The New Volunteer Workforce...But They Won't Stay

Here's an article from the Stanford Social Innovation Review entitled "The New Volunteer Workforce":

http://www.ssireview.org/articles/entry/1155/

In this article, the authors talk about the poor management of volunteers by nonprofits. In fact, more than one-third of volunteers in one year will not return the following year. Some great nuggets in this article.

We have to rethink completely our volunteer management model - a change to a 'volunteer engagement' model. Our volunteers expect more, demand more, and should be given more. A wealth of talent and expertise, at an incredibly cost-effective level, totally wasted due to inefficient and dated techniques.

The Role of An Association

Hello

Seems I've been involved with conversations in several states about free clinic associations, and their role. Most associations start out as a networking group, providing a chance to discuss common problems and challenges. Then, some money shows up... An association, like NC, suddenly finds itself with $$ (in the case of NC, $10 million!) for its member clinics via grants, etc. Now, if you ask an NC clinic what the primary role of an association is for them, I'll betcha most would say 'to raise money for me and the other clinics.' But, should that be the role? Associations with money or other resources to give become the victim of their own success. NC was able to get another $10 grant, but I would about bet my 3 kids that there will not be another $10 million. At that point, some clinics will see the association, one that brought in $20 million dollars over 10 years to the free clinic movement, as a 'failure'...is that fair? Should the primary function of an association be to raise money?

I would argue no - the primary reason for an association is to provide a common voice, to advocate, and to help the clinics in their long-term sustainability. If that means they happen to come across some grant $$ to share, great - but that is NOT their primary mission.

Of course, one could get into the philosophical argument that an association's job is to eliminate the need for free clinics - all people covered, 'universal health care' or whatever - basically, work the associaion and all its clinics out of business. I do not agree with that, but it is an argument I have heard.

I think the association is to teach clinics how to fish...while throwing them a few salmon along the way...

What do YOU think? Love to hear from ya...

Administrator or Program Manager?

Every clinic, as it matures from birth to adolescence, reaches a point where the founding ED comes to a crossroads. Most founding ED's have a medical background - an RN, MD, LPN or something, and they are not only administering the clinic, they are also running the program, the actual medical clinic itself. They are doing triage, or seeing patients, or doing eligibility, or some sort of direct service.

At some point, these two diverse roles come into conflict with each other, as something has to give. My experience has been that the clinics that make a successful transition into a larger, more sophisticated clinics are those where their ED has made the choice to become the true 'Executive Director', the administrator of the clinic, and left go of the clinical/program work they were doing, giving that up to either paid staff or volunteers.

Clinics that I have seen struggling have almost consistently had an ED trying to straddle the fence, trying to serve both roles.

I would be interested in hearing other perspectives, but i believe the admin/program issue makes or breaks many a clinic...