Browse
Search
Agenda - 03-04-1991
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1991
>
Agenda - 03-04-1991
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/8/2017 10:39:57 AM
Creation date
11/8/2017 10:29:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
3/4/1991
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
446
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ORANGE COUNTY RSVP ADVISORY COUNCIL <br />EVALUATION SUBCOMMITTEE REPORT <br />Eighteenth Year (1991 -1992) <br />The Volunteer Communit <br />Orange County is home to over 11,000 people over the age of 60 (about <br />12.4% of the total population). It continues to be a popular retire- <br />ment area with many retires remaining active and contributing to the <br />community through volunteerism. <br />There are great contrasts in the county with pockets of poverty as well <br />as very affluent areas. There is a concentration of University scho- <br />lars, "high tech" professionals, and executives, many who are retired. <br />RSVP's challenge is to involve these highly qualified retirees in more <br />complex volunteer jobs. There is hope that RSVP, as a county wide pro- <br />gram, can bring retirees together to benefit the entire county. <br />The RSVP Evaluation Committee conducted a second extensive evaluation <br />of the program. Questionnaires were sent to volunteer station mana- <br />gers, and active and inactive (exiting) volunteers. Twenty five percent <br />of the questionnaires were sent to volunteers who were enrolled in the <br />program for less than one year. A 75% response rate was achieved. The <br />results are categorized and reported below. <br />In our attempt to evaluate the RSVP program objectively, we sent ques- <br />tionnaires to (1) first year volunteers, (2) veteran volunteers, ('�) <br />volunteers leaving the program, and (4) participants in the second <br />annual agency director training program. The returns of the question- <br />naires was most gratifying - -in some rases seventy -five per cent. '"he <br />exception was in the ease of the training program for agency directors. <br />A differing method of securing opinion will have to be devised. <br />Not only were the rates of return gratifying, but also were the com- <br />ments on the questionnaires. At least 95% of the responses were pos- <br />itive. Only two minor problems surfaced. There appears to be a need <br />for better coordination between the volunteers in the RASTAT program <br />and the agency directors. In addition, some of the VITA volunteers <br />expressed concern about having to deal with persons who could obviously <br />afford commercial tax preparation assistance. We found that there were <br />three reasons for persons leaving the RSVP program - -(1) poor health, <br />(2) moving out of town, and (3) securing employment. None of the volun- <br />teers left because of dissatisfaction with the program. <br />RSVP Pro rammin <br />RSVP is responsive to community needs and publicizes through ratio, <br />newspapers, and newsletters. The Director is serving on a committee <br />that is establishing a volunteer action center (VAC) in Orange County. <br />It is hoped that a relationship between the new VAC and RSVP can be <br />• established for cross referrals of volunteers over and under age 60. <br />Because RSVP is perceived as the major source of volunteers, there are <br />a large number of requests. Perhaps with the new VAC, many more of <br />14-A <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.