Volunteer recruitment and retention: a case study of the Vancouver Planned Parenthood Clinic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this project is to conduct a detailed evaluation of the Vancouver Planned Parenthood clinic volunteer program. The primary focus of this study is volunteer recruitment and retention. The simplicity of individual perspectives commonly employed in volunteer theories and research is rejected in this research project. A multi-leveled sociological analysis stemming from an organizational behaviour framework is used as an alternative approach to broaden the scope of this case study. The five levels of analysis used to examine the volunteer program in this study are: 1) individual level of analysis, 2) group behaviour, 3) interpersonal and organizational processes, 4) organizational structure and job design, and 5) organizational environment. Multiple factors are discussed under each level of analysis. A triangulation of methods, comprised of interviews with volunteers, observational analysis, and document analysis, is used to provide a rich analysis of the volunteer program. Interpretations of the findings demonstrate that many factors beyond the individual level influence volunteer recruitment and retention. Results show that this particular volunteer program is operating below its maximum effectiveness, and that high volunteer turnover results in this atmosphere. Practical and theoretical implications of this case study are explored and recommendations are offered.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".