A missed chance to make a real difference to volunteering
So RVS are developing a multi million pound national volunteering site that will “supercharge” falling volunteer numbers around the UK by widening access and removing barriers. See here.
I have had to wait a while to write this as an angry response based on pure emotion was not needed. Safe to say that I am really not in favour of this approach to how we encourage more people to volunteer. You can get a hint of my view of national projects that usurp local initiatives here (1) Thank you for not asking, but we do not want a national volunteering platform. | LinkedIn
This is another unwanted, unnecessary project that will fail to have any real impact. We need to look at local solutions even if they are a bit messier, make a slightly less impressive headline and could be more complicated to fund.
We know a local solution works
We worked in partnership to build two local platforms for Cambridgeshire (Volunteer Cambs | VolunteerCambs!) and Peterborough (Peterborough CVS | Go-Vip) for less than £100,000 and this included a multi-year licence. Since the sites went live we have been working tirelessly to promote them despite the fact that we are still looking to raise money for a staff team to fit around the platforms. Up until now we have used some area specific funding and our core funding to make the sites work as the sector and our funders recognise the impact that this approach has.
I have heard figures of between £4 and £5 Million mentioned for the national site. If we say a local site costs £100K to build, this would have paid for between 40 and 50 sites, so that could have funded one site in every county in England (there are 48 ceremonial counties Counties of England – Wikipedia)
I am not saying that each site has to be based on a county, but the argument is that this money could have enabled local sites to be developed where they don’t exist and supported existing sites where they do.
We are proud of Volunteer Cambs and we know that other organisations are proud of their sites. We have worked hard to promote the site and to build the numbers of people and organisations using it. We collect local volunteer stories, attend local events to promote volunteering, work with local partners in the VCS, statutory and business sector to promote volunteering and the site. We are working with the elected mayor, with the health system and with all our district and county councils to get them to invest in volunteering and to help them understand that volunteering builds communities, helps people’s wellbeing and can be an important route back to work. The site is only the nut in the walnut whip of work we do around volunteering, but it is essential. It is our showcase, our brand and only works because of everything we and others do to build local relationships with local people and organisations to promote local opportunities.
I argue that volunteering is a local activity that needs local relationships. How will a national site develop these without stepping on the toes of local CVSs and volunteer centres? Will they be asking us to promote the site? If that is the plan I will save them the email to us as we will not promote it, and in fact we will actively be saying to groups that we talk to, not to use it but to use our site.
What would a solution built on partnership look like?
I am not totally against national projects, but they need to compliment and add value to the work happening locally, especially when related to an activity that is about local relationships. As such I propose funding a national site that links through to all the local sites, this could be a map where you clicked on the area and a simple postcode/place-based search function that takes you to a local site, this is a simple, cheap and fairly static website that could be looked after by an organisation like NAVCA.
The remaining funding should then be spent supporting and funding the local sites. Expertise already exists in the sector about the existing different platforms and how sites can be promoted, and I know that there would be an appetite to share those experiences as we benefitted from those who went before us.
The national site would allow national campaigns like Big Help Out etc. to have a single national link, but this would then help people and organisations to find their local site. The national site would allow me to find possible one-off volunteering opportunities if on holiday and looking for something to do. It could be the catalyst around Volunteers’ Week. It could be what the celebrities promoted, or the influences shared. This sort of national site would add value, it would amplify what the team here do, as well as all those other teams across the country. It would a real partnership and a real bonus.
The new site as it is proposed will not do this, it will detract from local work, it will confuse the public, it will have a negative impact on local relationships, and it will make my life so much harder as I try to raise the money we need to encourage more people to volunteer across Cambridgeshire.
There could have been an investment that would have elicited cheers from local organisations and those working tirelessly to support and promote volunteering, but instead all we hear are howls of outrage and concern.
I had thought better of the People’s Postcode Lottery, they stress that they are about local connections; their move to unrestricted funding and their local focus is great, but that positive view has gone.
You only had to ask. Speak to us, speak to our national bodies, we could have articulated a solution that would have been a win for you, a win for local solutions and a win for local people.
So what now?
We will continue to promote our site.
We will continue to encourage more people to explore all the benefits of volunteering.
We will continue to support groups in all aspects of volunteer recruitment and retention.
We will continue to support those who may have barriers to volunteering to overcome them.
We will continue to work with local business to promote volunteering that benefits them and the communities they are based in.
We will continue to work with statutory partners to ensure volunteering is a part of how they achieve their aims.
We will continue to struggle for funding.
We will not however promote or support this national site.
