Demographic Differences of 4-H Volunteers, Agents, and State Volunteerism Specialists: Implications for Volunteer Administration

Introduction & Review of Literature

Little research has been conducted that focuses on the demographics of 4-H volunteers. Volunteers, however, have been central to the success of the 4-H program since its beginning (Wessel & Wessel, 1982). Volunteers are an essential part of Extension and extend 4-H programs to vital areas of counties that might not otherwise be served (Steele, 1994). They continue to be vital in an age of issues programming and National Initiatives for the Cooperative Extension Service (Patton, 1990). Extension professionals make extensive use of volunteers by asking them to serve in a variety of roles and delegating to them responsibility for projects, programs, and activities. Volunteers provide direct service by performing both clerical and administrative tasks and contributing their public relations skills, fund-raising, and grant writing talents and often serving as policy makers, board members, and advisors (Murk & Stephan, 1990).

Volunteer administration is a rapidly growing field.

Volunteer administrators will need to strategically position themselves for dynamic audiences and clientele, as well as a changing volunteer base, in order to serve the needs of society in the next century. Innovative programs should be implemented which will anticipate and meet these evolving needs. Therefore, the tools and technologies which volunteer administrators use to manage and develop programs for these changing audiences will need to evolve for the Third Millennium (Culp, Deppe, Castillo, & Wells, 1998).

4-H Youth Development professionals should consider the most opportune ways to direct volunteer programs in order to maximize volunteer contributions to the organization. Agents work effectively with volunteers to fulfill the goals of the 4- Youth Development program. Nearly 625,000 volunteers deliver 4-H Youth Development programs to American youth annually (National 4-H Headquarters, 2002.) In order to effectively engage volunteers, agents must first understand the characteristics that define and identify who they are.

Becoming familiar with social background characteristics and their relationship to volunteer participation provides information on who is most likely to volunteer (Rohs, 1986). Those most ready to volunteer typically have a history of volunteering or serving in some unpaid position during their youth. Youth who engage in volunteer service continue to help their communities as they age and are more likely to see service as an obligation of all people (Wade, 1997). For them, volunteering has become a way of life. Others learn to volunteer through early experiences in school, sports clubs, church groups, 4-H, and Scouts (Zeutschel & Hansel, 1989).

A study by Culp (1996) corroborated earlier studies by Banning (1970), Clark and Skelton (1950), Denmark (1971), Enders and Fanslow (1981), Parrott (1977), and Zeutschel and Hansel (1989). These studies indicated that 4-H volunteers were primarily married women with children and homemakers with children in school. The profile of the "typical" 4-H volunteer was a 40-to-43-year-old married female with two to three children, nearly all of whom were 4-H participants.

Objectives of the Study

The purpose of the study reported here was to:

• Demographically describe 4-H Youth Development volunteers, agents, and state volunteerism specialists;
• Determine what discrepancies exist between them;
• Determine if volunteers are demographically similar over time; and
• Identify implications for volunteer administration.

Procedures

Research Design & Subject Selection

The exploratory survey research is descriptive and correlational in nature and was conducted utilizing mail questionnaires as outlined by Dillman (1978). The target populations for the census were identified as adult volunteers who interact directly with youth in the 4-H Youth Development (YD) program, 4-H YD agents, and state 4-H YD volunteerism specialists in the United States. A random sample of 100 adult volunteers who served in direct-contact roles with youth was identified in each state. Field staff members who had been employed 6 months or more were identified to participate in each of the target states. A census survey was employed for the state volunteerism specialists.

Three states were purposefully selected from each of the four Extension Regions (North East, South, North Central, and West), with an additional state selected from the South and North Central, to more accurately represent the 4-H member and adult volunteer population distribution in the United States. Twelve of the 14 states originally selected completed the study.

Instrumentation, Data Collection and Analysis

The instrument utilized in the study was developed to identify the demographic characteristics of volunteers, agents, and state volunteerism specialists. Face validity was established by a panel of experts drawn from 4-H volunteers, agents, specialists, and experts in the field of volunteerism and research methodology who were not involved in the study.

The participants were sent a mailed questionnaire as outlined by Dillman (1978). The questionnaire contained one qualitative and two quantitative components. The quantitative components focused on the characteristics of the respondent's volunteer program, including number of 4-H members, number of youth and adult volunteers, middle managers, and the number of agents working with 4-H, as well as the respondent's demographic characteristics.

Questionnaires and a cover letter inviting participation in the study were distributed electronically to the specialists and agents. Both groups were directed to access the appropriate version of the questionnaire via the University of Kentucky 4-H Youth Development Web site. Responses were transferred into a data set located at Purdue University. A reminder message was electronically mailed to the participants 3 weeks after the initial mailing. Because the data that were submitted to the Purdue database were anonymous, no attempt at non-respondent follow-up was made.

Questionnaires were disseminated to the volunteer samples in each state via US Mail, along with a cover letter and a self-addressed, stamped return envelope. Reminder postcards were mailed to non-respondents 3 weeks after the initial mailing, asking for a response within 2 weeks. As noted in Table 1, the following response rates were achieved: 38.38% for volunteers, 41.12% for agents, and 84% for specialists, for a combined rate of 40.54%. Data from the quantitative questions were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-square and analysis of variance utilizing SAS (SAS, 2002) to determine differences between the three populations. An alpha level of .05 was set a priori.

Results and Discussion

The figures in Table 2 illustrate that agents are significantly younger than both volunteers and specialists. In many cultures, youth are taught to show respect and to defer to their elders. Younger agents may be uncomfortable instructing, supervising, challenging, or disagreeing with volunteers who are more experienced and mature.

Agents also reported serving significantly fewer years in a volunteer role as compared to both volunteers and specialists. Agents therefore may be less comfortable in supervising volunteers and may learn about volunteer administration through "on-the-job" training. Specialists indicated having served a similar number of years in county-based Extension agent/educator roles, as have agents.

The number of adult volunteers with whom volunteers, agents, and specialists work as well as the number of youth volunteers were found to be significantly different. Because volunteers reported working with an average of 10 other volunteers, agents and specialists should focus on providing educational support to volunteers in recruitment, interpersonal skills, delegation, etc. Volunteers reported serving more volunteer organizations than either agents or specialists (Table 2).

Table 3 illustrates that the highest educational level achieved was significantly different (p = .0001) for the three groups. Additionally, a linear relationship between education and occupation was found. The highest educational level reported by most volunteers was either a high school diploma or a Bachelor's degree (30% for each). However, three-quarters of agents reported holding a Master's degree, with the majority of specialists also holding a Master's degree, and over one-third also holding a doctorate.

Similar to volunteers, education was most frequently identified by agents and specialists as their most frequently earned college major. Two important differences, however, should be noted. Ninety-five percent of specialists and 75.63% of agents have earned a master's degree, whereas only 13.76% of volunteers have a master's. Additionally, 19.62% of volunteers reported an education major, compared with 29.78% for agents and 51.22% for specialists. Volunteers, therefore, have greater diversity in their educational degrees than do either agents or specialists. This wider variety of educational background should be used to advantage by agents when recruiting individuals to share learning experiences with young people in our programs. Because today's 4-H volunteers are more highly educated than those from earlier studies, agents should begin to rethink, identify, and develop new level volunteer roles that utilize the expertise, talents, and skills of a more highly educated cadre of volunteers.

Historically, more women than men have served in volunteer roles. Women have tended to be more comfortable serving in nurturing roles, and men have traditionally been viewed as breadwinners who are too busy to serve as volunteers (Blackman, 1999). However, more men are needed to serve as role models in youth development. A comparison of gender differences among volunteers, agents, and specialists (Table 4) indicates that the total percentage of females serving the 4-H program outnumbers the percentage of males. Extension staff should carefully assess gender balance of their volunteers.

4-H volunteers contribute their time and energy to other organizations in addition to 4-H. Table 5 shows that over 85% of 4-H volunteers are also actively serving other organizations. The majority of volunteers serve one or two other organizations. Thus, agents should not be reluctant to identify and recruit potential volunteers from those who are already involved in service to other organizations.

Highly significant differences (p < .0001) were found among volunteers, agents, and specialists on the number of organizations for which they volunteered (Table 6). Less than half as many agents and specialists served other organizations, as compared to volunteers. Moreover, half of agents and specialists reported no outside volunteer activity. Neither agents nor specialists engage in the amount of volunteer service reported by the volunteers.

To probe the issue of why agents and specialists are less likely to engage in volunteer service, three questions should be raised.

1. Can agents and specialists who have little or no first-hand volunteer experience effectively develop volunteers or coordinate volunteer programs?

2. Could agents and specialists benefit by serving in volunteer roles outside of 4-H in order to more effectively understand volunteer service and the role of volunteers?

3. Are agents and specialists so devoted to or consumed by their jobs that they have no leisure time to devote to volunteer service?

As indicated in Table 6, the three groups differed significantly on the percent that volunteered for different organizations. Volunteers, agents, and specialists generally volunteered for the same kinds and a variety of organizations. Churches and religious groups were most frequently listed by all three groups as the organization (besides 4-H) for which the respondent served as a volunteer. Volunteering for school, PTO, band boosters, and school-related activities were second, and community and civic organizations were the third most frequently identified organizations for which respondents volunteered. Sporting events and health-related activities completed the top five organizations reported. All three populations indicated a strong likelihood to volunteer for organizations in the community. These findings would suggest faith communities and congregations could be targeted when recruiting 4‑H volunteers, as could other community-based organizations.

Significant differences were found when comparing 4-H participation among volunteers, agents, and specialists (Table 7). While all three groups were likely to have participated in 4-H as youths, a linear relationship was identified between occupation and former 4-H involvement. While knowledge of the 4-H program is an obvious advantage for volunteers and employees alike, that same knowledge and experience may also be a disadvantage or an obstacle to change.

4-H professionals should not hesitate to recruit prospective volunteers who are employed outside of the home. Findings from the study support the concept that volunteers are busy people. Almost two-thirds of all 4-H volunteers were employed full-time, with just over one-fifth being employed part-time. One-sixth of 4-H volunteers reported being unemployed. However, it is important to note that many respondents indicated on their questionnaire that they were unemployed due to retirement (Table 8).

4-H volunteers were employed in a variety of occupations (Table 9). Nearly 30% of employed volunteers worked in a professional specialty field. An additional 14.02% worked in administrative support, and 13.81% were employed as an executive, administrator, or manager. This supports the concept that volunteers bring tremendous skills and expertise to their volunteer role. Many of those employed in a professional specialty field can utilize these skills in their volunteer role. Agents should not hesitate to recruit volunteers outside of the traditional club-oriented, direct-contact roles. Given the current research base on episodic volunteer roles, agents should design short-term volunteer roles and recruit episodic volunteers to serve those positions.

Implications

1. Because agents are significantly younger and have less volunteer experience than the volunteers whom they supervise, specialists should provide in-service education to new agents in working with, supervising, and understanding the role of 4-H volunteers.

2. There is a graying of the volunteer pool in this nation. 4-H agents should work to recruit beyond the typical pool of parents or "moms." Retirees are likely an under-represented group of volunteers in the 4-H Program.

3. Agents should provide volunteer development activities in recruiting, delegating, working with co-leaders, 4-H volunteers, and involving parents.

4. Because of the great diversity reported by volunteers on their college major, agents should capitalize on this broad range of experience when expanding the 4-H program, redefining volunteer roles, or identifying local resources.

5. When recruiting new volunteers, agents should target individuals who are already actively involved in community service roles. Volunteering for churches, schools, and community and civic organizations are the most popular activities in which 4-H volunteers are also involved.

6. Volunteers were the least likely to have been enrolled as 4-H members in their youth. Staff cannot assume volunteers can begin working with the 4-H program without providing orientation on the history, vision, mission, and structure of the 4-H organization.

7. Because nearly all volunteers were employed, agents should not hesitate to identify and recruit volunteers from the workforce. Professionals, administrative support, and executive/administrative/management were the most popular occupations for 4-H volunteers.

References

Banning, J. W. (1970). Recruiting and training 4-H leaders--What studies show. Washington DC: Cooperative Extension Service, USDA and State Land Grant Universities Cooperating, 1970.

Blackman, S. T. (1999). Recruiting male volunteers: A guide based on exploratory research. Corporation for national service. Washington, DC

Clark, R. C. Jr., & Skelton, W. (1950). The 4-H club leader. New York State College of Agriculture, Bulletin 94. Ithaca: Cornell University.

Culp, III, K. (1996). Identifying continuing adult 4-H volunteers: How do they differ from non-continuers? How have they evolved over time? Journal of Agricultural Education. 37 (4) 44-51.

Culp, III, K., Deppe, C. A., Castillo, J. X., & Wells, B. J. (1998). The GEMS model of volunteer leadership administration. Journal of Volunteer Administration 16(4), 36-41.

Denmark, K. L. (1971). Factors affecting the identification, recruiting and training of volunteer 4-H adult leaders in Texas. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Texas A & M University, College Station.

Deppe, C. A. (1998). Ohio 4-H agents' perceptions of the level of importance and frequency of use of the eighteen components of the GEMS model of volunteer administration. Unpublished master's thesis. The Ohio State University.

Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and telephone surveys: The total design method. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Murk, P. J., & Stephan, J. F. (1990). Volunteers enhance the quality of life in a community...or (How to get them, train them and keep them). Salt Lake City, Utah: (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 326 639).

National 4-H Headquarters (2002). National 4-H youth enrollment report, fiscal year 2001.

Parrott, M. A. (1977). Motivation, personal and social characteristics of 4-H leaders. Unpublished M.S. thesis. Oklahoma State University, Stillwater.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Editor's page. Journal of Extension [On-line]. 28(3). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1990fall/ed1.html

Rohs, F. R., & Lee, G. B. (1989). Personal factors associated with volunteering in 4-H among middle school teachers. Paper presented at the Association of Voluntary Action Scholarship Conference, Washington, DC: National 4-H Center. Oct, 1989.

SAS 8.01 (2002). SAS Institute, Cary, NC.

Steele, D. L. (1994). Volunteer leader inventory. Rotary training guide. Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN

Wade, R. (1997). Community service learning: A guide to including service in the public school curriculum. New York: State University of New York Press.

Wessel, T., & Wessel, M. (1982). 4‑H: An American idea 1900-1980. Washington, D.C.: National 4-H Council.

Zeutschel, U., & Hansel, B. (1989). The AFS volunteer resources study: Summary of findings from Germany study. New York: AFS International/Intercultural Programs, Inc. Center for the Study of Intercultural Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services No. ED 322 053).