Responses
to February 2006 Hot Topic
Have
we regulated volunteer management beyond recognition?
Response
posted on February 6th 2006 by Jess Reed, Coordinator,
Volunteer Support (Mentoring) Program (VSMP), Inala,
Queensland, Australia
I
would like to respond briefly to Manon Ellis Williams
– while I can completely see where you are coming
from, and how well your model seems to be working
for you (and I doubt than any other model in your
situation would work as well), in my situation it
is through supporting our volunteers, and having all
those things in place – training, risk management
& assessments, team meetings – that we are
able to provide the best results for our program.
Our
volunteers mentor children and young people in the
foster care system (in foster homes, residential facilities,
hotels, back home with mum/dad). Each volunteer is
matched with a young person in the hope of establishing
a trusting, long term mentoring relationship. Our
program was created in response to the situation where
kids are “falling between the cracks”
– sometimes being moved from one foster home
to the next, with Case Workers often changing, and
no real sense of continuity, security or belonging.
For these kids, it is so important that we don’t
introduce any more change into their lives –
we don’t introduce them to someone who is unreliable,
or who will “quit on them” after a few
short months. Even for the kids that are in stable
foster care placements, introducing someone and then
taking them away can be very hurtful.
This
is the reason why we do focus so much on supporting
our volunteers. It is obvious that an unsupported,
unmonitored volunteer is far more likely to resign,
burnout or cause damage. Team Meetings give volunteers
a chance to access peer support and debrief, as well
as plan joint outings. Regular supervision means volunteers
feel supported, and realise that the work they do
is valued. It gives them a chance to reflect on their
experiences and debrief, and we hope it helps them
with professional development. It also means that,
as the Coordinator, I am aware of any issues that
are going on that might threaten the placement, and
we can take steps to resolving these.
Proper
screening (as Kate Power mentions), and going through
all those checks (and more) is the only way we can
feel remotely secure in introducing volunteers to
these young people. Proper training helps volunteers
be more prepared for their volunteering experience
– disclosures, behaviours, etc. Without this
our “drop out” rate would be much higher.
Finally,
our regular reviews and evaluations of the program
(and its risks) are so important in us finding out
how well we are doing our job – whether having
mentors is helping these young people, whether they
feel valued and whether their wellbeing measures (self
esteem, problem solving, etc) are affected. You might
see it as unnecessary red tape, but having a dialogue
with young people and carers is exactly what you are
talking about – finding the tangible results
of the job. The “best practice” stuff?
It’s just about making sure we can deliver to
our clients – the kids themselves.
Response
posted on February 12th 2006 by Kate Power, Head of
Volunteering Strategy, SCOPE, London, UK
This
is a very thought provoking article.
Some
thoughts for now. I am just setting up projects around
involving young disabled people as volunteers, basically
the most vulnerable people in society. As this is
a new area of work (I am talking about people with
very severe complex impairments who are normally hidden
in institutions) I am going all out on the risk assessment
/ protection issues front. When dealing with people
with this level of support need, and bearing in mind
that this type of project, when run inclusively, is
a magnet to groomers and people who want to abuse,
it is mind boggling in terms of the checks, procedures
and safety mechanisms which need to be thought through
and put in place just to hold a meeting. . . Let alone
start doing some volunteering.
So
I guess I am seeing it from a different perspective
- I have a huge responsibility when introducing a
new sector of people to volunteering, to ensure that
it is as safe and protected and organised as possible
- while still making it fun and exciting and innovative
and spontaneous . . . !
Response
posted on February 10th 2006 by Rosanna Tarsiero Online
Facilitator, Gionnethics, Italy
I
loved your hot topic! It matches the conclusions I
’ve come to from a theoretical perspective
I
think you’re very right … there are too
many persons wanting to be spoonfed, given “
best practices ” , and just replicate them,
whether they address the issue or not.
Response
posted on February 9th 2006 by Manon Ellis Williams,
Johannesburg, South Africa
It
seems to me that it all went wrong as soon as we started
to get overexcited about a job called "Volunteer
Manager". Ensuring that people who give their
time have a safe and rewarding volunteer experience
is important - don't get me wrong - but too many people
have forgotten that the outcome of the volunteer management
process is the vital thing, not the process itself.
We are expected to have policies all over the place,
regular risk assessments, the most thorough support
and supervision programme imaginable, but is anyone
looking at the results of volunteer involvement quite
so closely? There has to be a point to all this volunteer
activity. Volunteer managers tend to justify their
existence through endless "best practice"
models rather than looking at the tangible results
of their job - are more and better services being
delivered, are beneficiaries happy, did we actually
make a difference today? Taking our eye off the ball
to check that we have the right safety gear on is
resulting in us missing the shot entirely!
Before
everyone throws a hissy fit, let me put what I'm saying
into context. I worked in volunteer management in
the UK for several years and fully bought-in to the
"best practice is all" mantra. Since working
in South Africa for the past three years, my thinking
has changed. In a situation where basic human needs
are not being met by the State - water, sanitation,
food - non profit organisations and volunteers step
up and simply get on with the job. There is very little
fussing about policies and procedures, 6 month volunteer
training, weekly supervision meetings etc. - it is
just about community members doing what needs to be
done. Yes, I am sure that things sometimes go wrong,
but that is also true of "regulated" and
structured volunteering models in the global north.
From what I have witnessed, volunteers do not feel
exploited and they are getting something out of the
experience - whether it's a free lunch, a food parcel
for their family or something to put on their CV.
I
can't say that any model is better than another -
it is not a question of right and wrong - but I have
found it interesting to look at why volunteer management
has become such an industry in some countries and
whether it is actually useful. I t is perhaps easy
to engage in best practice navel-contemplation when
the need for delivery of basic services is not so
great?
Right,
let the games begin!
Response
posted on February 6th 2006 by Jess Reed, Coordinator,
Volunteer Support (Mentoring) Program (VSMP), Inala,
Queensland, Australia
I
would have to say that (in my own situation) we have
not gone overboard with regulation. Coordinating a
volunteer program that operates within the child protection
sector means that there are layers and layers of additional
red tape for us to wade through, but I think that
we have been successful in balancing this with real,
human connections with our volunteers.
Our
volunteers not only need Blue Cards, but must also
pass Dept of Child Safety (QLD) security checks that
go through child protection history, traffic history,
criminal history and domestic violence history (going
through all government databases). They also need
to attend training, and meet core competencies (although,
if anyone is struggling to meet these we merely sit
with them and go through it together – no one
fails!), as well as sit a one hour interview. The
checks in particular can be cumbersome (particularly
when they were introduced and there was a 5-6 month
wait on results!!!!! – there’s now about
a 2 week wait), but are so necessary.
We
really value the human connections with our volunteers,
and realise that remembering to send a birthday card,
ask about a sick child/puppy, or congratulate on graduating
uni/tafe is so important to making volunteers feel
appreciated, and part of a team. We have team meetings
each second month, as well as group days at parks
or 10 Pin Bowling alleys, to try and foster the team
environment and to encourage peer support and friendship.
I
think we are probably quite lucky in that we have
a relatively small program – 32 volunteers and
1 Coordinator – and that our volunteers began
with us in 4 different stages – some have been
with us for the 3 years we have existed, others for
shorter (after we finally got funded!). This means
that we have had the time to get to know vols at training,
and that veteran volunteers have befriended new volunteers.
Regulation
definitely plays a bit part – volunteers need
to fill out logbooks, we need to have supervision
fairly regularly, we need to brush up on confidentiality
in newsletters and at team meetings, we need to review
volunteer placements twice a year (speaking to the
young person, carer and volunteer) as well as reviewing
the program twice a year. A lot of this has less to
do with overregulation of Volunteer Program Management,
and more to do with the regulation of the child protection
sector (and the conditions of our licensing). One
of our biggest problems – not being able to
publish (even in our newsletter or in the members
area of our website!) photos of our volunteer with
their mentors due to confidentiality laws –
definitely has nothing to do with VPM, and everything
to do with the climate in child protection.
From
a VPM perspective I would LOVE to show these photos,
as I can see their value in recognising the work our
volunteers do, but this clashes with the regulations
of the system we work within.
From
my perspective at least it is VPM that is relatively
regulation free!!!!!
Response
posted on February 6th 2006 by Gwenda Lawther, Head
of School of Volunteer Management, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Hi
all,
This
is an interesting topic which encompasses a whole
range of interconnected issues. I don’t think
the volunteer sector has become too regulated, I think
the issue is getting it formalised in our minds so
that it all becomes as common practice as those HR
issues which we are all too familiar with.
Frequently
we are asked to work with organisations in a change
process, commonly where people suddenly become responsible
for volunteer teams, people with no HR experience
or knowledge of the legal issues. I think it’s
vital that organisations include the legal processes
in both volunteer and staff inductions, so that there
are no surprises. Simply making programs proactive
rather than reactive could be the key to staff understanding
and having the capability to work with volunteer regulatory
issues.
I
agree that associations, networking and education
are the cogs in the wheel that can facilitate knowledge
sharing and strengthen organisations ability to cope
with the issues and the forums to be kept up to date
with changes. I also think an accreditation model
could be the next step!
Let's
hear what you think!
Its
not too late...
Let's
hear what you think!
Return
to current month's Hot
Topic
Visit
this month’s ‘Hot
Topic’ on the Energize web site
The
contents of this Hot Topic are copyright © 2003
- 2005 OzVPM.
You may reproduce this Hot Topic in part or in full
on the condition that the author, source and website
address (www.ozvpm.com)
are quoted.
|
