY want to make a difference for developing countries suffering from a disaster, please make a financial donation to MercyCorps or the American Red Cross. For developed countries, like New Zealand or Japan, check the news and the internet for what agencies in those countries are saying they want – and don’t want. Please, no clothing drives or food drives, unless the American Red Cross says that’s what’s needed — it’s CASH that will pay for the things people need right now. Update your online profiles/status pages to encourage your friends to do the same.

If you want to truly help with a crisis situation or disaster, beyond financial donations, start thinking NOW about ways to get the training and affiliations you need to do such effectively for future emergency situations. There are many ways you can put yourself into a position for such in the future. Here’s why you need such training, and ways to get it.

And for agencies: People in Aid has a fantastic primer for organizations who want to develop their own emergency resources for sudden on-set disaster response. It’s something to do now. Good info for a funding proposal!

Australian volunteers growing preference for online volunteering

Leave a reply

ProBono Australia reports that a new study finds Australian volunteers have a growing preference for online volunteering, more young people want to get involved, and there is an increasing interest in short term or project based volunteering. The study, commissioned as part of the country’s National Volunteering Strategy Consultation, polled more than 800 volunteering groups and found that traditional forms of volunteering remain popular, but new forms of participation are emerging and needed to be accommodated.

Hmmmm…. this sounds like what myself and some other volunteer management consultants have been saying since, oh, 1996?! These trends have been happing for a while now, in several countries. But we can never have enough reports like this, as so many people – and funders – seem to remain unconvinced.

Among the things I was very happy to see from the report:

  • one of the many things needed to help embrace these emerging trends is addressing the various costs associated with volunteering, both for volunteers and volunteer-involving organisations, which can be significant barriers to participation. Yes, that’s right: volunteering is STILL not free!
  • the affirmation that effective volunteer management helps improve the efficiency of organisations and increases their capacity to comply with and implement risk management strategies needed for successful volunteer engagement.
  • the affirmation that information technology, especially the internet, can be better harnessed by volunteer-involving organisations to make participation in volunteering more accessible.

Organizations that involve volunteers need to accommodate and encourage these emerging trends while continuing to cater for traditional forms of volunteer participation. It’s my long-held contention that embracing these trends will vastly improve the experience for traditional volunteers (people who volunteer long-term). They will also, ultimately, help managers of volunteers be better supporters of volunteers. Everybody wins!

I presented on these trends last year during three weeks of intensive workshops with volunteer managers in Australia (thanks again, Martin Cowling of People First – Total Solutions and Andy Cowling of OzVPM and both of Australia, for all you did to make that happen). Given the responses in this report, I suspect some of the workshop attendees, as well as those who were a part of the Australasian Retreat for Advanced Volunteer Management that year, were contributors. That’s not me trying to take credit for what’s in the report; that’s me lauding Australian volunteer managers for being so aware of what’s happening in their sector.

ProBono Australia provides an excellent summary of the report. The report will inform the National Volunteering Strategy, which the Government plans to release later in 2011. The strategy is expected to outline the Government’s vision for volunteering over the next 10 years and will provide a framework which encourages volunteering. You can download the full report as well.

CTK Foundation’s 2011 Heart & Soul Grant Award Program (contest)

1 Reply

I don’t normally post about funding contests, as I have some issues with them (oh-so-much work on the part of the nonprofit or NGO, for no return at all for most submissions), but by special request, and because of the creative nature of this particular contest that could easily be leveraged within the organization’s staff, volunteers, participants and other supporters, regardless of whether they win the contest or not, I’m making an exception:

The CTK Foundation’s 2011 Heart and Soul Grant Award Program is using a poetry contest to award more than $25,000 in grants to nonprofits, charities and voluntary organizations in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom. And the good news is that grants can be used to fund whatever a nonprofit wants: technology (which the foundation specializes in), volunteer management training, or another critical function that many donors are often reluctant to fund.

To enter this contest for funds, a nonprofit, charity or voluntary organization submits an original four-to-eight-line poem that reflects its mission and work. Poems may be written by staff, clients and/or volunteers and must be entirely original. The winning poem, to be selected by an international panel of independent artists and producers, will be the inspiration for a song by Bill Dillon, a recording artist who was exonerated through the work of Innocence Project of Florida.

Applicants must be registered as a nonprofit, charity, NGO or volunteer organization in the USA, Canada or the UK, have been registered as such for at least one full calendar year, and provide proof of this upon request. Applicant organizations must have an operating board of non-related directors, a list of whom must be available upon request. The board must meet on a regular basis and document the proceedings of each meeting. Applicant organizations must be able to provide, upon request, financial statements for the last year of operations. An applying organization must also agree, if it wins, to allow CTK Foundation Fund to publish their grant submission lyrics, along with information about the organization and its work in any media format elected by CTK Foundation Fund.

Applications will be accepted through March 28th, 2011. Winners will be notified by April 10th and celebrated at the Heart and Soul Grant Award Gala on April 14th in Austin, Texas. More information here.

Why not open this contest up to all of your organization’s staff, volunteers, participants and other supporters? Ask them to create a poem per this Foundation’s guidelines, and pick one to submit for this contest. Even if your organization doesn’t win, post all of the submissions about your organization to your own web site or blog.

Donated service or donated cash?

Leave a reply

graphic by Jayne Cravens representing volunteersThe discussion group for volunteer managers in Ireland and the United Kingdom, UKVPMs, brought to my attention a question from Directory of Social Change:

Which would most benefit your organisation, a £10,000 cash donation or an equivalent value in volunteers (or volunteer hours)?

My answer was this:

But what is “equivalent value in volunteers”? How many volunteers do I get for £10,000? Is it one pro bono obstetrician, working for a month in my free health care clinic? Is it three Java programmers for my online mentoring program interactive platform? Is it 300 volunteers that show up every weekend for a month to fix up the trails and visitor areas of a large park?

I would most definitely take the cash – because I could use it to fund the training, management and support needed to involve more volunteers, involve volunteers in new areas, etc.

What I wish I had said additionally: if you took £10,000 worth of volunteers (which, as I’ve pointed out, can mean oh-so-many things), how much extra is it going to cost to involve those additional volunteers? Volunteers are never free!

So, yes, I would take the cash – and put it toward volunteer engagement!

Also see

Volunteers – still not free! Even at Wikipedia!

Government support re: volunteerism increasing worldwide (but not their financial support)

Girls Are More Likely to Support Charities Using Social Media

Leave a reply

A survey commissioned by World Vision, a Christian international relief and development group, says that girls in the USA are more likely than boys in the USA to “friend”, “like” or “follow” causes they believe in on social media (41 percent vs. 27 percent) and that girls are more likely than boys to say they’ve become more aware of the needs of others as a result of their use of social media (51 percent vs. 38 percent). The study also found high overall levels of social media use: Four out of five USA teenagers surveyed said they used social networks like Facebook.

The study was conducted online in January by Harris Interactive among more than 500 youth ages 13 to 17 years old.

According to the survey, nearly 1 in 4 teens (23%) say they volunteer during their free time. How easy would it be to make that percentage even greater? Consider the answers to these questions:

How strongly do you agree or disagree
with each of the following statements?		 Summary of Strongly/ Somewhat Agree (Net)
It is more important than ever to help others who are less fortunate. 90%
I wish I could do more to help those in need. 88%
It is important to support charitable causes or organizations symbolically even if you can’t do so financially. 86%
I have become more aware of the needs of others as a result of the current economic climate. 79%
My family has been negatively affected by the current economic climate. 73%
The benefits of using social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter) outweigh the risks. 66%
I have become more aware of the needs of others as a result of my use of social media (e.g., Facebook, Twitter). 44%

When you see just how strongly these young people in this study felt about charity, social responsibility and volunteering – something you can see echoed per the questions from teens on YahooAnswers Community Service – you have to wonder why many nonprofits are doing such a lousy job of reaching out to teens and pre-teens as volunteers and participants! If your organization isn’t getting youth involvement at the numbers you want, or should be, it’s time to look at how your organization is using social media.

World Vision sponsored the study to coincide with its annual 30 Hour Famine, scheduled for February 25-26, in which teenagers fast for 30 hours to raise money for global poverty. The event, which raised $10.4-million dollars last year, has set a goal of $11-million for 2011. World Vision expects 200,000 participants.

Advice for nonprofits, NGOs, charities, civil society, government agencies and others looking to use the Internet to mobilize young people as volunteers and program participants:

Nonprofit Organizations and Online Social Networking: Advice and Commentary

Evaluating Online Activities: Online Action Should Create & Support Offline Action

What nonprofit & government agencies “get” FaceBook?

Microvolunteering is virtual volunteering

7 Replies

Imagine if I announced that a one-day beach clean up, or a one-day walk-a-thon, that brought hundreds or thousands of people together for one-off service in support of a nonprofit organization or cause, wasn’t really volunteering. Imagine if I said it isn’t volunteering because most of the participants who are donating their time and service aren’t screened, aren’t interviewed, aren’t background-checked, and aren’t trained beyond maybe a 10 minute speech about things to keep in mind during the experience. Imagine if I also said it was because most participants may never volunteer again with that organization or for the cause.

Imagine if I claimed that people who sewed or knitted items from their home, in their spare time, for some nonprofit group helping kids in hospitals or people suffering from a particular disease, weren’t really volunteers. They also aren’t screened the way most other volunteers are, aren’t background-checked, and usually have no deadline for their work – they get it done when they get it done, if at all.

I would look ridiculous to make such claims. The volunteer management community would laugh me out of the workshop or conference (or the conference hotel bar, as the case may be). Or off the Intertubes.

Of course all of these activities are volunteering. In fact, they are all MICROvolunteering, without a computer! (most volunteer managers call such episodic volunteering, but the new name is much snazzier)

The folks behind the microvolunteering movement The Extraordinaries (though their web site is now called Sparked.com) continue to try to say microvolunteering isn’t virtual volunteering. Which is as preposterous as me claiming those other one-off volunteering gigs like one-day beach clean ups aren’t really volunteering. Of course microvolunteering is virtual volunteering: it’s unpaid, donated service in support of nonprofit organizations, provided via a computer or handheld device. How much time it may or may not take, and how volunteers are or aren’t screened or supported, is immaterial.

I’ve had an ongoing battle with the people behind the Extraordinaires for a while now. They burst online a few years ago, claiming that there was no need for traditional volunteering, or traditional volunteer management, because everything nonprofits need by online volunteers can be done through what they were calling microvolunteering: people who volunteered for just a few minutes at a time whenever they might get an inclination to help, from wherever they were. Web sites would be built. Topics would be researched. Logos would be designed. Marketing plans would be written. Children would be mentored. All by people waiting for a plane or during time outs at sporting events. No need to make time to volunteer — just volunteer whenever you have some spare time, even if that’s just for a minute or two.

I challenged them on various blogs and the ARNOVA discussion group, pointing out that, indeed, microvolunteering can work for some tasks – and I had been saying so since the late 1990s, when I called the practice byte-sized volunteering – but most certainly not for mentoring a child (online or face-to-face, mentoring is effective only if its a long-term, ongoing commitment that builds trust – something I learned when working with the National Mentoring Partnership in launching their standards for online mentoring) and many other activities undertaken by community-serving organizations. I pointed out that microvolunteering most definitely can work for something like logo design — which, in fact, I wrote about back in 2006, per the first NetSquared conference that highlighted several examples of such. But I also pointed out that successful volunteer engagement isn’t about just getting work done; it is, in fact, about relationship-building — recruiting people who could turn into donors, for instance, or raising awareness and changing behaviors — and it’s also about reserving certain tasks for volunteers specifically, because some tasks are actually best done by volunteers.

This recent blog shows that some of those arguments are starting to seep into their thinking – Hurrah! – but they still need to evolve their concept. They are right to point out that microvolunteering doesn’t employ some volunteer management techniques in the same way as other volunteering, but they just can’t get their mind around the fact that LOTS of volunteering doesn’t, like a one-day beach clean up doesn’t. But that doesn’t somehow negate microvolunteering as volunteering, or as virtual volunteering.

Volunteer management and support must be adjusted for a wide variety of volunteering scenarios, online and off; while there are certain fundamentals of volunteer management that are always the same for all volunteering, online or offline, microvolunteering or longer-term, such as capturing volunteer contact info, ensuring volunteers are invited to future opportunities, thanking volunteers for their contributions and showing volunteers how their service has been of value, other aspects of volunteer management have to be tailored to the unique situation, and that does, indeed, mean not recruiting micro-volunteers the same way as long-term volunteers, on or offline. 

In addition to their continued refusal to accept that, indeed, microvolunteering is virtual volunteering, they also continue to make some other misguided statements, such as:

With microvolunteering, ‘You hire EVERY volunteer.’ The end result gets better as more people work on and peer-review your project. You turn no-one away.

You do NOT hire every volunteer in a microvolunteering or crowd-sourcing project. In fact, you reject MOST of them — for a logo design, for instance, most people’s ideas are rejected – most ideas are not used. For open source software design that allows anyone to contribute to the code, not every submission gets included in the released version. It doesn’t mean those volunteering efforts aren’t appreciated and that you shouldn’t thank them and celebrate such, but the reality is that you are not going to use most of the work submitted for such a crowd-sourcing endeavor.

And as for their comment that The end result gets better as more people work on and peer-review your project, I could point to dozens of pages on Wikipedia that have gotten worse as more people have worked on them. The idea that more volunteers automatically means better is something that only someone who does not work with volunteers regularly — particularly online volunteers — would say.

If they want to claim that microvolunteering is the coolest form of virtual volunteering, or even the coolest form of volunteering, I wouldn’t be quite so passionate in my arguments – what’s coolest is, ofcourse, entirely subjective. Of course, I’d still argue that it wasn’t — I’d be speaking as a person who has been both a long-term online volunteer and a micro-volunteer, and has recruited and managed both kinds of online volunteers. To me, mircrovolunteering is like a one-night stand: interesting/fun in the moment, but then quickly forgotten. Um, not that I know what a one-night stand is… Such might lead to something more substantial, but usually, it won’t – and that means it’s not for everyone.

But this fact Ben and Jacob will have to eventually accept: microvolunteering, online, is virtual volunteering. And it’s been going on long before the Extraordinaires showed up. Proposing that it isn’t creates only confusion, segregates them from terrific conversations and resources and networks, and holds them back from the full success they could have with their efforts; accepting that they are part of virtual volunteering would open many more opportunities for their endeavor and ensure their long-term success.

Also see:

Micro-Volunteering and Crowd-Sourcing: Not-So-New Trends in Virtual Volunteering/Online Volunteering

But virtual volunteering means it takes no time, right?

What online community service is – and is not

Is group volunteering all its cracked up to be?

2 Replies

Do most nonprofits really need groups of volunteers from corporations or other organizations showing up for one-day volunteering activities?

I’ve been thinking about this for a few months lately, and now the British-based company nfpSynergy has scooped me with its own thoughts on whether or not corporate volunteering really all its cracked up to be. An excerpt from its blog:

There is nothing more difficult to deal with than an employer who rings up a charity offering 30/300/3000 employees who want to do a bit of volunteering as part of their team-building on Thursday afternoon in three weeks time. Charities quietly (for fear of upsetting their corporate partners) dislike employee volunteering while companies are much more enthusiast.

It’s so true!

I started thinking about blogging about this myself when I saw that a certain corporation had won a certain state’s group volunteering award for its participation in a range of one-time events. IMO, this corporation was being honored for “volunteering” in events that had been created more to accommodate the corporation and others looking for a one-time, feel-good experience (and photo ops) than to actually make a difference in the community.

As any person who has worked with nonprofits knows, one-time volunteering events – walks, runs, dances, auctions, benefit performances, beach clean-up days, house painting, etc. – are very expensive and time-consuming. They are worthwhile for most organizations only if they result in one or more of the following:

  • measurable results regarding community awareness of a particular issue or organization
  • candidates for longer-term volunteering in more substantive activities regarding service delivery
  • funds raised to cover all costs, including staff time to organize and supervise the event, insurance, etc.

A school once asked me if it had to accept a corporation’s request for a group of their employees to hold a pizza party for two of their classes of fourth graders just before the students went home on an upcoming Friday. The corporation considered this as somehow a great thing for the kids, and as a volunteering experience for their employees. The teachers balked at losing even an hour of teaching time, and saw nothing beneficial about such an event for the kids whatsoever. They were reluctant to tell the corporation no, however, for fear of losing the chance of a grant down the road. The school representatives were at first stunned, and then relieved, when I told them they had every right to refuse any such offer, that they could say, “Thanks so much. Because every hour of teaching time is vitally important, we can’t do anything that takes away such time. But here’s information about our lunch-time mentoring program; we would love any of your employees attend our next orientation about this program. Or we could do a presentation at your corporation about the program and how your employees could get involved. We have some other volunteering activities we would welcome your help with as well.”

(In case you are wondering, the corporation declined. Lunch time one-on-one mentoring wasn’t the kind of experience their employees were looking for, and they didn’t have time for employees to sit through a presentation by the school. Sigh.)

The nfpSynergy blog continues, with an experience very similar to my own:

For nearly five years now nfpSynergy has had a company policy of giving each employee 5 days of paid volunteering time. Doesn’t that make us wonderful? Well no not really because it didn’t work: very few staff used their volunteering days. And this is despite the fact that almost everybody who works for us is very committed to the charities and non-profits.

So why didn’t people use their volunteering days? The answer is simple. Five days is ‘diddly squat’ in the world of volunteering. It was like telling people they could go and buy a free lunch on the company but only giving them 10p with which to do.

My experience exactly: once upon a time, I ran the philanthropy activities for what was then a Fortune 500 company with hundreds of employees at headquarters and at another location in the USA, and thousands abroad. We also gave USA employees five days of paid time off to volunteer. In the two years I oversaw the program, less than a dozen individual employees took the days. Only two groups of employees did, in events organized by me: people from our facilities department painted a room at a nearby family homeless shelter, and three employees from our IT department networked the new computers of a nearby nonprofit over two days. It took me twice as many hours to organize these two group volunteering events as it took the volunteers to actually do them! 

Right now, I’m trying to find group volunteering activities for Girl Scouts in my area. And the reality is that, not only are most organizations not prepared, in terms of insurance, supervision and program, to host groups of girls under 16 (most under 13, in fact) as volunteers, most organizations do not want a group of young girls as volunteers; the staff have critical activities that must be taken care of, that cannot be delayed in order to give a group of young girls a feel-good experience.

Attention corporations and governments: if you want to see more group volunteering activities by corporate employees, youth groups, professional associations, etc., prepare to pay for it. Money is needed to fund the staff, material, training and other resources to not only make the activity happen, but to make the activity a meaningful part of the organization’s mission or outreach efforts.

Also see:

Creating One-Time, Short-Term Group Volunteering Activities

One(-ish) Day “Tech” Activities for Volunteers

Finding Community Service and Volunteering for Groups

Pro Bono / In-Kind / Donated Services for Mission-Based Organizations: When, Why & How?

 

 

Survey for Returned Peace Corps Volunteers Re: Safety

1 Reply

A followup to my blog from back in January, Peace Corps must better address assaults and murders of members, which talked about the USA television network 20/20 piece about women Peace Corps members who were sexually-assaulted while serving abroad, and how these women’s needs both before and after these crimes were not addressed by the Peace Corps. You can view the interviews with some of these former Peace Corps members here. 20/20 also did a profile of a slain Peace Corps volunteer, Kate Puzey, who was murdered after the Peace Corps leaked her name to a suspect she had accused of sexually abusing children. You can view part of the story here.

Among the women interviewed on the program was Casey Frazee, whose story and request for change were first published in the Winter 2009 issue of the National Peace Corps Association’s (NPCA) WorldView magazine.  A follow-up blog post was published in September 2010. She formed an ad hoc group, First Response Action (FRA), that “advocates for a stronger Peace Corps response for Volunteers who are survivors or victims of physical and sexual violence.”  The group envisions “a Peace Corps with policies that reflect best practices in all areas of training, prevention and response.”  FRA is currently conducting a survey of current and Returned Peace Corps Volunteers about their experiences during sexual assault training in the Peace Corps. 

NPCA also offers the following information about Peace Corps Resources on Safety and Security:

If you have experienced sexual assault or safety and security issues during your Peace Corps service, here are some resources from the Agency:

  • As noted on the Peace Corps website, Peace Corps works in some of the least developed countries and in some of the most remote areas in the world, therefore health, safety, and security risks are an unavoidable part of life and of Volunteer service. Peace Corps has gathered the key points about Volunteer safety and security on the following website page:  Safety and Security in Depth for Family and Friends.
  • Although the Peace Corps is not authorized by law to provide medical care or counseling to Returned Peace Corps Volunteers, all Volunteers who leave Peace Corps service after having been the victims of sexual assault are eligible for counseling under the Federal Employees Compensation Action (FECA), the workman’s compensation program for federal employees, under which Peace Corps Volunteers are covered.  Peace Corps offers three counseling sessions following sexual assault to serve as a bridge for Volunteers until they can arrange counseling under FECA, with the cost paid by the Peace Corps, not the Volunteer.  FECA is administered by the Department of Labor. Full information on FECA can be found here on the Peace Corps website.

I’m going to continue to monitor how Peace Corps responds to complaints about the safety of its members, particularly women, and continue to post updates here on my blog. To be fair, such information is not available about other volunteer sending organizations, at least than I can find. If you have a heads up about such information, please let me know.