2011 Annual Social Report

2011 ANNUA L SOCIAL REPORT

socially sustainable communities focused on community, family Creating

and individual well-being

Complete Version

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

social sustainability

3

descriptive indicators

4

social investment

5

volunteer return on investment

6

measuring core FCSS outcomes

7

collection method and interpretation

9

overall effect sizes

10

self-esteem

11

social problem-solving

16

social isolation

19

mentoring

23

social knowledge and skills

26

public understanding of issues

29

social capital

32

volunteer engagement

38

references

41

SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY For a socially sustainable community, our focus is on how we can best meet the health, well-being and social needs of the community. Airdrie Family and Community Support Services (FCSS) enhances the social well-being of individuals, families and community through prevention. In partnership with the Province of Alberta, Airdrie FCSS funds preventive social programs to strengthen the social fabric of our community.

SOCIAL WELL-BEING INDICATORS A socially sustainable community is one that is healthy and provides ample opportunity for social interactions and meeting people’s needs (AirdrieONE). We measure individual, family and community interactions using social well-being indicators.

Indicators tell us whether or not our social investments in preventive social programs enhance the social well-being of individuals, families and community. In 2011, our FCSS funded programs collected survey data using the above common indicators. These surveys were given at the beginning and the end of programs to participants. In addition, we used relationships (or process changes) as indicators. For example, we surveyed the perceived supports provided by mentors and the perceived supports received by mentees. With this baseline data, we were able to encapsulate the effects of FCSS program participation.

3

DESCRIPTIVE INDICATORS Descriptive indicators tell us about the number of people who have participated in FCSS funded programs. In 2011, we changed the way we collected data from FCSS funded programs. In addition to using common indicator measures (surveys), FCSS funded programs were required to only report statistics from programs and activities funded by FCSS. These changes resulted in smaller albeit more refined data.

FCSS PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS Overall, 1,679 people were served in-person by 11 programs in 7 agencies. 3,266 people were served through telephone consultations by 6 programs in 4 agencies. Finally, 1,435 people were served through email and other online-based services by 6 programs in 4 agencies.

In-person consultations service providers (7%)

children (13%)

volunteers (14%) seniors (5%)

Telephone consultations service providers (7%)

adults (10%)

volunteers (9%) youth (9%) adults (10%) families (42%) seniors (5%)

Email/web-based consultations youth (9%)

service providers (6%)

families (65%)

volunteers (8%)

seniors (5%)

adults (3%) youth (10%)

4

families (68%)

SOCIAL INVESTMENT In 2011, the City of Airdrie ($211,868) in partnership with the Province of Alberta ($688,602) invested a total of $900,470 in Airdrie FCSS. $600,565 of FCSS funds was invested externally on 11 preventive social programs. $299,905 of funds was invested internally on social research, youth engagement and community development. The total social investment of $900,470 amounts to $20.86 per capita.

$688,602 + $172,000 $860,602 + $39,868 $900,470

Government of Alberta City of Airdrie minimum contribution

City of Airdrie extra funds

invested in preventive social programs in Airdrie

5

VOLUNTEER RETURN ON INVESTMENT Using average 2011 Alberta wage and salary data , we were able to find the closest matches and assigned hourly wage values for all volunteer positions in FCSS funded programs.

VOLUNTEER RETURN ON INVESTMENT Volunteer Position Function (equivalent) Rates donation sorter/food ham- housekeeping/cleaner 14.39 pers student leaders early childhood educator 15.32 corporate volunteers general carpenter/ 21.55 labourer community events park maintenance 15.96 board of directors/ management consultant 38.55 committees counselors in training community worker 20.87 program assistants education assistant 17.69 special events assistants event planner 20.81 general maintenance, general carpenter/ 21.55 repairs labourer IT consultants user support technician 27.19 victim Advocates registered social worker 37.32 court support advocates paralegal 29.23 adult mentors registered social worker 37.32 teen mentors community worker 20.87 seniors/special needs driver 17.39 transportation crafting activities/ artisan 17.2 decorators income tax preparation accounting/related clerks 21.29 group facilitators facilitator/life skills coach 20.87 administrative assistants administrative clerk 19.23 seniors supports in-home support/disability 20.87 worker newsletter writers public relations 30.05

6

Hours 4,384.8

Value $ 63,097

174.0 421.5

$ $

2,666 9,083

2,854.5 3,697.5

$ $

45,558 142,539

2,880.0 3,121.5 1,129.0 130.0

$ $ $ $

60,106 55,219 23,494 2,802

15.0 4,353.0 633.0 2,080.0 1,101.0 957.8

$ $ $ $ $ $

408 162,454 18,503 77,626 22,978 16,655

1,200.0

$

20,640

242.3 132.5 404.3 98.5

$ $ $ $

5,158 2,765 7,774 2,056

201.8 30,211.8

$ 6,063 $747,641

MEASURING CORE FCSS OUTCOMES INDIVIDUAL WELL-BEING Individuals experience increased quality of life.

Elements such as life satisfaction, self-esteem, competence, resiliency and healthy relationships all contribute to individual well-being. We used self-esteem, social problem-solving and social isolation as indicators for individual well-being.

Self-esteem is generally described as a positive or negative orientation toward oneself; an overall evaluation of one’s worth or value . It has been suggested that for most people self-esteem is relatively high in childhood, drops during adolescence, rises gradually throughout adulthood, and then declines in old age. 65% of FCSS program participants indicated having increased their self-esteem from 62% when they first started.

Social problem-solving is the process of problem solving as it occurs in real life . It has been suggested that effective problem-solving is dependent on one’s ability to view a problem positively and use rational problem-solving skills. Problem-solving is ineffective when one takes a negative attitude toward the problem, uses impulsive decision-making techniques or uses avoidance . 75% of FCSS program participants enhanced their social problem-solving skills from 68% when they first started.

Social isolation can be defined as the lack in quantity and quality of social contacts . Social isolation occurs when individuals and groups experience fewer social roles and contacts, and at times, the absence of meaningful relationships with others. Social isolation can occur at any age but some researchers suggest social isolation manifests itself more as we age. A subset of social isolation is social loneliness. Social loneliness refers to how we perceive our level of aloneness or solitude . 48% of FCSS program participants indicated having decreased their social isolation from 53% when they first started.

Mentoring refers to the relationships a teacher or mentor has with a learner or mentee. The positive effects of mentoring are generally thought to be derived from the support and role modeling these relationships offer.

These effects can be categorized in the following subset indicators :

Social and emotional development: 88% of mentors indicated providing quality companionship to

mentees. On the other hand, 79% of mentees indicated receiving quality companionship from their adult mentors.

Cognitive development: 60% of mentors indicated providing a strong sense of security (attachment) to their mentees. 84% of mentees indicated feeling safe and secure with their adult mentors.

Identity development: 51% of mentors indicated increasing the self-esteem of their mentees. 76% of mentees indicated increasing their self-esteem because of their adult mentors.

7

FAMILY WELL-BEING Strong social supports and healthy functioning within families Positive family relationships, positive parenting, positive family communications all contribute to healthy family functioning. Likewise, elements such as quality, density and extent of social networks contribute to family well-being. We used knowledge and skills as indicators for family well-being.

Social knowledge and skills. FCSS supports community programs help people develop an awareness of social needs. Developing an awareness of social needs is the first step in the process of change. Social needs may refer to personal needs (those needs affecting the self) or collective social needs (those affecting the community).

When people have an increased awareness of social needs, and the tools to address those needs, they have higher chances of making positive life-changes. 73% of program participants increased their social knowledge from 58% when they first started. 71% of program participants gained new social skills from 66% when they first started.

COMMUNITY WELL-BEING People experience strong interpersonal connections Strengthening relationships between community organizations, residents, business groups and the local government increase the ability of people to create diverse, inclusive and engaged communities. We used public understanding of and attitudes towards social issues, and social capital as indicators to measure community well-being.

Public Understanding of Social Issues. FCSS funds programs to provide life enriching social information to people. We fund such programs because we believe that evidence-based social knowledge has the power to positively change the attitudes of people. Research suggests that attitudes people consider personally important become instilled, and strongly influence personal and collective behaviours and perceptions. The longer people retain a particular attitude (negative or positive), the more they become resistant to change. In fact, a strong personal attitude about a particular issue or topic becomes a strong weighing factor in decision-making for people . Hence, FCSS attempts to provide evidence-based social information to people at the earliest opportunity to attenuate the negative effects of commonly held social attitudes and beliefs. For example, some of our funded programs provide information sessions on parenting to provide parents with information on alternative discipline techniques. Other examples are mental health information sessions which are designed to reduce public misconceptions about mental diseases, and anti-bullying information sessions which are designed to correct notions about bullies and the bullied. 81% of program participants increased their public understanding of social issues from 69% when they first started. 81% of program participants positively changed their attitudes towards social issues from 69% when they first started.

8

Social Capital. What is social capital? Social capital (defined by Robert Putnam, Harvard University) refers to features of social life such as networks, norms and trust that enables participants to act together more effectively to achieve a shared objective . There are generally two types of social capital: one is called bonding social capital and the other is called bridging social capital. Bonding social capital is simply the nature, depth and quantity of social networks amongst people with shared identity, values and beliefs. Bridging on the other hand refers to the nature, depth and quality of social networks amongst diverse people. Bridging social capital links people to others who may have access to resources otherwise not readily available. 67% of program participants increased their social capital from 60% when they first started.

COLLECTION METHOD AND INTERPRETATION In 2011, 9 out of 11 funded programs used common surveys prescribed by Airdrie FCSS to measure shifts in knowledge, attitudes, values, skills and behaviours. Programs that were deemed longer-term (usually 4 to 6 weeks or more), administered the surveys at the very beginning of the program (pre-test) and again towards the end of the program (post-test). Programs that were delivered as one-time events (i.e. information sessions), were administered as retrospective tests (retro-test).

Programs used a macro-enabled excel spreadsheet to enter their survey data. To ensure privacy, all recorded names were assigned client ID numbers or dummy names prior to programs submitting their results to Airdrie FCSS. We aggregated survey results by indicators. Survey results with sufficient sample size were analyzed for significance using Student’s T-test.

Survey results were further analyzed for Effect Size. Effect size or ES is simply the magnitude of change or size of effect. For example if program participants rated their self-esteem 55% at the beginning of the program and then rated themselves again 60% at the end, what is the effect of the program on participants? Is it a small, medium or large effect? Effect size helps us understand the changes programs make in participants. Effect size is derived from the difference of the pre-test and post-test scores divided by the pooled standard deviation. Effect size could either be positive or negative in value with zero as its neutral point. We use the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) benchmarks to interpret effect size:

<.10 ES Trivial Effect (+/-) 0.11-0.29 small effect (+/-) 0.30-0.49 moderate effect (+/-) 0.50-0.69 large effect (+/-) 0.70 or greater-very large effect (+/-)

9

OVERALL EFFECT SIZES INDIVIDUAL WELL-BEING Self-esteem 0.32 ES Social Problem-Solving 0.60 ES Social Isolation -0.32 ES

FAMILY WELL-BEING Social Knowledge 1.36 ES Social Skills 0.49 ES

COMMUNITY WELL-BEING Social Awareness 0.30 ES Social Attitudes 0.80 ES Social Capital 0.45 ES

10

SELF-ESTEEM Self-esteem is generally described as a positive or negative orientation toward oneself; an overall evaluation of one’s worth or value . It has been suggested that for most people self-esteem is relatively high in childhood, drops during adolescence, rises gradually throughout adulthood, and then declines in old age. However, some researchers have reported that self-esteem for males and females differ in adolescence in that adolescent boys tend to have higher self-esteem than girls . More specifically, it has been suggested that the way girls experience the physical changes related to puberty might be different from boys. Boys generally accept physical changes more positively. On the other hand, girls tend to be more concerned about physical changes and are more sensitive about their self-image. Some speculate society’s higher expectations for girls to look more feminine, and their tendency to mature earlier compared to boys , may be factors.

On the other end of the age continuum, it has been suggested that self-esteem declines in old age. One or a combination of changes in roles (i.e. retirement), relationships (i.e. death of spouse) and physical ailments probably contribute to lower self-esteem in old age.

In a study of the effects of unemployment on adults, those with higher self-esteem had higher resistance to the effects of unemployment compared to those with lower self-esteem. As well, adults with lower self-esteem tended to accept lower paying jobs or would accept jobs below their professional or skill level expectations .

In terms of health outcomes, research indicates a relationship between self-esteem and health outcomes. Researchers suggest chronic self-esteem (negative view of the self that develops over time) predicts subjective reports of health problems. In simpler terms, lower self-esteem tends to lead to poorer health.

Why is it important to improve self-esteem?

We speculate that low self-esteem is one factor that hinders the ability of people to improve their quality of life.

In FCSS, we are interested in learning how relationship building activities such as constructive family dialogues and peer support programs increase self-esteem in people. Programs such as Girls Circle—a peer-to-peer support program for adolescent girls—have proven to improve self-efficacy, communication to adults, self-image and self-respect in adolescent girls . Likewise, there is evidence to suggest activities that help parents and their adolescent support one another improve both of their self-esteem and have lesser unhealthy family conflicts .

11

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (short version) Program participants were asked to complete a shortened version (5-item) of the 10-item Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale . We decided to shorten the scale because we did not want it to be an onerous exercise for participants to complete. There were five items or constructs of self-esteem that we tested with our program participants: selfworth, inner qualities, self-comparison, self-perception and self-respect. Functionally, these five items can be grouped in two—beliefs and emotions.

Beliefs (descriptive self-assessment): • Self-comparison: “I am able to do things as well as most other people.”

• Self-perception: “I take a positive attitude toward myself.”

Emotions (subjective self-assessment): • Self-worth: “I feel that I’m a person of worth.”

• Inner qualities: “I feel that I have a number of good qualities.”

• Self-respect: “I feel I have respect for myself.”

The shortened scale was administered as a pre-test and post-test in one group (see table 1.0) and as a retrospective test in another (see table 2.0). Pre-test and post-test means the surveys were filled out by participants at the beginning of the program and at the end of the program. Retrospective (retro) means participants filled out the surveys at the end of the program. Why did we do two tests? Because of the varying lengths of programs, we decided to use pre-test and post-test with programs which we predicted would have consistent attendance records. Retrospective tests were used with programs which we could not ascertain attendance. As well, because self-esteem is a fairly subjective interpretation of oneself, we wanted to learn if there was a significant difference between the measured gain in self-esteem (measured by the pre-test and post-test) versus how much participants deemed they have gained (measured by the retrospective test).

RESULTS Group A: Pre-test and Post-test Groups 32 participants (14 males and 18 females) from the programs (group A) mentioned below (table 1.0) completed the 4-point likert scale survey at the beginning of the program (pre-test) and at the end of the program (posttest).

TABLE 1.0 GROUP A PROGRAMS SAMPLE Girls Circle-Community Links 18 Men in the Mirror-Community Links 7 Men on a Mission-Community Links 7 Significance Test We averaged all of the pre-test items and compared them to the averaged post-test items. In analyzing the data, we learned: (PRE, M=62.50%, SD=9.41%); (POST, M=65.38%, SD=8.83%), (t(31)=2.86, p=.007 at a .05 alpha level) . What do all of these mean? The analysis tells us that the overall change between the pre/post average (M=mean) scores is highly significant because the probability that we achieved this change by coincidence (p value) is less than .05 (5%) .

12

Self-Comparison

Self-Perception

Self-Worth

Inner Qualities

Self-Respect

13

We further tested each item (self-worth, inner qualities, self-comparison, self-perception and self-respect) for significance. The results indicated all items to be statistically significant with the exception of self-comparison (p = .9).

Power Analysis To know how much of an effect the programs had on participants, we used a different analytical tool called effect size (Cohenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s d). The result of our power analysis indicated moderate program effects for self-worth (0.31), inner qualities (0.36), self-perception (0.35), and self-respect (0.34). There was trivial negative effect for self-comparison (-0.10). The overall self-esteem effect size was 0.32.

Group B: Retrospective Test Group 54 participants (17 males and 37 females) completed the retro (retrospective) test. They were asked at the end of their program participation to recall their experiences or issues prior to their attendance and to compare them to their current conditions. Their test score Group B means are shown below: TABLE 2.0 PROGRAMS Adult/Child Counselling-Community Links Keystone-Boys & Girls Club of Airdrie

GROUP B SAMPLE 39 15

GROUP B: MEAN SCORES 72% 70% 68% 66% 64% 62% 60% self-worth

14

inner qualities

selfcomparison

selfperception

selfrespect

Comparison: Group A (Post-test) and Group B (Retro-Test) We used an independent t-test to compare the total aggregated mean post-test (averaged all items) to the total mean retro-test (averaged all items) scores. The overall difference was insignificant: (POST, M=65.38%, SD=9.92%), (RETRO, M=68.52%, SD=10.04%), (t(87)=1.51, p=.14 at .05 alpha level). Overall, there was no statistical difference between the measured gain in self-esteem (measured by the pre-test and post-test) versus how much participants deemed they have gained (measured by the retrospective test) . However, when we compared each item from the post-test to the retro-test, we found a statistical difference in mean scores for self-perception (p=.02). Participants in group B scored higher for self-perception than group A. COMPARISON: GROUP A AND B 72% 70% 68% 66% 64% 62% 60%

Post-Test Means

Retro-Test Means

DISCUSSION We used programs in group A to measure change in self-esteem. When we analyzed the pre-test and post-test mean scores for Group A: • • • • •

68% increased their self-worth from 65% with a moderate magnitude of change of 0.31 ES. 68% increased their inner qualities from 64%% with a moderate magnitude of change of 0.36 ES. 62% increased their self-perception from 58% with a moderate magnitude of change of 0.35 ES. 64% increased their self-respect from 60%with a moderate magnitude of change of 0.34 ES. There was a statistically insignificant decrease in self-comparison from 65% to 64% with a magnitude of change of -0.10 ES.

Overall, 65% indicated having increased their self-esteem with a moderate magnitude of change of 0.32 ES .

There was a slight but insignificant decrease in self-comparison. Although it may be tempting to attribute this small decrease in self-comparison to the programs’ designs (i.e. Girls Circle’s intent to lower negative body image or Men in the Mirror’s introspective group counselling model), the decrease was statistically insignificant (p =.6).

When we analyzed the mean scores for Group B, their retro-test suggested slightly higher scores for self-worth and inner good qualities, self-comparison and self-respect relative to group A’s scores; however, the graphic pattern for Group B did not differ significantly with Group A’s. One exception however was the score for self-perception. Group B indicated a significantly higher mean score for self-perception than group A. This may be explained by the higher proportion of adolescent participants in group B. 15

SOCIAL PROBLEM-SOLVING A problem simply is a situation that requires a response but the response may not necessarily be obvious. Problems can be simple or complex. A solution is what one does to solve the problem using problem solving processes. Social problem solving is the process of problem solving as it occurs in real life . It has been suggested that effective problem solving is dependent on one’s ability to view a problem positively and use rational problem solving skills. Problem solving is ineffective when one takes a negative attitude toward the problem, uses impulsive decision-making techniques or uses avoidance .

FCSS funds programs that enhance problem solving skills in people. Because it is skills (as opposed to practical knowledge or common sense), problem solving skills are learned through observed behaviours. FCSS programs provide opportunities for people to observe from facilitators about positive ways to respond to problems. It has been suggested that the ability to problem solve increases a person’s personal competence. In addition, problem solving skills help people make conscious and rational decisions about finding and using the most effective solutions .

Problem Solving Skills (PSS) Scale Program participants were asked to complete a 5-item, 5-point likert scale survey called Problem Solving skills (PSS). The items (questions) used in this survey were borrowed from the 25-item composite C-SPSI-R scale developed by Siu and Shek (2005). Four items were selected from C-SPSI-R related to rational problem solving (RPS), and one item was selected related to positive problem solving (PPO).

If you have a problem, • • • • •

RPS1: think about how a problem changed your mood?

RPS2: keep in mind your goal.

RPS3: weigh and compare consequences of each option?

RPS4: reflect back to see if your situation has changed for the better?

PPO1: believe a problem could be solved?

Participants of the Men in the Mirror and Men on a Mission completed the survey as a pre and post-test (see table 3.0). Although a small sample, we selected these participants to complete the survey due to the length of their attendance.

TABLE 3.0 PROGRAMS Men in the Mirror-Community Links Men on a Mission-Community Links

16

SAMPLE 14 14

17

Significance Test We averaged all of the pre-test items and compared them to the averaged post-test items. In analyzing the data, we learned: (PRE, M=68%, SD=13.03%); (POST, M=75.14%, SD=11.33%), (t(13)=2.56, p=.02 at a .05 alpha level) . What do all of these mean? The analysis tells us that the overall change between the pre/post average (M=mean) scores is significant because the probability that we achieved this change by coincidence (p value) is less than .05 (5%) .

Power Analysis To know how much of an effect the programs had on participants, we used a different analyitical tool called effect size (Cohen’s d). The result of our power analysis indicated moderate to very strong program effects for RPS1 (0.93 ES), RPS3 (0.35 ES), RPS4 (0.44 ES), and PPO1 (0.59 ES). There was trivial negative effect for RPS2 (-0.08 ES). The overall problem solving skills effect size was 0.60 ES.

DISCUSSION We used programs listed in table 1.0 to measure changes in problem solving skills. When we analyzed the pretest and post-test mean scores for program participants:

•

•

•

•

•

70% indicated an increase in positive mood change when problem solving from 56% with a very strong magnitude of change of 0.93 ES. 76% indicated using options comparison when tackling a problem from 70% with a moderate magnitude of change of 0.35 ES. 76% indicated using recall techniques to gauge the status of their problems from 69% with a moderate magnitude of change of 0.44 ES. 84% indicated increased confidence in solving problems from 74%with a strong magnitude of change of 0.59 ES. There was a statistically insignificant decrease in goal setting from 71% to 70% with a magnitude of change of -0.08 ES.

Overall, 75% indicated having increased their problem solving skills with a strong magnitude of change of 0.60 ES .

18

SOCIAL ISOLATION One of the goals of FCSS is to help people develop interpersonal and group skills to help them create constructive relationships. It seems simple enough, right? Make good friends and acquaintances, and be rewarded with good relationships. However, the reality of making friends or building a strong social support network for some people is not as easy to achieve. Certain factors such as mobility issues, access to transportation, poor health, being new in town, and interpersonal challenges often contribute to social isolation.

What is social isolation?

Social isolation can be defined as the lack in quantity and quality of social contacts . Social isolation occurs when individuals and groups experience fewer social roles and contacts, and at times, the absence of meaningful relationships with others. Social isolation can occur at any age but some researchers suggest social isolation manifests itself more as we age. A subset of social isolation is social loneliness. Social loneliness refers to how we perceive our level of aloneness or solitude .

Why is it important to reduce social isolation?

We speculate that when we are socially isolated from our families, friends and community, our quality of life deteriorates. Some suggest that socially isolated individuals and groups, particularly in older population, tend to be more prone to illnesses or tend to frequently visit health services. Others believe that loneliness may even be linked to negative effects, including boredom, restlessness, and unhappiness, and to dissatisfaction with social relationships . All in all, there are numerous factors that explain why people feel lonely and become socially isolated from others. Although we do not have the capacity to investigate all of those factors, FCSS strives to reduce social isolation by supporting programs and activities that provide meaningful social connections.

In 2011, we funded the following Programs-Activities that aimed to reduce social isolation in people. (See table 4.0) TABLE 4.0 PROGRAMS Pregnancy and Beyond-Community Links Intake Clients-Community Links Caregiver Support Group-Airdrie Seniors Outreach Program

SAMPLE 3 35 9

19

Measuring Social Isolation So why measure social isolation? There are two types of social isolationâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;one in which an individual consciously decides to be isolated or be alone, and another in which an individual becomes isolated due to life circumstances such as mobility issues, being new in town, language barriers and emotional issues. We are interested in measuring the latter. One way to measure social isolation is by using items from the revised University of California Los Angeles Loneliness Scale . Originally created to assess the subjective feelings of loneliness in people, this measurement tool has been used for various groups to gauge their levels of detachment. The revised scale is a shorter (20-items) version of the original (40-items). Because we were only interested in asking questions related to social isolation, and because we did not want the survey to be an onerous exercise for the program participants to complete, we only selected 2 social loneliness and 2 emotional loneliness related items out of the 20-items scale. r-UCLA Loneliness Scale We wanted to learn whether or not the levels of emotional loneliness and social loneliness in participants decreased as a result of their program participation. Emotional loneliness is based on the absence of an intimate attachment figure, such as might be provided for children by their parents or for adults by a spouse or intimate friend. Emotional loneliness can be categorized as either the lack of either tangible supports (i.e. family or friends that could provide aid such as money or temporary housing if needed) or intangible supports (i.e. advice, shoulder to cry on or companionship). Social loneliness on the other hand occurs when a person lacks a sense of social connectedness or community that may be provided by having a network of friends and associates at work or school (Weiss, 1973, 1974) . Social loneliness can be categorized as either social exclusion which is oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sense of being excluded from the rest of the community or personal isolation which is oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s sense of being isolated from others around them.

The 4-items scale included the following: 1.

2.

3.

4.

Social exclusion: How often do you feel part of a community? (revised from r-UCLA LS (#5).

Personal Isolation: How often do you feel isolated from others? (revised from r-UCLA LS (#14).

Lack of Intangible Supports: How often do you feel there are people who really understand you? (revised from r-UCLA LS: (#16).

Lack of Tangible Supports: How often do you feel that there are people you can turn to for help? (revised from r-UCLA LS: (#20).

Results 47 participants (10 males and 37 females) from the programs-activities mentioned in table 4.0 completed the 5-point likert scale survey at the beginning of the program (Pre-test) and at the end of the program (Post-test).

20

21

Why are the Post-test scores lower than the Pre-test scores?

The r-UCLA Loneliness Scale, measures a person’s degree of loneliness. An easy way to look at the score differences is the higher the post-test scores, the lonelier the participants. In this instrument, some of the scores were reversed so that lower scores were weighted higher and higher scores were weighted lower.

Significance Test We averaged all of the pre-test items and compared them to the averaged post-test items. In analyzing the data, we learned: (PRE, M=52.98%, SD=18.43%); (POST, M=47.66%, SD=16.04%), (t(46)=3.09, p=.003 at a .05 alpha level). What do all of these mean? The analysis tells us that the overall change between the pre/post average (M=mean) scores is highly significant because the probability that we achieved this change by coincidence (p value) is less than .05 (5%) .

We further tested each item (social exclusion, personal isolation, lack of intangible supports, and lack of tangible supports) for significance. The results indicated all items to be statistically significant with the exception of personal isolation (p = .6).

Power Analysis The result of our power analysis indicated small negative effect for social exclusion (-0.27); trivial positive effect for personal isolation (+0.02); moderate negative effect for lack of intangible supports (-0.34); and moderate negative effect for lack of tangible supports (-0.38). The overall social isolation effect size was moderate -0.31.

DISCUSSION When we analyzed the sense of social isolation of participants at the end of the program and compared them to their ratings at the beginning, on average:

• 47% decreased their social exclusion from 53% with a small magnitude of change of -0.27 ES.

• 48% decreased their lack of intangible supports from 55% with moderate magnitude of change of -0.34 ES.

• 38% decreased their lack of tangible supports from 46% with a moderate magnitude of change of -0.38 ES.

• There was a statistically insignificant decrease in participants’ sense of personal isolation from

58.30% to 57.87% with a magnitude of change of +0.02 ES. Overall, 48% decreased their overall sense of social isolation from 53% with a moderate magnitude of change of -0.31 ES. The changes or decreases for participants at the beginning and at the end of the programs were small to moderate for all items of the r-UCLA-LS scale with the exception of item (2), “sense of personal isolation from others”.

It may be possible that this item or question triggered response-shift biases from participants, hence the insignificant changes. Response-shift occurs when participants learn a new concept or idea in a program which later influences their responses. For example, if participants at the beginning of the program interpreted personal isolation, or the sense of being isolated from others, to mean only geographical isolation, and later learn that personal isolation extends to other elements such as not having close or intimate affiliations with friends, families or neighbours, they may indicate higher scores at the beginning of the program thus showing very little change at the end. Another possible explanation for the small changes for item (2) is the characteristic of the item itself. It may be too broad in scope that participants have challenges answering it. In future, we may need to re-visit this item and consider selecting a different item from the r-UCLA LS scale.

22

MENTORING FCSS funds Big Brothers Big Sisters of Calgary and Area (BBBS) to deliver mentoring programs in Airdrie. Currently there are two programs offered by BBBS,

• Mentoring Airdrie is a community-based mentoring program where adult mentors are matched with youth.

• Teen Mentoring is an in-school-based program where high school student mentors are matched

with elementary students.

What is mentoring? Mentoring refers to the relationships a teacher or mentor has with a learner or mentee. The positive effects of mentoring are generally thought to be derived from the support and role modeling these relationships offer. These effects can be categorized as follows :

• •

Social and emotional development Cognitive development and Identity development

Results 52 mentors (adults and teens) and 61 mentees (teens and children) completed a three-point likert scale using BBBS’s mentor and mentee surveys.

TABLE 5.0 PROGRAMS Teen Mentoring-Big Brothers Big Sisters Mentoring in Airdrie-Big Brothers Big Sisters

Mentor 42 10

SAMPLE Mentee 43 18

There were approximately 46 items in these surveys. We selected one indicator for identity development and two indicators for social and emotional development. Our goal is to discover whether or not mentoring in fact indicates changes in social, emotional, cognitive and identity development in young people. Below you will find the matched responses from mentors and mentees for each item. In addition, graphical representations are also included to show overall changes in the following indicators: companionship, attachment and self-esteem.

Social and Emotional Development Mentoring provides mentees opportunities to develop their social and emotional health. One of the ways that mentors provide social supports to their mentees is through companionship. By doing fun and enjoyable activities with mentees, mentors are demonstrating that it is possible to have positive relationships with grown-ups (adults and teens).

COMPANIONSHIP My mentor almost always ask me what I want to do I almost always ask my mentee what they want to do My mentor thinks of fun and interesting things to do I try to think of things to do that my mentee will find fun and interesting

not true

somewhat true 21.80% 8.55% 20.40% 15.95%

mostly true 78.20% 91.45% 79.60% 84.05%

23

Companionship Another indicator of social and emotional development is attachment. According to attachment theory, young people seek comfort and protection from caregivers in times of distress. A sense of security is restored when an attachment figure demonstrates a sensitive response that alleviates the distress . The social relationships built between mentors and mentees provide opportunities for young people to practice forming trusting relationships with exemplary adult and teen role models. Likewise, these trusting relationships provide teachable moments which enable mentors to instill problem solving skills in young people.

ATTACHMENT My mentor listens My mentee listens to my point of view My mentor has good ideas about how to solve a problem My mentee talks about issues he/she is facing My mentor helps me take my mind off things by doing something with me I look forward to the time I spend with my mentee My mentor cares about me My mentee knows I care about him/herâ&#x20AC;Ś

Attachment

24

not true 4% 9%

7.40%

somewhat true 14% 38% 20.00%

mostly true 81% 54% 80.00%

48.55% 14.30%

44.05% 85.70%

20.70% 9.05% 19.00%

79.30% 90.95% 81.00%

Cognitive and Identity Development Role modeling is the primary function of a mentor. Mentoring helps young people create a positive view of the self. Likewise, self-esteem can open opportunities for young people to imagine what is possible. The “possible self ” or “imagined self ” refers to the ideas of young people of what they might become, what they would like to become, and what they fear they would become (Markus and Norris, 1986) . By attaching themselves to adults or teens who display ideal qualities, young people are able to imagine themselves becoming like their mentors or at least open possibilities of what they could become.

SELF-ESTEEM

not true

I feel good about myself My mentee made positive improvements For the most part, I like myself I feel I'm making a difference in my mentee's life

8.55% 1.20% 1.20%

somewhat true 18.80% 52.60% 19.85% 35.50%

mostly true 81.25% 38.80% 78.95% 63.35%

Self-esteem

DISCUSSION 52 mentors (adults and teens) and 61 mentees (teens and children) completed a three-point likert scale using BBBS’s mentor and mentee surveys. The overall changes in the following indicators: Companionship

•

Attachment

88% of mentors indicated providing quality companionship to their mentees involving fun and interesting activities. 79% of mentees indicated receiving quality companionship from their mentors involving fun and interesting activities.

•

Self-esteem

60% of mentors indicated providing a strong sense of security (attachment) to their mentees. 84% of mentees indicated feeling secure with their mentors.

•

51% of mentors believe they increased their mentees self-esteem. 76% of mentees indicated increasing their self-esteem.

25

SOCIAL KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS FCSS supports community programs help people develop an awareness of social needs needed to make positive life changes. Developing an awareness of social needs is the first step in the process of change. Social needs could mean personal social needs (those needs affecting the self) or collective social needs (those affecting the community). The subsequent step in the change process is to provide people with skills or the “how to’s” to address their personal and collective social needs. When people have an increased awareness of social needs, and the tools to address those needs, they have higher chances of making positive life-changes.

The Process of Change What is a change process? A change process is any activity that you initiate to help modify your thinking, feeling or behaviour. Generally people go through change in the following manner albeit not always sequential (adapted from Moore, 2005) : Step 1.

Consciousness raising involves increasing one’s knowledge and awareness about oneself and the

nature of the problem.

Step 2.

Self-reevaluation involves a person giving a thoughtful and emotional reappraisal of his or her

problem and an assessment of what differences a change could lead to.

Step 3.

Self-liberation a process of choosing and committing to an action or belief in a person’s ability to change.

Step 4.

Countering which involves replacing unhealthy behaviours with healthy alternatives.

Step 5.

Environmental triggers which involves possibly changing the environment to avoid high-risk situations.

Step 6.

Helping relationships involve increasing one’s social supports and consists enlisting the help of others.

Step 7.

Big picture thinking and action involve joining an advocacy group to raise awareness of a

particular social need.

Personal Knowledge and Skills Scale (PKS) The Personal Knowledge and Skills survey (PKS) has two parts--knowledge gains and skill gains. 55 participants (10 males and 45 females) completed the knowledge survey, and 40 participants (5 males and 35 females) completed the skills survey at the beginning and at the end of their programs (see Table 6.0). To gauge changes in the knowledge and skills of participants, we asked our FCSS funded programs to use a 5-point likert scale consisting of 3-items knowledge survey, and 3-items skills survey. Program administrators were free to fill-in whatever knowledge or skills they wished to assess. Participants were then asked to indicate their level of knowledge of a particular issue or topic (1-I know nothing, to 5- I’m an expert). A similar rating scale was used for skills.

26

Programs

Knowledge Gains (Group A)

Skill Gains (Group B)

North Rocky View Community LinksBudgeting Basics North Rocky View Community LinksSingle Parents North Rocky View Community LinksBaby Sign langauge North Rocky View Community LinksComfort, Play and Teach North Rocky View Community LinksTriple P-(Primary) North Rocky View Community LinksTriple P-(Parenting Teens) North Rocky View Community LinksAnger Management Airdrie & District Victim Assistance SocietyVictim Advocate Training

budgeting basics

budget plan & money management

Sample 8 3

coping information

BabysignŠ information

BabysignŠ

3

early childhood development

school readiness & parenting skills

11

common behaviour challenges (0-12)

basic parenting skills

4

common behaviour challenges (11-16)

17 core parenting skills

6 5

healthy emotions information e-crime, human trafficking, online sexual exploitation, gender diversity

death notification, stress management, applied suicide intervention

15

GROUP A

Significance Test We conducted a paired t-test to analyze the total mean scores for knowledge gained. In analyzing the data, we learned: (PRE, M=58.42%, SD=12.15%); (POST, M=72.88%, SD=8.88%), (t(54)=7.54, p=.000 at a .05 alpha level). What do all of these mean? The analysis tells us that the difference between the PRE/POST average (M=mean) scores is statistically significant because the p value is less than .05 (5%). The p value indicates whether or not the probability that we achieved change was true or by mere coincidence.

Power Analysis As predicted the effect sizes for our information/awareness programs were very strong. In the effect size benchmarks any value above 0.80 is considered very strong effect. In the social field, effect size larger than 0.80 ES is considered to be very strong. The knowledge gains of program participants was very strong at 1.36 ES. TABLE 6.0 PROGRAMS Knowledge Gains

GROUP A SAMPLE 55

27

1.36ES

Knowledge Gains

GROUP B Significance Test We conducted a paired t-test to analyze the total mean scores for skills gained. In analyzing the data, we learned: (PRE, M=65.50%%, SD=11.08%); (POST, M=71.17%%, SD=12.11%), (t(39)=2.63, p=.01 at a .05 alpha level).

What do all of these mean? The analysis tells us that the difference between the PRE/POST average (M=mean) scores is statistically significance because the p value is less than .05 (5%). The p value indicates whether or not the probability that we achieved change was true or by mere coincidence.

Power Analysis We conducted a power analysis using Cohenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (d) for effect size (ES). The results of the power analysis indicated a moderate positive effect for skill gains of 0.49 ES.

0.49 ES

Skill Gains TABLE 7.0 PROGRAMS Skill Gains

GROUP B SAMPLE 40

DISCUSSION Just as predicted, the changes or effects for knowledge gains were very strong. It is fairly common for knowledge or awareness-based programs to report higher effects.

We used programs in Group A to measure gains in knowledge. When we analyzed the pre-test and post-test mean scores for Group A, 73% indicated having increased their knowledge from 58% with a very strong magnitude of change of 1.36 ES. We used programs in Group B to measure gains in skills. When we analyzed the pretest and post-test mean scores for Group B, 71% of program participants indicated having gained new skills from 66% with a moderate magnitude of change of 0.49 ES. 28

PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF ISSUES FCSS funds programs to provide life enriching social information to people. We fund such programs because we believe that evidence-based social knowledge has the power to positively change the attitudes of people. Research suggests that attitudes people consider personally important become instilled, and strongly influence personal and collective behaviours and perceptions. The longer people retain a particular attitude (negative or positive), the more they become resistant to change. In fact, a strong personal attitude about a particular issue or topic becomes a strong weighing factor in decision-making for people . Hence, FCSS attempts to provide evidence-based social information to people at the earliest opportunity to attenuate the negative effects of commonly held social attitudes and beliefs. For example, some of our funded programs provide information sessions on parenting to provide parents with information on alternative discipline techniques. Other examples are mental health information sessions which are designed to reduce public misconceptions about mental diseases, and anti-bullying information sessions which are designed to correct notions about bullies and the bullied.

To learn more about how people’s knowledge and attitudes change, we asked program participants to complete the Public Understanding of Issues-Community Development (PUI-CD) survey. The survey is used for all types of topics or issues discussed in FCSS public consultations and information sessions. The survey is comprised of 5-items (questions) using a 5-point likert scale. These items measure three domains:

•

•

•

Prior knowledge: the existing knowledge of participants about social issues.

Acquired knowledge: the acquisition of new knowledge. Knowledge gains can be assessed by learning how much people understood the causes and effects of social issues.

Attitude Change: the change in attitude related to acquired information.

We predicted that if people attended programs that provided new social information, they would invariably increase their knowledge and possibly change their attitudes or beliefs about social issues.

Public Understanding of Issues (PUI) Inventory 75 participants (8 males and 67 females) completed the PUI-CD survey.

TABLE 8.0 PROGRAMS Family Resource ServicesCommunity Links Airdrie Seniors Outreach Program-Community Links

TOPICS social marketing

SAMPLE 16

Dementia

5

Depression Nutrition Seniors Services Caring for Seniors

27 4 8 15

29

Significance and Correlation To analyze the data, we conducted a paired T-Test. In addition, we used a simple linear correlation (Pearsonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s r) test to determine the relationship between prior knowledge, acquired knowledge and attitude change. For consistency of measures, we converted the r-values to effect sizes (ES). In analyzing the data, we learned: (prior knowledge, M=69.33%, SD=21.14%); (acquired knowledge, M=80.53%, SD=12.62%); (t(67)=4.0, p=.000 at a .05 alpha level). Likewise, (prior knowledge, M=69.33%, SD 21.14%); (attitude change, M=81.33%, SD=10.44%); (t(67)=4.89, p=.000 at a .05 alpha level).

TABLE 9.0 CORRELATION Prior knowledge Prior Knowledge Acquired Knowledge

Acquired Knowledge Attitude Change Attitude Change

r 0.15 0.37 ns*

ES (d) 0.30 0.80 ns

p .000 .000 ns

*ns (not significant)

0.30 ES

Acquired Knowledge

0.80 ES

Attitude Change

30

DISCUSSION Did program participants learn new information?

• Overall, 81% of participants increased their knowledge of social issues compared to 69% when they first started. However, we found the correlation between prior knowledge of participants and their acquired knowledge to be negligible.

Did program participants achieve attitude change?

• 81% of participants indicated changes in attitudes toward social issues. Overall, there was a positive moderate correlation between prior knowledge and attitude change (0.37 r).

Did program participants’ attitude change because of newly learned information?

• Overall the answer is no. Even when we collapsed the data by age groups, there were no statistically significant relationships between acquired knowledge and attitude changes.

What did we learn?

Our report suggests that people do not necessarily change their attitudes because of newly acquired information nor attend information session programs to acquire new information. For the most part, people attended information sessions to find out whether or not their previously held beliefs or knowledge of certain social issues were true. For example, anecdotally, participants of the caregiver support group for seniors indicated that learning from experts about the myths and facts of dimentia provided them with the validation they needed to not be afraid to care for their senior family members.

31

SOCIAL CAPITAL What is social capital? Social capital (defined by Robert Putnam, Harvard University) refers to features of social life such as networks, norms and trust that enables participants to act together more effectively to achieve a shared objective . There are generally two types of social capital: one is called bonding social capital and the other is called bridging social capital. Bonding social capital is simply the nature, depth and quantity of social networks amongst people with shared identity, values and beliefs. Bridging on the other hand refers to the nature, depth and quality of social networks amongst diverse people. Bridging social capital links people to others who may have access to resources otherwise not readily available.

Volunteerism, a form of social capital Who are these people we call volunteers? The profile of the typical volunteer is familiar. He or she is likely to be above average in education and income. Chances are he or she will be actively involved in church and perhaps even be a parent . Does this sound like you? If it doesn’t, it is probably because the profile of a volunteer today is changing. Generally there are two types of volunteers or volunteer work: the first one is called “formal volunteering”, where time and efforts are given for the betterment of the community such as volunteering at the food bank or your kid’s hockey team. The second kind is called “informal volunteering”. This type of volunteer work is done when people like you and I help others such as a family member who is sick or babysitting for a friend . So as you can imagine, there are many more people who volunteer informally than we know. Nevertheless, in this report, we will be discussing the first type of volunteers or formal volunteers because we are able to collect information about their involvement in FCSS. There are so many reasons why people volunteer. One theory is that people volunteer because they want to learn new skills, to develop the self, to enhance self-esteem, to prepare for a career, to express personal values and community commitment. Others volunteer because they believe in the importance of civic participation and charitable responsibility. Some volunteer because they identify with a particular cause or issue. Finally there are those who volunteer because it is part of their nature to help others . Whatever the reason, most of us would agree that volunteering is good for community. Although we know a lot about the benefits of volunteers for our community, we know very little about how the act of volunteering benefits those who volunteer.

Because we know so little about the benefits of volunteering on volunteers, FCSS is interested in learning if volunteers bond with one another—that is, work together to achieve a common objective (i.e. collective planning of a community event or activity), and bridge or expand their network of people to learn new skills and acquire different resources.

32

In this report, we used social capital indicators : Indicators:

•

•

•

•

•

Size of Network (SN): How many people volunteers know?

Network Density (NDe): How well do volunteers connect with one another?

Network Frequency (NF): How often do volunteers connect with one another?

Network Intensity (NI): How well do volunteers know each other on a person-to-person basis?

Network Diversity (NDi): How many people do volunteers know who have different interest, skills and hobbies than theirs?

Network intensity is a function of strength in relationship. It measures the level of trust and emotional investment amongst volunteers. Even though the effect change is small, it is important for volunteers to form social ties. The presence of social ties increases the likelihood of volunteers working together to achieve a common goal and develop sense of trust and belonging.

Network frequency refers to the number and duration of contacts among volunteers. It measures sociability among volunteers. The more they have contact with one another; the higher chances they have of creating a common identity. Likewise, it increases the likelihood of volunteers to share both tangible (i.e. lend a lawnmower) and intangible (i.e. provide emotional advice/assistance) resources.

Network Density is the difference between connecting with one or two volunteers versus connecting with three or more. The theory being, the more intense connections you have the denser your network becomes. A dense network will increase the number of resources that are shared among volunteers. In our case, volunteers have strong network density. It means if ever a volunteer needs support (personal or otherwise), they have a dense support network to draw from.

Network size refers to the number of people within the volunteer program that volunteers know. The larger the network size, the less volunteers are going to feel social isolation. In our analysis, there was a small change in network size for volunteers.

Network diversity creates bridging relationships among volunteers. Network diversity is about knowing people who have different skills, hobbies and interest than you. In our case, volunteers indicated a strong change in their network diversity. In a volunteer setting, having a strong diverse network of volunteers increases the chances of the program they are supporting to become successful. Volunteers with different skill sets will open up innovative solutions to community issues.

Volunteer Social Inclusion (V-SI) Survey Each indicator mentioned above consisted of two items or questions for a total of 10 items. The 10-item, 5-point likert scale Volunteer Social Inclusion survey (V-SI) was completed by 24 volunteers as a pre and post-test. 55 volunteers completed their preliminary test only.

33

Results Group A: Preliminary Test Group 18 male and 37 female volunteers completed the preliminary Volunteer Social Inclusion survey.

Group A is comprised of volunteers from Boys and Girls Club of Airdrie (BGCA) and Airdrie Meals On Wheels (MOW). BGCA completed the full 10-item survey while MOW completed a shorter 6-item version. Because MOW is a fairly homogenous volunteer group, we excluded items related to network diversity and some items related to network size.

In analyzing the preliminary results of group A, the mean scores of MOW and BGCA were fairly close to each other with the exception of network densityâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;BGCA scored higher. Until group A completes the post-test, we are unable to make any conclusive remarks on this difference.

TABLE 10.0 PROGRAMS Volunteer Program-Meals On Wheels Volunteer Program-Boys and Girls Club

GROUP A SAMPLE 24 31

GROUP A: PRELIMINARY TEST

80 70 60

BGCA Volunteers

50 MOW Volunteers

40 30 20 10 0

34

network intensity

network frequency

network density

network size

network diversity

Pre and Post-Test Group 7 male and 17 female volunteers completed the Volunteer Social Inclusion survey as pre and post-test.

TABLE 11.0 PROGRAMS Volunteer Program-Community Links Volunteer Program-Airdrie Food Bank

GROUP B SAMPLE 7 17

Significance Test We conducted a paired t-test to analyze the scores. In analyzing the data, we learned: (PRE, M=59.75%, SD=17.30%); (POST, M=67.17%, SD=15.92%), (t(23)=2.07, p=.07 at a .05 alpha level). What do all of these mean? The analysis tells us that the difference between the PRE/POST average (M=mean) scores is approaching significance because the p value is more than .05 (5%) but less than .10 (10%).

Power Analysis There were small effects for network intensity (0.22 ES) and network size (0.26 ES). There was a moderate effect for network frequency (0.33 ES) and strong effects for network density (0.52 ES) and network diversity (0.50 ES).

35

0.22 ES

Network Frequency

0.33 ES

Network Frequency

0.53 ES

Network Density

0.26 ES

Network Size

0.50 ES

Network Diversity 36

DISCUSSIONS We used programs in group B to measure social capital in volunteers. When we analyzed the pre-test and posttest mean scores for Group B:

• 60% of volunteers increased their network intensity from 55% with a small magnitude of change

of 0.22 ES.

• 61% of volunteers increased their network frequency from 55% with a moderate magnitude of

change of 0.33 ES.

• 63% of volunteers increased their network density from 50% with a strong magnitude of change

of 0.53 ES.

• 75% of volunteers increased their network size from 69% with a small magnitude of change of 0.26 ES.

• 78% of volunteers increased their network diversity from 70% with a strong magnitude of change

of 0.50 ES. Overall, 67% indicated having increased their social capital from 60% with a moderate magnitude of change of 0.45 ES .

37

VOLUNTEER ENGAGEMENT In a survey published by the National Survey of Nonprofit and Voluntary Organizations (2006), over half of organizations reported problems recruiting board members (56%) and non-board volunteers (57%). In both cases, 13% of organizations said that the problem is serious. Just under half (49%) of organizations reported problems retaining volunteers; 9% said that the problem is serious. In addition, smaller organizations or organizations with small number of volunteers (less than 10) tend to have more challenges recruiting and retaining volunteers. Particularly, long-term commitment type of volunteer roles and volunteer board members seem to be very difficult to attract and retain .

Volunteer Airdrie is a community operated volunteer organization serving the people of Airdrie and surrounding area. Volunteer Airdrie is a virtual organization. Most of their services are delivered online, through telephone and online conversations. To date, Volunteer Airdrie is the only program funded by FCSS that uses a purely community development model operating online. Their primary goal is to strengthen our community through volunteerism. They deliver this goal through the following services: • • • • • •

Online listing of volunteer opportunities (database); Volunteer Management Support Group; Informational Outreach (provision of information and resources to community groups); ICANN online distance learning; Volunteer Recognition; Community Awareness –(print, online & trade/community fairs).

Volunteer Airdrie surveyed 16 of their member organizations to gauge the effectiveness of their services. Using an open-ended telephone survey questionnaire, member organizations provided Volunteer Airdrie with information about: • • •

what was and was not working for them in terms of Volunteer Airdrie services; their own organizational challenges regarding volunteer recruitment and retention; and opportunities to enhance their volunteer programs.

50 Volunteer Organization’s Challenges FREQUENCY OF RESPONSES

40 30 20 10 0

38

time organizational commitment fit

other

lack of awareness

Results Challenges We coded the responses as follows: Time commitment, Organizational fit, lack of network, process delays, lack of awareness.

Time commitment refers to organizations’ difficulties in acquiring long-term and short-term commitment volunteers. Although some have mentioned challenges in recruiting long-term volunteers, most frequently organizations indicated having challenges finding short-term commitment volunteers. Short-term commitment volunteers or one-time volunteers are those that volunteer their time for one-time events. Examples would be fundraisers, canvassers, event workers etc.

Organizational fit refers to organizations’ requirements of the types of volunteers they need. Apart from time commitment, organizations are looking for volunteers with specific skills suitable for their volunteer programs.

Examples would be mentoring skills, community engagement skills fundraising skills etc. In addition, some organizations are looking for volunteers from specific demographic groups, adults, youth, parents etc.

Lack of Awareness refers organizations’ challenges recruiting volunteers. Organizations indicated residents generally do not know about their volunteer programs.

Other challenges provided by organizations include the delays brought on by the new police clearance and reduction in the numbers of volunteers over the summer.

Opportunities We coded the responses as follows: Training, Network, Marketing and Other.

Volunteer Organization’s Opportunities FREQUENCY OF RESPONSES

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

training

networking

other

marketing

39

DISCUSSIONS Residents searching for volunteer opportunities and organizations searching for volunteers found the Volunteer Airdrie database difficult to use. To address this issue, Volunteer Airdrie removed the search feature of their online database and provide a scrollable listing of volunteer opportunities. This new approach also makes it easier for member organizations to post volunteer opportunities since they send them directly to the Volunteer Airdrieâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Coordinator who posts on their behalf.

Because Volunteer Airdrie operates mainly in the virtual world, they have learned about the importance of keeping a consistent and professional look to their website. Likewise, they have learned that for their website to be a â&#x20AC;&#x153;livingâ&#x20AC;? service, they needed to ensure it contains up-to-date information relevant to the ever changing needs of volunteers and organizations.

40

REFERENCES Addison C.C., Campbell-Jenkins B.W., Sarpong D.F., Kibler J., Singh M., Dubbert P., Wilson G., Payne T., Taylor H. Psychometric Evaluation of a Coping Strategies Inventory Short-Form (CSI-SF) in the Jackson Heart Study Cohort. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2007; 4(4):289-295.

Andrews, A. B., Guadalupe, J. L., & Bolden, E. (2003). Faith, hope and mutual support: Paths to empowerment as perceived by women in poverty. Journal of Social Work Research & Evaluation, 4(1), 5-18.

Ascoli, Ugo; Cnaan, Ram A. Volunteering for Human Service Provisions: Lessons from Italy and the U.S.A. Social Indicators Research Volume 40, Number 3 (1997), 299-327, DOI: 10.1023/A:1006876528133 Barge, Kevin J. Hope, Communication, and Community Building. Southern Communication Journal, Vol 69, No. 1, Fall 2003, pp 63-81.

Baumeister, R. F., Bushman, B. J., & Campbell, W. K. (2000). Self-esteem, narcissism, and aggression: Does violence result from low self-esteem or from threatened egotism? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(1), 26-29.

Bekker, Marie H.J.; van Assen, Marcel A.L.M. A Short Form of the Autonomy Scale: Properties of the Autonomy–Connectedness Scale (ACS–30), JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT, 86(1) (2006), pp 51–60 Bekkers, R. (2005), Participation in Voluntary Associations: Relations with Resources, Personality, and Political Values. Political Psychology, 26: 439–454. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00425.x Benard, Bonnie. Fostering Resiliency in Kids: Protective Factors in the Family, School and Community. August 1991. (unpublished) Blanchard-Fields, F. (2007). Everyday Problem Solving and Emotion: An Adult Developmental Perspective.

Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(1), 26-31. Retrieved from http://cdp.sagepub.com/lookup/ doi/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00469.x Bloomfield, Linda. Testing a parenting programme evaluation tool as a pre and post course measure of parenting self-efficacy. Centre for Research in Primary and Community Care University of Hertfordshire. (unplublished) Boninger, David S.; Krosnick, Jon A.; Berent, Matthew K. Origins of attitude importance: Self-interest, social identification, and value relevance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 68(1), Jan 1995, 61-80. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.68.1.61

41

Bruns, Deborah A.; King, Terri; Stateler, Teena. The parenting class ... has helped me to better realize the parent I want to be": The HOPE Program for Female Offenders and Their Children. NHSA Dialog Vol. 6, Iss. 2, 2003, pp289-300.

Chan, K. S., Li, H. C. W., Chan, S. W.-c. and Lopez, V. (2011), Herth Hope Index: psychometric testing of the Chinese version. Journal of Advanced Nursing. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05887.x Chang, Edward C. (Ed); D'Zurilla, Thomas J. (Ed); Sanna, Lawrence J. (Ed), (2004). Social problem solving: Theory, research, and training., (pp. 171-191). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association, xvi, 276 pp.

Clark, Jennifer; Barber, Bonnie L. Adolescents in Postdivorce and Always-Married Families: Self-Esteem and Perceptions of Fatherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Interest. Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 56, No. 3 (Aug., 1994), pp. 608-614.

Cockrum, Janet; White, Priscilla. Influences on the Life Satisfaction of Never-Married Men and Women. Family Relations, vol 34 no 4, (Oct 1985), pp 551-56.

Crocker, Jennifer; Wolfe, Connie T. Contingencies of self-worth. Psychological Review, Vol 108(3), Jul 2001, 593623. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.108.3.593 Day, Kathleen M.; Devlin , Rose Anne. The Payoff to Work without Pay: Volunteer Work as an Investment in Human Capital. The Canadian Journal of Economics / Revue canadienne d'Economique Vol. 31, No. 5 (Nov., 1998), pp. 1179-1191 Demo, David H.; Small, Stephen A.; Savin-Williams, Ritch C. Family Relations and the Self-Esteem of Adolescents and Their Parents. Journal of Marriage and Family Vol. 49, No. 4 (Nov., 1987), pp. 705-715.

Dimitrov, Dimiter M.; Rumrill, Phillip, D. Jr. Pretest-posttest designs and measurement of change. Works 20 (2003), pp 159-165 DiTommaso, E., Brannen, C., & Best, L. A. (2004). Measurement and Validity Characteristics of the Short Version of the Social and Emotional Loneliness Scale for Adults. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(1), 99-119. Retrieved from http://www.ingentaselect.com/rpsv/cgi-bin/cgi?ini=xref&body=linker&reqdoi=10.1177/0013164403258450 Doherty, Gillian. The Mentoring Pairs for Child Care Projects. MPCC Final Outcome Report 2011.

42

Drahos, Peter. Trading Public Hope. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science March 2004 vol. 592 no. 1 18-38. doi: 10.1177/0002716203261614 Forrest, Ray; Kearns, Ade. Social Cohesion, Social Capital and the Neighbourhood. Urban Studies November 2001 vol. 38 no. 12 (2001), pp 2125-2143.

Gecas, V., & Seff, M. A. (1989). social class, occupational conditions, and self-esteem. Sociological Perspectives, 32(3), 353-364. University of California Press. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1389122 Hall, Madelyn; Havens, Betty. The Effect of Social Isolation And Loneliness on the Health of Older Women. Aging in Manitoba Study, Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Manitoba. http://www.pwhce. ca/effectSocialIsolation.htm Hamilton, Stephen F.; Fenzel, Mickey L. The Impact of Volunteer Experience on Adolescent Social Development: Evidence of Program Effects. Journal of Adolescent Research SPRING 1988 vol. 3 no. 1 65-80. doi: 10.1177/074355488831006 Hegeman, E. (1982), The Anatomy of Loneliness. Joseph Hartog, J. Ralph Audy, and Yehudi Cohen, eds. Medical Anthropology Newsletter, 13: 20–21. doi: 10.1525/maq.1982.13.3.02a00190 Herth, K. (1996), Hope from the perspective of homeless families. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 24: 743–753. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1996.25113.x Herth, K. (1998), Hope as seen through the eyes of homeless children. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 28: 1053– 1062. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00813.x Hill , Laura G. Revisiting the Retrospective Pretest. American Journal of Evaluation (December 2005) vol. 26 no.

4, pp 501-517. doi: 10.1177/1098214005281356 Honigsfeld, Andrea; Dunn, Rita. High School Male and Female Learning-Style Similarities and Differences in Diverse Nations. Journal of Educational Research, v96 n4 p195-206 Mar-Apr 2003, pp195-206.

Irvine, Angela; Roa, Jessica. Title II Evaluation: Gender Specific Programs in Sonoma and Santa Cruz Counties (2007-2010). http://www.girlscircle.com/docs/Final_Report_CAS.pdf

43

Janoski, T., Musick, M., & Wilson, J. (1998). Being volunteered? The impact of social participation and pro-social attitudes on volunteering. Sociological Forum, 13(3), 495-519. Springer. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/ stable/684699 Karcher, M. J., Kuperminc, G. P., Portwood, S. G., Sipe, C. L. and Taylor, A. S. (2006), Mentoring programs: A framework to inform program development, research, and evaluation. J. Community Psychol., 34: 709–725. doi: 10.1002/jcop.20125 Keefe, Janice; Andrew, Melissa; Fancey, Pamela; Hall, Madelyn. A Profile of Social Isolation in Canada. Centre on Aging Nova Scotia, May 2006. pp 1-30.

Kelch, Benjamin P.; Demmitt, Alan. Incorporating the Stages of Change Model in Solution Focused Brief Therapy With Non-Substance Abusing Families: A Novel and Integrative Approach. The Family Journal 2010 18: 184 originally published online 10 March 2010, 184-188. DOI: 10.1177/1066480710364325 Lenney, Ellen (1981). What's Fine for the Gander Isn't Always Good for the Goose: Sex Differences in Self-Confidence as a Function of Ability Area and Comparison with Others. Sex Roles, Vol. 7, No. 9, 1981, pp 905-924.

Mahaffy, Kimberly A. Girls’ Low Self-Esteem How Is It Related to Later Socioeconomic Achievements? Gender & Society June 2004 vol. 18 no. 3,pp 309-327. doi: 10.1177/0891243204263988 Marcotte, D., Fortin, L., Potvin, P., & Papillon, M. (2002). Gender differences in depressive symptoms during adolescence: Role of gender-typed characteristics, self-esteem, body image, stressful life events, and pubertal status. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 10(1), 29-42. Retrieved from http://ebx.sagepub.com/cgi/ doi/10.1177/106342660201000104 Moore, M. J., (2005 October) The Transtheoretical Model of the Stages of Change and the Phases of Transformative Learning : Comparing Two Theories of Transformational Change. 3 (4), 394-415. doi:10.1177/1541344605279386 Nahapiet, Janine; Ghoshal, Sumantra. Social Capital, Intellectual Capital, and the Organizational Advantage. The Academy of Management Review Vol. 23, No. 2 (Apr., 1998), pp. 242-266 National Survey of Student Engagement. Contextualizing NSSE Effect Sizes: Empirical Analysis and Interpretation of Benchmark Comparisons. www.nsse.iub.edu Parra, G. R., DuBois, D. L., Neville, H. A., Pugh-Lilly, A. O. and Povinelli, N. (2002), Mentoring relationships for youth: Investigation of a process-oriented model. J. Community Psychol., 30: 367–388. doi: 10.1002/jcop.10016 Parra, Gilbert R.; DuBois, David L.; Neville, Helen A.; Pugh-Lilly, Aalece O. mentoring relationships for youth: investigation of a process-oriented model. journal of community psychology, Vol. 30, No. 4, (2002), pp 367–388.

Payzant, Daniel S. A Mixed Methods Examination of Strengths-Based Prevention Training in a Youth Recreation Program (2011). Open Access Theses and Dissertations from the College of Education and Human Sciences.

Paper 105. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cehsdiss/105

44

Peplau , L. A.; Goldston, S. (Eds.). Preventing the harmful consequences of severe and l o n e l i n pre s s . (pp.

13-46). U.S. Government P r i n t i n g Office, 1984. DDH Publication No. (ADM) 84-1312.

Peplau, Letitia Ann, Perlman, Daniel. Loneliness. Encyclopedia of Mental Health. Academic Press (1998), pp 571-581.

Piliavin, Jane A.; Siegl, Erica. Health Benefits of Volunteering in the Wisconsin Longitudinal Study. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. Vol. 48, No. 4 (Dec., 2007), pp. 450-464.

Ponzetti, Jr., James J. Loneliness among College Students. Family Relations, Vol. 39, No. 3 (Jul., 1990), pp. 336340.

Putnam, Robert D. Tuning In, Tuning Out: The Strange Disappearance of Social Capital in America. Political Science and Politics, Vol 28, No 4, (Dec. 1995), pp 664-683.

Rhodes, J. E., Spencer, R., Keller, T. E., Liang, B. and Noam, G. (2006), A model for the influence of mentoring relationships on youth development. J. Community Psychol., 34: 691â&#x20AC;&#x201C;707. doi: 10.1002/jcop.20124.

Robins, Richard W.; Trzesniewski, Kali H. Self-Esteem Development Across the Lifespan. Current Directions in Psychological Science June 2005 vol. 14 no. 3, pp 158-162. doi: 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00353.x Ron, Pnina. Depression, Hopelessness, and Suicidal Ideation Among the Elderly. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, Vol. 43, Iss. 2-3, 2004, pp. 97-115 Russell, Dan; Peplau, Letitia A.; Cutrona, Carolyn E. The revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: Concurrent and discriminant validity evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 39(3), Sep 1980, 472-480. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.39.3.472 Russell, David. Living Arrangements, Social Integration, and Loneliness in Later Life: The Case of Physical Disability. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, Vol. 50, No. 4 (Dec., 2009), pp. 460-475.

Sarason, Irwin G. (ed); Sarason, Barbara R.(ed); Peplau, Letitia A. Loneliness Research: Basic Concepts and Findings. Social Support: Theory, Research and ApplicationsMartinus Nijhoff. 1985. pp. 270-286.

Shamir, B. (1986). Self-Esteem and the Psychological Impact of Unemployment. Social Psychology Quarterly, 49(1), 61-72. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2786857?origin=crossref

45

Small, S. and Memmo, M. (2004), Contemporary Models of Youth Development and Problem Prevention: Toward an Integration of Terms, Concepts, and Models. Family Relations, 53: 3–11. doi: 10.1111/j.17413729.2004.00002.x Smith, Richard A. Measuring neighborhood cohesion: A review and some suggestions. Human Ecology Volume 3, Number 3 (1975), 143-160, DOI: 10.1007/BF01531638 Stanley, D. (2003). What Do We Know about Social Cohesion: The Research Perspective of the Federal Government’s Social Cohesion Research Network. Canadian Journal of Sociology Cahiers canadiens de sociologie, 28(1), 5. Canadian Journal of Sociology. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3341872?origin=crossref Starrett, R. A., Bresler, C., Decker, J. T., Walters, G. T. and Rogers, D. (1990), The role of environmental awareness and support networks in Hispanic elderly persons' use of formal social services. J. Community Psychol., 18: 218–227. doi: 10.1002/1520-6629(199007)18:3<218::AID-JCOP2290180305>3.0.CO;2-Y Stinson, Danu Anthony; Logel, Christine; Zanna, Mark P.; Holmes, John G.; Cameron, Jessica J.; Wood, Joanne V.; Spencer, Steven J. The cost of lower self-esteem: Testing a self- and social-bonds model of health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 94(3), Mar 2008, 412-428. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.94.3.412 Sui, Andrew M. H.; Shek, Daniel T. L. Relations between Social Problem Solving and Indicators of Interpersonal and Family Well-Being among Chinese Adolescents in Hong Kong. Social Indicators Research. Vol. 71, No. 1/3, Quality of Life in the Global Context: A Chinese Response (Mar., 2005), pp. 517-539 Tanaka, E., Sakamoto, S., Ono, Y., Fujihara, S. and Kitamura, T. (1996), Hopelessness in a community population in Japan. J. Clin. Psychol., 52: 609–615. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-4679(199611)52:6<609::AID-JCLP2>3.0.CO;2-F Thoits, Peggy A.; Hewitt Lyndi N. Volunteer Work and Well-Being. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. Vol. 42, No. 2 (Jun., 2001), pp. 115-131.

Thomopoulou, Ioanna; Thomopoulou, Dimitra; Koutsouki, Dimitra. Biology of Exercise, Vol. 6.2 (2010), pp 1428. D.O.I: http:doi.org/10.4127/jbe.2010.0037 Tobin, D. L., Holroyd, K. A., Reynolds, R. V., & Wigal, J. K. (1989). The hierarchical factor structure of the coping strategies inventory. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 13(4), 343-361. Retrieved from http://www.springerlink. com/index/10.1007/BF01173478 Trzesniewski, Kali H.; Donnellan, M. Brent; Moffitt, Terrie E.; Robins, Richard W.; Poulton, Richie; Caspi, Avshalom. Low self-esteem during adolescence predicts poor health, criminal behavior, and limited economic prospects during adulthood. Developmental Psychology, Vol 42(2), Mar 2006, 381-390. doi: 10.1037/00121649.42.2.381

2

Vaux, Alan. Social and Emotional Loneliness: The Role of Social and Personal Characteristics. Personal and Social Psychology Bulletin (December 1988) vol. 14 no. 4, pp 722-734. doi: 10.1177/0146167288144007 Venkatesh, Viswanath; Morris, Michael G. Why Don't Men Ever Stop to Ask for Directions? Gender, Social Influence, and Their Role in Technology Acceptance and Usage Behavior. MIS Quarterly Vol. 24, No. 1 (Mar., 2000), pp. 115-139.

Wayment, Heidi A.; Taylor, Shelley E. Self-Evaluation Processes: Motives, Information Use, and Self-Esteem.

Journal of Personality 63:4, December 1995, pp 730-756.

Wilson, John; Musick; Marc. The effects of Volunteering on the Volunteer. Law and ContemporaryProblems, Vol. 62, No. 4, Amateurs in Public Service: Volunteering, Service-Learning, and Community Services (Autumn, 1999), pp. 141-168.

Yarcheski, Adela; Scoloveno, Mary Ann; Mahon, Noreen E. Social support and well-being in adolescents: The mediating role of hopefulness. Nursing Research, Vol 43(5), Sep-Oct 1994, 288-292. doi: 10.1097/00006199199409000-00006

2