Active leisure time - what gym membership says about potential volunteering..

Active leisure time - what gym membership says about potential volunteering..

Firstly some stats from market research world:

1. Almost 4.5 million UK adults (15+) have a gym membership, an increase of almost a million since 2000.
2. A third of them are aged 15 to 24 and they are over 60% more likely than the average adult to be single. Since 2000, the number of gym members aged 65+ has increased almost 70%.
3. Only 27% of gym members regularly go to the gym.
4. Their average household income is 35% higher than that of the average adult.
5. They are 18% more likely than the average adult to be heavy consumers of chocolate bars.
6. However, over a third of gym members always think of the calories in what they eat.
7. They are over 50% less likely than the average adult to specially choose to watch Heartbeat.
8. Gym members are over twice as likely as the average adult to be in the highest quintile for cinema exposure.
9. They are over 50% more likely than the average adult to agree that when they need information, the first place they go is the internet and they are over 60% more likely than the average adult to access health-related websites.
10. Female gym members will spend on average 35% more on shoes and 29% more on handbags than the average woman.

So what can we learn from this growth about volunteering. We know we're moving from 'obligation-led' volunteernig to 'fun-led' volunteering (see @ncvo participation stats)

There are parallels between the civic core, and the education levels of gym goers.

Could we realistically see a massive increase in people who want to move "from viewing to doing" in their leisure time..?

Could we build something that meets their needs..?

What can we learn from all the "what can we learn from" blogs on the Olympics volunteers..?

What can we learn from all the "what can we learn from" blogs on the Olympics volunteers..?

Remember there were 240,000 applicant, 40% of whom had never volunteered before. 

If nothing changes, will return to non volunteering in a few weeks. Here's a few links of interesting commentary:

1. Can the Olympic experience help change the face of volunteering? http://www.guardian.co.uk/voluntary-sector-network/2012/jul/19/olympics-change-face-volunteering
2. A blog from phil coogan from nesta about where we take this: http://www.nesta.org.uk/blogs/public_services_lab_blog/Standing%20out%20from%20the%20crowd
3. Guardian professionalblog: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/jul/17/london-2012-games-makers-800-roles
4. A forum for people looking for accommodation that showed these new volunteer organising themselves (like a local version of airb&b or couchsurfing..?) http://www.gm2012accommodation.org.uk/default.aspx?g=forum 
5. A few 'sector leaders' opinions http://www.guardian.co.uk/voluntary-sector-network/2012/aug/07/best-bits-olympic-legacy-volunteering
6. Gamesmakers on facebook (1,700 of them organising on the most simple of social networking sites, which is maybe what works when you have a strict time bound purpose..) http://www.facebook.com/2012VolunteerGamesmaker 
7. The End of Volunteering article (which touches on many of these themes..) http://wearewhatwedo.org/the-end-of-volunteering 
8. This from the Telegraph on the weekend of getting involved in local sports clubs.. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/news/9473635/London-2012-100000-volunteers-sign-up-to-Keep-The-Flame-Alive.html

Soooooooooooooooo what's next..? What's stopping something happening with this energy, this passion for change..? 

My top two suggestions would be would be 

1. a sense of urgency, 
2. a genuinely people focussed approach. 

Lets give the people what they want, which the Olympics has shown is not what in its entirety we have right now. People care about things, but don't associate 'volunteering opportunities' as a way of doing something about it. And as someone pointed out: at exactly the same time as 70,000 were working for free, the MPs were off on paid holiday..

Will gamesmakers come back home and be the change..?

The most interesting thing to come out is wewillgather, but more on that later..
(tweet the #WeWillGather hashtag, a postcode and the word ‘help’..)

Profile of the new director general of the national trust..

So what can we expect from Dame Helen Ghosh as the new director general of the national trust..? She's 56 so she might be around for less than 10 years..? She has inherited a period of rapid change, so she will implement someone else's change programme. She was chosen ahead of people in the cultural sector, maybe reflecting a strong board who want to lead and an objective eye on how the change is progressing.


Based on a www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b01lz7yf

Simon Jenkins, the Chairman said "we wanted a strong leader who could get to grips with different part of the organisation that need addressing. Someone who could be a little unpopular. its a bit of a gamble from her, a bit of a gamble from us. but one we were prepared to take.

"A civil service background didn't naturally offer what we wanted. we're waiting to see. it will be very interesting. she has significantly organisational skills which is what we need. 

"I asked her at interview: what would it be like if you had a make a speech against the government. she said she can't wait"

In conclusion, according to radio 4 "They will be led by a figure who has been at the head of leading change in organisations and institutions. 

"Trust members and staff should be prepared for change.."

York 's voluntary sector strategy in 2 pages..

Components of York 's voluntary sector strategy: - see what you think..

1. More people getting involved in their communities 

2. A constructive dialogue between sectors is established and valued 

3. Strong voluntary sector infrastructure that can support high quality services  and volunteering   

4. Commissioning and funding frameworks that are needs led and offer value for money

5. A city wide asset strategy that recognises the social value in communities taking ownership of their facilities and empowers people to take an active role in creating what they know is needed in their community.   

Outcome 1; More people getting involved in their communities

Volunteering is a powerful force for change, both for those who volunteer and for the wider community.  Together we can support the development of valuable social networks that will strengthen community involvement in the life of the city through

1. To further develop neighbourhood networks, such as time banking
2. To promote and embed York 's Volunteering Charter across the partners
3. To make sure volunteering meets the needs of the most vulnerable people in the City.

Outcome 2; A constructive dialogue between sectors is established and valued 

The voluntary sector has a wealth of experience that can be of great benefit to policy-makers in the statutory sector, by contributing to effective policy development. The voluntary sector also has a key role in enabling the voice of the community to be heard.  This applies particularly to some excluded groups who may be reluctant to engage with statutory partners through: A joint approach to widen our collective reach. A commitment to finding practical ways to maximise voluntary sector representation on key decision-making groups.

Outcome 3; Strong voluntary sector infrastructure that can support high quality services and volunteering   

In order for voluntary sector organisations to contribute successfully to the delivery of high quality services, they need support which meets the needs of a wide range of types of groups in different stages of their development. Through: Increasing the opportunities for communication and collaboration between the voluntary sector and its partners, including the private sector,  via mainstreaming of the successful elements of the Transforming Local Infrastructure Project.

Outcome 4; Commissioning and funding frameworks that are needs led and offer value for money

In the current economic climate it is vital that we work together to establish a robust financial relationship by developing innovative ways of funding services, supported by quality assurance and monitoring.  A joint commissioning and funding framework will help partners take a considered and consistent approach to funding and contracting with the voluntary, community and private sector. 

Priority actions could include: A review of how to improve joint commissioning, given that we have new commissioners emerging, such as the Clinical Commissioning Group or To introduce an integrated commissioning and funding framework by September 2013.

Outcome 5;   A city wide asset strategy that recognises the social value in communities taking ownership of their facilities and empowers people to take an active role in creating what they know is needed in their community.   

Priority actions could include: Joint mapping of assets leading to a directory of spaces 

Thougths..?

Guardian article on the national trust - pros and cons of "going local"..

Here's an editorial from the guardian in 2010 on the national trust..

"It is difficult to conceive of a body as conservative (with a small c) as the National Trust undergoing its very own cultural revolution. Smashing the liberal bourgeoisie is not the first thought that leaps to mind as you munch your way through a slice of coffee and walnut cake in the orangery. But their new strategy, Going Local, which the trust unveils this morning, would represent something of a sea change in the culture of a body dedicated to preserving heritage, and with it healthy servings of tradition. 

The idea of re-establishing the involvement of local communities in the great houses and parks in their midst has much merit. Nearly one-third of the £3m needed to rescue Seaton Delaval Hall in Northumberland, one of England's finest stately homes, was raised locally. So why shouldn't a former miner write in the guidebook about the coal on which much of the Delavals' wealth was founded? 

(and here's a comment underneight that sums up the (equally valid IMHHO) counterview..)

@Pinnington

10 February 2010 4:08AM

The idea of re-establishing the involvement of local communities in the great houses and parks in their midst has much merit.

"What do you mean 're-establish' local community involvement? You mean as underpaid servants, ground-keepers, labourers? 'Re-establish'? What are you talking about? What is 're' about it?

A 'National Trust' that sought to reinvent itself for the contemporary world would surely be concerned not only with matters relating to the preservation of aristocratic and bourgeois icons but also with matters relating to the sustainable development of iconic structures upon which our great grandchildren would gaze with pride.

We may appreciate the grandeur of the great gardens and gazebos paid for by slavery and oppression but will we bequeath, to the 'National Trust', artefacts and architectures that tell a more egalitarian and less imperialist story? What will be the 'Jenkins Legacy' other than the re-preservation of stories of inequity? Do tell!

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/feb/10/national-trust