Lessons from the "Loss" of Vol England

The Boards of the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) and Volunteering England are considering merging the two organisations by early 2013. It has been stated that such a merger “will enhance the work of both agencies and help deliver on a new vision for volunteering and voluntary action”.

The merged organisation would be known as the National Council for Voluntary Organisations but with an additional "strapline".  It will retain the brands for Volunteering England and Institute for Volunteering Research.

I believe NCVO are a great organisation and a very, very logical merger choice. There will be some things that will go, I suspect.  Eventually, Institute for Volunteering Research will be integrated into the wider NCVO Research area.  Policy issues around Volunteering will need to compete for space amongst the many good issues NCVO tackle. The voice of managers of volunteers will be less heard. Advocacy for volunteers needs to be considered amongst the backdrop that NCVO focuses on organisational issues. Funding applications for NCVO will need to consider a number of issues including volunteerism. If there is not strong advocacy internally for volunteering, the issue may have less impact than it currently does in the UK.

On the other hand, it could mean that something survives in a bleak economic environment.

I have been predicting for three years now, we will see wholesale consolidation of the Volunteering infrastructure" sector.  We  have seen:

• the almost complete disappearance of Volunteering Australia this month.
• the 2007 merger with Hands On/Points of Light in the USA
• Volunteer Canada's major funding challenge following the change of government there
• the merger of Volunteering Ireland/Volunteer Centres Ireland. 

Who is left? Volunteering New Zealand, Civiq - Instituut Vrijwilligers Inzet in Holland, Volunteer 21 Taiwan, Japan Volunteer Center, Takatioff (UAE) and National Volunteer & Philanthropy Centre (NVPC) all remain stand alone. Will they remain alone or will they merge to survive?

These mergers show us that volunteer infrastructure development is still not "sexy".  We have not sold it well at any level. I wonder if Reimagining Service will help over in the USA. Otherwise, we are going backwards globally and the loss of VE will be felt widely.

Uk Student named top volunteer

University of Southampton medical student Nathan Highton has been named as the winner of the Matt Spencer Award 2012 for involvement "in numerous charities; in particular HIVE (HIV Education) teaching local high school and college students about HIV biology and transmission."


Nathan is National President  UK blood Cancer Charity: Marrow, which looks for bone marrow matches for those with blood-borne cancers such as Leukaemia and Lymphoma.  In his term recruited more supporters and "fundraised to an all time record".  Nathan also helps his local youth club.


The award is celebrated during Student Volunteering Week (20 to 26 February) in memory of Matt Spencer who became involved with Student Community Action at the University of London. He passed away in 2001 aged just 23. Matt epitomised student volunteering - he cared deeply about people, His commitment, enthusiasm and sense of fun inspired many and will always continue to do so. His family set up a fund in his memory to recognise the work of outstanding student volunteers which awards one outstanding student each academic year with an inscribed tankard, a cheque for £100 and a bottle of champagne.

Nathan told Volunteering England: “I was very surprised at even being nominated, let alone receiving this great award. To me, I just do what I enjoy and it's really humbling to be recognised for doing this."

From Volunteering England

Friday Facts: Uk Big Society is imploding

It started as a great scheme! The new UK Government aiming to get people involved in their communities with national citizen service, less  central control, more volunteering and more co-ops, mutuals, charities and social enterprises. The Prime Minister David Cameron (pictured left) said "groups should be able to run post offices, libraries, transport services and shape housing projects."


Rolled out to great fanfare it now seems to be moving from big to bogged.  In fact, the situation in the UK now seems to be getting out of control:


First up as I blogged last week, Lord Nat Wei of Shoreditch hired to be one of the main advisers for the Program reduced his time because he found out after his appointment that it was a voluntary role and he could not afford the time or money to volunteer. 


Secondly, this week   Liverpool Council one of the four cities involved in the Pilot project pulled out  after "the council learned in December that it would lose £100m in specialist grants from the government, many of which were allocated to charities and community groups tackling welfare issues, from worklessness to family breakdown.  The Prime Minister of England continued to defend Big Society as he attacked Liverpool Council.

Thirdly Charity leaders are starting to speak out against the scheme. Dame Elizabeth Hoodless, a formidable figure in UK volunteering ha weighted in saying that the Government cuts are destroying the Big Society. She was backed up by others including Sir Stephen Bubb, head of the Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations, who said Big Society "more soundbite than programme", causing "a tide of cynicism" and said it was "hitting the buffers".


Eight concerns I have about Big Society:

1. do vast numbers of British people want to overnight suddenly start running, for no pay, services in their areas that for decades have been run for them? e.g. their libraries
2. do we really want everyone to volunteer? There are some I don't believe should volunteer.  
3. a lot of people are no longer connected to one local area in today's modern world
4. Cameron has said: "“I don’t believe that civil society springs up of its own accord” yet has massively cut so much infrastructure  and support for volunteer management e.g. Volunteering England 
5. it means replacing paid staff  with volunteers -morally dubious
6. it ignores the huge numbers of volunteers already out there- will they be expected to volunteer more or will others really join them
7. most telling was that a number of Politicians when asked how they volunteer cold not tell people (ala the cartoon below!)
8. Big Society sounds awfully like the 21st Century version of Thatcher's Privatisation in disguise. A program detested by some Britons and welcomed as salvation by others

In the 70s and 80s there were many TV shows that imagined a future Britain in a state of collapse and bereft of services (The Guardians, The Changes, Noah's Castle).  If they are not careful Big Society may actually hasten that in and not prevent it.

Friday Facts: There is no such thing as a Free Lunch

Imagine being head hunted by the British Government to take on a prestigeous role with Her Majesty's Government.

Imagine resigning from your Board positions to avoid having a conflict of interest.

Imagine steeling yourself for your first day of work.

Imagine the night before you start your new job, you find out that your role has no salary!

This happened to Lord Nat Wei of Shoreditch, the youngest member of the British House of Lords.

What is the connection to us in not for profit land?

On 18 May 2010  Lord Wei was appointed as an adviser for the UK Big Society Project.  One of the priorities of Big Society is to "Encourage people to take an active role in their communities" (volunteerism)

He is designing the approach to building the Big Society in the UK. In other words, he is trying to find strategies to get people to volunteer.

His 3 day role comes with a nice desk but no salary.

His reaction? After 6 months in the role, Lord Wei has reduced his hours from three days to one day a week saying to friends: " he is cutting his hours to allow him to earn more money and "have more of a life"

In other words, he does not have enough time to volunteer. Yes thats right the man charged with increasing volunteerism in England is reducing his own volunteering! Check out the Article on his situation!

Some Friday Facts 

1. Volunteer Management is not free. Why does David Cameron, the Prime Minister of England pay his Communications Director £140 000 and pay nothing to his director of volunteerism? How about we swap that around-ask the Comms director to work for free and employ a volunteering adviser for £140 000?
2. Not Enough time is the top reason in the UK for people to not getting involved in volunteering. Lord Wei has just shown this in action. Love to see his national strategy now for people who say they need more time for family and work.  
3. Money reveals priorities The government spends £4.9 million on  special advisers (ie media advisers). This is about the total budget for Volunteering England. The PM's own special adviser team is being paid about £1.3million of that money - a little less than the amount the Cabinet Office gave to Volunteering England last year. And guess who got reduced funding?
4. Accurate Role Descriptions will keep people engaged - the treatment of Lord Wei happens to lots of volunteers. They are told one thing on recruitment and another when they start the job!

How does your agency, community, department show their real value of volunteering?