Volunteer Alberta Sector Media

Announcement from Public Safety on Police Information Checks

(Past member) — Thu, 26 May 2011 20:11:15 GMT

Nothing New for the Sector

The news conference in Calgary on Wednesday May 25^th with the Honourable Vic Toews, Canada’s Minister of Public Safety, and Calgary Police Services Chief Rick Hanson announced decreases in wait times for Police Information Checks (PIC) thanks to a new Live Scan machine. This However, is not news. He released exactly the same information earlier this year: The availability of the Live Scan digital fingerprinting machine offers an opportunity for police services to decrease wait times for Police Information Check (PIC).

In February, Volunteer Alberta and the Government of Alberta arranged for the arrival of the existing Live Scan machine in Calgary to address the daunting wait times for those wanting to volunteer in vulnerable sectors. The announcement by Minister Toews does not offer anything new for the volunteers or volunteer-engaging organizations in Alberta. However, it does offer an opportunity to address the current wait times.

“Technology is a superb tool, but it requires human resources to operate. The wait times in Calgary are of huge concern to volunteers, many who have been waiting several weeks to get their clearances out of the way so they can get doing what they offered their time and energy to do,” said Karen Lynch, Executive Director Volunteer Alberta. “The delays are of equal concern to Calgary Police Services, but unless this announcement was about additional dollars to augment the staffing required, I am not sure what will change because of yesterday’s announcement by the Minister and Police Chief. I hope I missed something and look forward to a phone call from CPS to tell me what is now possible since this technology is already in place and is in fact old news."

The sector now needs to address Police Information Checks from a two-pronged approach: appeal to police for more staff to decrease wait times exceeding two – three weeks, and education on the part of the volunteer sector to understand which potential volunteer positions need a PIC. Both approaches will significantly increase efficiency and protection to vulnerable populations served by the sector.

Calgary's wait times in February 2011 for Police Information Checks and fingerprinting were the longest in Alberta. Volunteers were waiting 6-8 weeks for the Police Information Check portion. Since then, Calgary Police Services have made valiant efforts to address the current wait times by adding additional staff and authorizing overtime as well as expanding access to additional district stations. Wait times are decreasing; however Calgary-area organizations are still reporting wait times up to 6 weeks.

As a result of these wait times, organizations are simply choosing not to screen volunteers to save time and get the volunteer involved immediately. This is jeopardizing the safety and well-being of the communities they serve. Delays are causing volunteers such as coaches for sports teams to miss entire seasons.

The Volunteer Police Information Check Program (VPICP) is a program administered by Volunteer Alberta with support from the Government of Alberta. The program enables eligible organizations to access Police Information Checks (PICs) free of charge for their volunteers that work with children, seniors, or people with a disability. One of the key components of the VPICP is the educating organizations about best practices for screening processes and emphasizing that PICs are just one way to screen potential volunteers. To learn more about the program and to see if your organization is eligible visit voan.volunteeralberta.ab.ca/

Are there Enough Volunteers in Alberta?

(Past member) — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 18:08:40 GMT

To mark National Volunteer Week, PrimeTime Television hosted Volunteer Alberta's Executive Director Karen Lynch for a discussion around Alberta's nonprofit/voluntary sector.

Click here to watch the interview

Volunteering 101 - open up to the awesome

(Past member) — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 17:45:13 GMT

From the Hinton Voice - April 14, 2011
Tyler Waugh

Karen Lynch was everything I’d hoped she would be as executive director of Volunteer Alberta.

She’s outspoken and doesn’t sugarcoat emerging and ongoing challenges within the volunteer world, but is equally optimistic about how boards and committees will adapt to those challenges.

Lynch spoke to around 100 people April 11 at a board of directors appreciation dinner hosted by the Town of Hinton at the Hinton Centre as part of National Volunteer Week.

The volunteer advocate and self-described board junkie pulled no punches in giving a realistic assessment of what too many boards are doing wrong.

Among other things she touched upon during the 40-minute presentation was the issue of marketing opportunities within an organization. She emphasized word of mouth in setting the tone for positive experiences. Sounds hokey, sure, but her example rang true to me.

How many times have we stood in a checkout line and either overheard a conversation or held one personally with somebody lamenting how they had to go to a meeting that particular night and how they’d rather be lounging in their chair in front of the television. Can’t say I haven’t been guilty of that myself. Lately, I have been pretty open about the fact that I am likely going to pull back on my volunteer commitments for a year or so. I’ve never thought about statements like that being misconceived as negative about my volunteer experiences.

It couldn’t be further from the truth and since I value volunteering, I probably owe it to the movement to discuss how the different roles make me feel and how I’ve benefitted. So here it goes.

Hinton United Way - I was invited to a lunch meeting in 2005 under the auspices of covering it for the paper and left as a board member. While I still wonder just exactly how that happened (I didn’t get a lunch, either!), it’s hard to argue with the experience.

Helping coordinate fundraising and marketing opportunities for a diverse group of local non-profits is pretty exciting, especially considering the vital services these groups provide to those less fortunate in our community.

It’s provided me a far better perspective on some of the unique challenges in our town and a deep appreciation for those who toil in relative anonymity to make it better. I hope I never need their services, but I feel better knowing they exist in case the unexpected should occur.

Citizens Advisory Group - This is my first experience on a town-driven committee. I spend my professional life reporting and commenting on what these committees undertake and this was my first foray into “seeing how the sausage is made” so to speak.

Honestly? It’s been a long grind and frustrating at times as 11 people with unique perspectives endeavoured to marry long-term municipal planning with public-driven objectives.

With the end near (our final draft goes to Town Council on May 3), it’s easier to reflect on what a remarkably rewarding experience it’s been. I’ll miss the debates about Hinton’s future with people I respect and learning that “making the sausage” should be somewhat hard if it’s going to be relevant.

Hinton Minor Hockey - Helping to coach atom hockey this year meant being at the rink a lot and, for me, being at the rink helping out is like a two thumbs up sundae dripping with awesome sauce.

Volunteer, I tell you, and open yourself up to the awesome.

Effective Checks Coming

Wed, 23 Mar 2011 22:12:29 GMT

Reposted from Saint City - St. Albert's Weekly Newspaper

March 4, 2011
Brent Rathgeber

On Tuesday, Feb. 15, the Hon. Vic Toews, Minister of Public Safety, along with senior personnel from the RCMP, highlighted the use of the latest technology in vulnerable sector criminal record checks: an electronic fingerprint scanner.

Background security checks of would-be teachers, minor sports coaches, daycare workers and anyone wanting to work with children, seniors or the disabled are a requirement in most organizations and are strongly encouraged where not required. The problem is that these security checks can take up to six to eight months to complete.

The federal government tightened the security check criteria to prevent persons with criminal records or pardons for sexual offences from slipping through the system by simply changing their names. Accordingly, the first screening criterion used is date of birth, as this cannot be legally changed. If an applicant’s birthday and gender match that of a convicted criminal, the vulnerable sector check is flagged and the applicant must be fingerprinted.

As an example, the St. Albert Minor Hockey Association requires a vulnerable sector check from all potential coaches. This new tightened security check protocol flagged 100 of the 400 potential coaches for fingerprinting using date of birth as the criteria, meaning that 25 per cent of those applying to coach a minor hockey team had the same birthday and gender as a convicted criminal. The fingerprint check will eliminate any doubt, and it will also screen out someone like Graham James as the potential coach of a minor hockey team.

Minister Toews and the RCMP have introduced a new electronic fingerprint scanner that could reduce the wait times for vulnerable sector checks from months to just days, and potentially even minutes. The new tighter security checks have caused fingerprint checks to go from 130 per month to almost 8,000 nationally, with all of them having to be processed manually. All fingerprints taken either in ink or electronically for a vulnerable sector check are destroyed afterwards.

The electronic fingerprint scanner costs approximately $15,000. This is a good investment to ensure the protection of the most vulnerable members of our society. This equipment would be extremely helpful for the police, but more importantly, it would be beneficial to those seeking to volunteer — something the citizens of St. Albert are noted for. The applications of this equipment could extend well beyond the volunteer sector to include employment checks, adoptions and even visa applications.

I know many of you have had negative experiences with vulnerable sector checks. Although absolutely necessary to protect the most vulnerable, the federal government is seeking to make the system as accurate and time-efficient as possible.

look forward to hearing your comments on vulnerable sector checks and electronic fingerprint scanning. You can reach me by email at rathgb0@parl.gc.ca or by phone at 780-458-0809.

Picking up the Pace on Police Checks

Tue, 01 Mar 2011 16:35:56 GMT

SEE VIDEO

Kevin Libin: Wildrose unveils warm, fuzzy side

Tue, 08 Feb 2011 21:28:41 GMT

The blouse Danielle Smith wore when she walked into Calgary’s Southview Community hall Monday was a dusty pink, but her mission, just the same, was to begin the counter-offensive against her competitors’ campaign to vilify her as some kind of Albertan brownshirt.

The leader of the Wildrose Alliance Party had come to try to talk sympathetically about the homeless, the disabled and the poor and hungry children of Alberta. It was her party that genuinely cared to create a government with “warmth, compassion and generosity,” she said, laying down a marker in the stewing political battle over humane policy. Looking for cold-hearted bastards? For that, Ms. Smith suggested, you would have to look to the current Progressive Conservative government.

Premier Ed Stelmach last month tipped the PCs’ strategy to brand Ms. Smith’s Wildrose party as a horde of raving, pitiless reactionaries. Since Ms. Smith’s group began two years ago aggressively riding up in the polls on the Tories’ right side, there had been those in the Tory caucus who would, in private, turn purple at any mention of Wildrose and sputter about the fanatical “wild-eyed alliance.”

Mr. Stelmach, in his resignation speech, made the slur public. There was, he warned in an obvious allusion to Ms. Smith’s organization, a “danger” of “an extreme right party” lurking. It would “disguise itself as a moderate party.” It would practice “U.S.-style politics.” Only the Tories could protect Albertans from it.

The Wildrose, with its demands for reduced government spending and market-style health-care reforms, had surely expected the attack. On Monday, Ms. Smith laid out her plan to neutralize it: Big spending wasn’t the same as compassion, she argued. In fact, it was often the opposite.

“The PC government clearly believes the answer to caring for those in need is to make the government bigger,” she said. “To create more bureaucracy, to complicate assessment regimes and funding applications, and to centralize administration of funding programs Albertans rely on every day to survive.” The result, she said, has been a hash; provincial support for mental health programs had become “erratic” and government-appointed regional boards were politicizing funding allocations. Social program spending was soaring, while services were struggling. “The losers in all of this are, of course, Albertans in need,” Ms. Smith said. “We’ve got to get government out of the way.”

There is decent evidence to back her position up. Keith Seel, director of the Institute for Nonprofit Studies at Calgary’s Mount Royal University, points out that an appalling amount of social spending gets eaten up by government and agency administrators on its way to the front lines. Take the amount of money going into the Persons with Developmental Disabilities board in either of the province’s big cities: it works out to roughly $70,000 per client undefined just about enough, he points out, to hire two full-time workers to work every day of the year for every single developmentally disabled Albertan. By the time the money passes through myriad layers of bureaucracy, however, what developmentally disabled Albertans actually get is about two half-days of support a week.

“If you were to take the amount going into a system, say children’s services, or seniors, or persons with disabilities, 100% arrives there, but depending on how many steps are in the system, some of the burn rate from the perspective of families receiving service would appear to be as high as 90%,” Mr. Seel says. “Say the average was $70,000 per person in a particular area. What we’ve collected data on is that some of the families are literally seeing out of that $70,000 just $6,000 in service provision.”

The issue with the government’s approach is that it doesn’t view the social services system as a “system,” Mr. Seel believes, but rather, creates webs of competing services swollen with redundancies and inefficiencies. And so, it misses opportunities to streamline delivery and maximize the benefits per dollar spent.

Institutional shortsightedness might help explain also the government’s logic in setting up a system that claws back benefits for the severely handicapped the moment they earn income of their own. This, Ms. Smith insisted, is “not only unfair to vulnerable Albertans who wish to supplement their income with a view to maybe working full-time, it creates a negative incentive for them to join the workforce and only further traps them into dependency.”

Ms. Smith proposes ending the clawbacks and moving money out of the ministries and instead delivering it as directly as possible to community level non-profit agencies demonstrating a “proven and ongoing track record of strong performance.”

She also promised to introduce tax credits for volunteerism, and increase the tax benefit for donations to charities to bring them “at least as much or more” as the write-off for donating to a political partyundefinedwhich, under the current tax regime, actually gives taxpayers in the highest brackets a 50% bigger break than a pledge to a homeless shelter or addiction treatment centre.

A 2009 study by Volunteer Alberta actually concluded that such tax credits may not increase volunteerism or donations and could even have “adverse long-term effects” by undermining the altruistic element of giving.

Still, most voters would doubtless presume the opposite, and the Wildrose Alliance’s social support platform unveiled Monday isn’t just defensible social policy; it’s about the optics of looking caring and big-hearted, despite the Conservatives’ attempts to paint them otherwise.

These policies have a strong ring of the sort of “compassionate conservative” championed once by former U.S. president George W. Bush, who promoted the idea of increasing the role of faith-based grassroots agencies to deliver social programs undefined though the plan was never implemented once he took office. The big difference is that Ms. Smith, whose party takes a more libertarian line than the Tories, did not emphasize any role for faith-based groups over secular ones. And that she seems set out to, in this province at least, officially separate the word compassionate from Conservative.

National Post
klibin@nationalpost.com

Screening out the Pervs

Thu, 27 Jan 2011 19:12:19 GMT

CALGARY HERALD JANUARY 20, 2011

The RCMP's attempt at enhancing its screening process in the wake of sex offender Graham James' pardon last year has created unintended consequences for the nonprofit sector. It's also another reason sex offenders and other serious violent criminals should not be granted pardons, period.

Non-profits, agencies and others who rely on police checks to recruit employees and volunteers who will be working with children or the vulnerable are now subject to a process fraught with long delays. A routine check can now take months when it should be days.

In some cases, new volunteers quit before they even get started, according to the executive director of Volunteer Alberta. In other cases, people who have volunteered for years are now being flagged because the search criteria is broader, and has resulted in thousands more matches.

Date of birth and gender are searched, but not name, as the RCMP realized their old protocols failed to catch those who legally changed their names but didn't bother to report it to police.

In Calgary, the situation is worsened because local police don't have a fingerprint scanner. Before hiring more officers, perhaps CPS should modernize its equipment. Sending paper fingerprints to Ottawa for processing adds eight weeks to the process, according to RCMP. The turnaround time to send fingerprints electronically is just three days, unless there's a match.

In the short term, Calgary police need to get themselves a scanner. In the long term, RCMP should revisit their protocols and come up with something better. When a criminal legally changes his or her name, part of that legal process should send an update to police, as a matter of routine. Leaving this detail up to the offender to report, simply should no longer be an option.

more:http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Screening+pervs/4136420/story.html#ixzz1CGi6zQxD

Sex-offender screening plagues non-profit groups with delays

Wed, 26 Jan 2011 20:19:23 GMT

New RCMP process has flagged hundreds of volunteers who must then submit to fingerprinting for verification

BY RICHARD CUTHBERTSON, CALGARY HERALD; POSTMEDIA NEWS JANUARY 17, 2011

It is meant to weed out pardoned sex offenders who change their name, but a new RCMP police-check policy for those working with children and vulnerable people is wreaking havoc with some non-profits, here in Calgary and across the country.

Those who rely on the screening as one part of an effort to ensure their volunteers don't have a criminal background say the process is now fraught with delays.

In some cases, new volunteer recruits simply quit before they even get started because the checks are taking so long, according to the executive director of Volunteer Alberta.

Some groups are reportedly abandoning the police-check process entirely because it has become so lengthy.

The new policy, which was implemented in July, uses date of birth and gender -- but not the person's name -- to search for hits among the country's more than 14,000 pardoned sex offenders.

The major problem is thousands of people locally, and tens of thousands nationally, are now being flagged during the process, simply because their birthdate and gender match that of a pardoned sex offender.

They are then asked to return to their local police station for fingerprinting, which is sent to Ottawa.

Calgary has no proper scanners

In Calgary, the situation is particularly acute, according to some, as police in this city cannot scan fingerprints digitally and send them electronically.

It all adds substantially to the time it takes for police checks to be completed, delays which some say are now more than two months long. "It's quite ... untenable the wait time there," said Karen Lynch, the executive director of Volunteer Alberta.

The RCMP and local police say they have added personnel to deal with the "staggering" increase in vulnerable sector hits, and there are other changes on the way to reduce lag time in processing checks.

But so large is the problem caused by the protocols that the Chinook Council, which represents scouting groups in southern Alberta, reports more 150 of its volunteers have already been caught in this new hopper.

Executive director Doug MacDonald said police checks are taking two months or more to return. In small communities which have a series of new volunteers, delays mean scouting groups had no one to lead their activities, he said.

In other cases, leaders are forced to take on new groups, as other volunteers wait for their police check to finally arrive.

And longtime volunteers who have never been flagged before are now being forced to submit fingerprints for analysis as Scouts Canada requires an update to the police check every three years.

"We had 20-year volunteers that I've had to send down to the police for fingerprinting because their date of birth -- day, month, year -- matches somebody on the pardoned sex-offender list," MacDonald said. "I've got a 50-plus-year volunteer I had to send down. He's been doing police record checks since 1997, every three years. This year -- he's 78 years old -- had to go for fingerprinting."

The problem is hitting thousands in Calgary. In all of 2009, the system flagged just 67 people for fingerprinting out of the roughly 52,000 vulnerable sector checks, according to city police.

Since the new protocols were put in the place in July, the number of people required to return and submit fingerprints has jumped to more than 2,500.

"Because the criteria for this search is less specific, far more people are being flagged and therefore required to take this extra step, thus causing the processing delay," said Staff Sgt. Scott Boyd, with the Calgary police information check unit.

The average lag time for police checks in Calgary is now six weeks, far beyond the previous target of just 10 days to two weeks, although Boyd adds the vulnerable sector protocols are not the only thing at play.

Police checks hobble charity work

Mon, 17 Jan 2011 17:26:37 GMT

BY RICHARD CUTHBERTSON, CALGARY HERALD
JANUARY 17, 2011

It is meant to weed out pardoned sex offenders who change their name, but a new RCMP police check policy for those working with children and vulnerable people is wreaking havoc with some non-profits, both in Calgary and across the country.

Those who rely on the screening as one part of an effort to ensure their volunteers don't have a criminal background say the process is now fraught with delays.

In some cases, new volunteer recruits simply quit before they even get started because the checks are taking so long, according to the executive director of Volunteer Alberta.

And some organizations are reportedly abandoning the police check process entirely because it has become so lengthy.

The new policy, which was implemented in July, uses date of birth and gender -- but not the person's name -- to search for hits among the country's more than 14,000 pardoned sex offenders.

They are then asked to return to their local police station for fingerprinting, which is sent to Ottawa.

In Calgary, the situation is particularly acute, according to some, as police in this city cannot scan fingerprints digitally and send them electronically.

It all adds substantially to the time it takes for police checks to be completed, delays which some say are now more than two months long.

"It's quite . . . untenable the wait time there," said Karen Lynch, the executive director of Volunteer Alberta.

The RCMP and local police say they have added personnel to deal with the "staggering" increase in vulnerable sector hits, and other changes are on the way to reduce lag time in processing checks.

Executive director Doug MacDonald said police checks are taking two months or more to return. In small communities that have a series of new volunteers, delays mean scouting groups had no one to lead their activities, he said.

In other cases, leaders are forced to take on new groups, as other volunteers wait for their police check to finally arrive.

And longtime volunteers who have never been flagged before are now being forced to submit fingerprints for analysis as Scouts Canada requires an update to the police check every three years.

"We had 20-year volunteers that I've had to send down to the police for fingerprinting because their date of birth -- day, month, year -- matches somebody on the pardoned sex offender list," MacDonald said.

"I've got a 50-plus year volunteer I had to send down. He's been doing police record checks since 1997, every three years. This year -- he's 78 years old -- had to go for fingerprinting."

The problem is hitting thousands in Calgary. In all of 2009, the system flagged just 67 people for fingerprinting out of the roughly 52,000 vulnerable sector checks, according to city police.

Since the new protocols were put in place in July, the number of people required to return and submit fingerprints has jumped to more than 2,500.

The average lag time for police checks in Calgary is now six weeks, far beyond the previous target of 10 days to two weeks, although Boyd adds the vulnerable sector protocols are not the only thing at play.

Calgary police, Boyd said, have doubled the number of people working in the information police check unit and will soon roll out other changes to reduce delays.

But another problem is that Calgary police do not have a fingerprint scanner. That means fingerprints on paper must be sent to the RCMP in Ottawa, leading to an eight-week delay, according to the Mounties. By contrast, sending them electronically produces a turnaround time of just three days, unless the fingerprints match the pardoned sex offender.

Boyd suggests Calgary police are contemplating some kind of solution, but Lynch said action can't come soon enough.

"The digital fingerprinting machine -- I've got the budget for it, I'll drive down and give it to them," she said.

The issue relates to changes in the way the RCMP does its vulnerable sector checks in the wake of the Graham James scandal. Last year, it was revealed the former junior hockey coach, who was convicted in the 1990s of sexually assaulting two of his players, had quietly had his convictions pardoned.

But with just birthdate and gender to go by, thousands are being tipped as potential matches, leaving Lynch to suggest another difficult-to-change criterion, such as height or ethnicity, be added to shrink the number of hits.

In all of 2009, the RCMP's Canadian Criminal Real Time Identification Services performed 2,500 vulnerable sector fingerprint checks. Since August, they've processed 34,719 under the new protocols.

The RCMP said it recognizes there is an issue. It moved more people into the unit and has allocated overtime to process applications, according to Sgt. Julie Gagnon.

It is also hoped that delays will be reduced by enhancements to their electronic systems, she wrote in an e-mail.

rcuthbertson@calgaryherald.com

Volunteer Canada’s Panel Discussion on Volunteerism

Fri, 10 Dec 2010 19:16:32 GMT

Speech: Governor General of Canada David Johnston

Ottawa, Wednesday, December 8, 2010

(Volunteer Canada hosted an interactive panel discussion of the research implications with Canadians representing the four groups examined in the research, the Right Honourable David Johnston, Governor General of Canada, and key players in the voluntary sector.

Thank you for this invitation to speak on a topic of great importance to me, and to all Canadians.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to those who have gathered here to discuss the changing landscape of volunteerism in Canada. I also want to thank Volunteer Canada for bringing us together, and for your important research on the volunteer experience in this country.

Before we begin, let me take a moment to look back at where we’ve been. Canadians have a truly remarkable history of volunteerism, both at home and abroad.

Early Canadians fully understood the extent of their dependence upon one another. The first governor of this land, Samuel de Champlain, said that his pioneering settlement at Port Royal would not have survived its first winter in 1605 were it not for the generous help of the local First Nations.

Later, the mostly rural inhabitants of our young country helped each other, as they built barns and communities in the hopes of a better life for their children. I still see examples of this, as neighbours combine their diverse talents and energies to help their communities in times of need.

Today, in dozens of countries worldwide, millions of people participate in the volunteer-led Terry Fox Run. Close to $500 million has been raised for cancer research to date.

Indeed, every school child in Canada knows about the Marathon of Hope. In his book, Terry, author Douglas Coupland remarks upon the thousands of names of everyday Canadians in the Terry Fox archives, and writes: “Collectively, those names testify to something divine – our nation, our home and our soul.”

Canadians are rightly renowned for their spirit of volunteerism.

Here at home, volunteers are involved in every aspect of our society. Canada has the second-largest voluntary sector in the world, and our social, cultural and economic well-being is directly linked to the countless donations of time and energy made each day by Canadians.

And yet, the circumstances in which we volunteer are evolving, and the demands are growing.

How will we meet these needs?

Since my installation as governor general, I have been inviting Canadians to join me in imagining our country as it could be. We strive for a smart and caring nation, where all Canadians can succeed, contribute, and develop their talents to their fullest potential.

To achieve this vision, I have set out three pillars: supporting families and children; reinforcing learning and innovation; and encouraging philanthropy and volunteerism.

I believe that a renewed spirit of philanthropy and volunteerismundefinedof givingundefinedis essential to creating the smarter, more caring nation we seek.

New ideas and innovative thinking will be crucial to our efforts.

The changing demographics of Canada present us with new opportunities for mobilization. Energetic and talented retirees are valuable sources of professional insight and experience. Their contributions are essential to the nation we aim to build.

We can also look to new Canadians as important contributors to civic life. Their international experience and enthusiasm for Canada can greatly enhance our volunteer potential.

It will also be important to find new ways to encourage youth volunteerism. Young people are filled with tremendous energy and idealism, and more than 55 per cent of youth volunteer their timeundefinedthat’s twice the rate of adults.

We also know that those who volunteer early in life are more likely to continue. Adult role models are crucial, as demonstrated by the fact that young people who have a parent who volunteers are almost three times as likely to volunteer themselves.

Families and workplaces offer new avenues for generosity. And, in what has been termed a new world of active citizenship, today’s volunteers are broadening our idea of altruism. Can we shift our focus so that giving is understood as an act of citizenship, with reciprocal benefits for the donor, the recipient, and society as a whole?

In a democracy, everyone has something to give.

With globalization, many Canadians now direct their energies overseas, helping out in a multitude of noble causes worldwide.

As our world changes, so too does the nature of volunteerism.

Our challenge is to adapt, and always to preserve the spirit of giving. As we approach the 150th anniversary of Canada in 2017, the time is right for us to renew our collective pursuit of kindness.

Thank you.

Volunteers freely give their gifts of time, effort

Mon, 04 Oct 2010 20:54:49 GMT

Re: Free Labour, Sept. 15. Ottawa Citizen

The notion of volunteers' contributions as "free labour," as a suggestion of simple replacement of paid staff, disregards the inherent altruism that drives and motivates volunteers and undermines the fact that these gifts of time, freely given, improve the quality of life for millions worldwide.

There's no doubt that the young people featured in the Citizen article are sincere in offering their skills for the benefit of fellow human beings. While they are "transitioning careers," they also are volunteering within the context of professional development. We find that most volunteers will tell you that they get more out of volunteering than they give.

In order to sustain and strengthen any volunteer program, a great deal of resources are necessary to recruit, train, support, and recognize volunteers for their time and contribution. Adequate financial resources, and often paid professional staff resources, are required to support volunteer programs in order to effectively engage and motivate volunteers. It all comes at a cost.

While volunteers may not receive financial compensation, volunteering offers many tangible and intangible benefits that enhance our social, educational, and professional development. There are also many community service programs that focus on promoting citizenship and strengthening skills.

It takes dedicated resources and organizational commitment to connect the energy, skills, and passions within a community. When this happens, people can provide meaningful service while gaining valuable experiences. Ask any organization this question: "If you had enough money to hire all the staff you could, would you still involve volunteers?" The answer would be a resounding yes. In addition to vital services, volunteers bring accountability and credibility to an organization. Volunteers are trustworthy community ambassadors and they are a compelling voice of an organization's mission. Definitely not free labour, but definitely worth the investment!

Contrary to the article, the number of Canadians volunteering each year is more than 12.5 million as the Canada Survey of Giving, Volunteering and Participating reported in 2007. That's the equivalent of 46 per cent of the population aged 15 and over. They contribute almost two billion hours of volunteer time. Indeed much comes from a few, and it is worth clarifying that about seven per cent of Canadians are contributing approximately 78 per cent of the volunteer time in this country.

Ruth MacKenzie, Ottawa

President & CEO, Volunteer Canada

PIPA and Policy Development: Legislate or Educate? - Canadian Journal of Volunteer Resource Management 18.2 By: Evan Romanow

Wed, 25 Aug 2010 22:24:09 GMT

On January 1, 2004, nonprofit and voluntary sector organizations in Alberta became subject to Alberta’s Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA).[1] PIPA was Alberta’s response to the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA) – federal legislation which specified how private sector organizations could collect, use or disclose personal information in the course of commercial activities. Nonprofit/voluntary sector organizations in Alberta remained exempt from PIPA, provided they did not engage in commercial activities. However, that was expected to change in 2007 when a committee of the Legislative Assembly of Alberta (the Alberta Select Special PIPA Review Committee) recommended bringing “all not-for-profit organizations fully within the scope of the Act” (Recommendation 5, Final Report). This is the brief story of how the voluntary sector was able to demonstrate how the needs of the sector and those of government could be realized mutually.

The first step in response to initial concerns about the potentially arduous legislation was to understand the needs and policy interests of stakeholders within the sector. Katherine van Kooy, President and CEO of the Calgary Chamber of Voluntary Organizations (CCVO), would prove integral in providing the foundation for encouraging professionalism in the sector when developing organizational best practices. The CCVO conducted a series of surveys, forums and interviews within the sector on understanding what tools and resources can be developed to help organizations understand and implement best practices for handling personal information.[2] Consultative processes helped develop an understanding of the implications if PIPA was fully applied to nonprofit organizations.

Based on additional consultation with the sector, concerns emerged that legislation requiring organizations to either adapt their current practices or introduce new policies around confidentiality and personal information would present significant challenges and impediments for many nonprofit and voluntary sector organizations. An additional concern was the capacity of organizations to undertake drastic legal and risk management re-organization required by the legislation to protect personal information. This was especially important considering approximately 58 percent of Alberta’s 19,000 nonprofit/voluntary organizations are run entirely by volunteers. Legislative requirements may also compound escalating financial challenges as nonprofits continue to grapple with declining donations from Albertans, a decrease in community investment budgets from corporate Alberta and diminishing funding from all levels of government.

Volunteer Alberta, CCVO and the Edmonton Chamber of Voluntary Organizations began working with Minister Heather Klimchuk’s staff in Service Alberta, to gauge the best method of encouraging an increased awareness of the need to protect personal data. However, the question was whether to legislate or to educate. Advocates for organizations engaging volunteers strongly felt that something other than a one-size-fits-all solution was needed. Furthermore, it was felt that education rather than rigid legislation would need to be part of any solution. The goal was to provide guidance to assist organizations to protect personal privacy and to advance the needs of voluntary organizations. This was especially important for those that were working under legislative or regulatory requirements by virtue of their contracts to deliver services for the Government of Alberta. The sector shared concerns and suggestions with Service Alberta and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Alberta about ways to develop education and outreach opportunities on privacy legislation and best practices.[3]

Ultimately, the Personal Information Protection Amendment Act, 2009 (Bill 54), introduced by MLA Jonathan Denis, did not require all nonprofit/voluntary sector organizations to comply with PIPA regulations. Bill 54 modified the act to include breach notification and data transfer requirements. Importantly, the final decision of the Minister was based on the nonprofit/voluntary sector assuming and maintaining the highest standards of personal information protection. Bill 54 clarifies PIPA’s existing provisions regarding personal employee information and the retention of personal information and includes some revised consent provisions to better address longstanding business practices. Service Alberta Minister Heather Klimchuk felt the amendment would “result in better protection for Albertans’ information.”[4]

It is worth noting that Information and Privacy Commissioner Frank Work expressed disappointment that certain nonprofit agencies will be exempt from the new rules. “Many of these organizations collect highly sensitive personal information that should be subject to legislative protection.”[5] Volunteer Alberta and others were of the opinion that legislation alone would not have the desired effect without a vigorous and thorough education plan. Legislation’s only value in this regard is that it would give the Government of Alberta the ability to prosecute and/or penalize an organization. The value of a concerted education and implementation plan is that it provides the sector with the ability to manage its own responsibilities through strengthening risk management practices. In fall 2010, Volunteer Alberta will lead seminars throughout Alberta on implementing best practices to protect the personal information of Albertans. The sector will be able to learn what is required to improve information protection policies and practices as efficiently as possible. This will happen by the delivery of educational seminars via videoconferencing (through iCCAN - Innovative Communities Connecting and Networking) available in over 80 locations plus several in-person regional seminars.

Through persistent, yet focussed advocacy, Volunteer Alberta and other nonprofit/voluntary sector organizations in Alberta were successful in shaping the policy outcome of the Personal Information Protection Amendment Act of 2009, to not require all nonprofit/voluntary sector organizations to comply with PIPA regulations. Instead of legislating change, collaborative actions between the provincial government and the sector were taken to implement and increase nonprofit/voluntary sector best practices for protecting personal information. A balance was struck between protecting personal information and privacy, without unduly straining the capacities for delivering charitable services to communities throughout Alberta. Targeted and constructive advocacy facilitated favourable outcomes in policy development for the nonprofit/voluntary sector.

[1] Personal Information Protection Act, S.A. 2003, c. P-6.5

[2] Calgary Chamber of Voluntary Organizations (CCVO), “PIPA, (Personal Information Protection Act) Background,” Calgary: CCVO, 2009. http://www.calgarycvo.org/our-work/policy-issues/provincial-government/pipa-personal-information-protection-act. See Calgary Chamber of Voluntary Organizations (CCVO), “Survey: Nonprofit Organizations & Protecting Personal Information,” Calgary: CCVO, 2004.

[3] Calgary Chamber of Voluntary Organizations (CCVO), “PIPA, (Personal Information Protection Act) Background,” Calgary: CCVO, 2009. http://www.calgarycvo.org/our-work/policy-issues/provincial-government/pipa-personal-information-protection-act.

[4] Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Alberta, “Commissioner Reacts to Changes to Personal Information Protection Act,” Edmonton: Legislative Assembly of Alberta, October 28, 2009.

[5] Ibid.

Alberta's volunteer firefighters drifting away as funding shrinks: association boss - Edmonton Journal, By: Conal Pierse

Wed, 23 Jun 2010 21:09:53 GMT

Link to online Article

Recruitment numbers and government funding for volunteer fire departments are shrinking, the president of the Alberta Association of Firefighters says.

Alberta's volunteer fire departments receive $500,000 a year, which Cornforth said only covers basic training. He said many firefighters have to raise money to buy equipment. It would be time better spent training, he said, adding volunteers need more support.

"We're just borrowing these people from their families," Cornforth said. "We need to support them with proper training, proper equipment and proper recognition."

A report on volunteer recruitment and retention was released to fire chiefs from across Alberta Tuesday at the Alberta Association of Firefighters annual conference. The 188-page document from Volunteer Alberta contains strategies for departments and encourages fire chiefs to switch things up. "If you have a recruitment or retention program that's not working or hasn't been working, it has to change," said Karen Lynch, executive director of Volunteer Alberta.

Some of the strategies discussed include developing a support system for firefighters' families, providing better education to new recruits on both what the job entails and what it does for the community, as well as providing better counselling and psychological services.

A shortage of volunteers has stretched some departments to the breaking point. Wandering River's fire department suspended service June 4 because the five-woman team could no longer safely respond to the high number of collisions on the nearby stretch of Highway 63. Trevor Sutherly, deputy fire chief for Parkland County, said he has enough volunteers, but not enough equipment with which to train them.

Volunteers train for three hours once every two weeks, Sutherly said. When someone misses training due to other commitments, he worries it might be something they encounter while responding.

"It's tough to cover the amount of topics we need to in the short amount of time volunteers give us," Sutherly said. "If somebody hasn't put up a ladder in six months, the next time they have to they will be rusty."

Bill Prudy, executive director of the association of firefighters, said the training volunteer firefighters receive is sufficient for them to be safe and effective. He said there's only so much you can ask of volunteers.

Of the 14,000 firefighters in Alberta, 10,000 are volunteers.

Cornforth said while recruitment efforts will continue, local government's need to start acknowledging these issues and start working with their departments. He said the volunteers provide a great service to the province at minimal cost. "I'm humbled to stand next to these people," Cornforth said.

cpierse@thejournal.canwest.com

To Lobby or Not to Lobby | Alberta Panel Discusses Reasons For and Against Business Lobbying

Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:07:07 GMT

Click to listen to Interview

Question: Should lobbying be part of your tool kit?

by Fil Fraser, Alberta Venture

The Case: At one time, businesses could expect to succeed by offering reliable products and honest service. “Build a better mousetrap,” and all that. But in an era where everything from cars to couriers to cough syrup are regulated, and where government subsidies and legislative agendas are often part of the environment, businesses are faced with challenges beyond doing a good job. In addition to advertising and public relations, they may need to lobby as well.

But, as we’re learning from the Americans (who spend billions doing it), business lobbying not only helps maintain a level playing field, but can tip the scales – sometimes unfairly and perhaps illegally – either in your favour or that of your competitor. As a matter of course and at the same time, not-for-profit and volunteer organizations lobby government on behalf of their own causes as well.

The Panel:
Ron Ghitter: a lawyer and businessman, and a former senator and one-time Alberta MLA
Karen Lynch: the executive director of Volunteer Alberta, an organization that advocates in favour of not-for-profit and charitable organizations
Ken Chapman: a lawyer, political analyst, blogger, principal of Cambridge Strategies Inc. and a registered lobbyist

Ron Ghitter: It’s always fair for a corporation, philanthropic or otherwise, to have the opportunity to express its point of view to the decision-makers to explain their particular benefits and needs. And it’s good from the politicians’ point of view to have the opportunity to hear from these people.

And that is all OK. The difficulty you get into is when big money enters into the equation and the public perception is that they’re buying their way into government contracts or government legislation. It’s a matter of walking the tightrope as to when lobbying gets too far over the line and is against the public interest.

Karen Lynch: No one thinks that we want a Canadian situation to mirror what they have in America, where simply huge amounts of money are spent both on direct lobbying and also indirectly supporting political campaigns. I don’t think anyone wants to see that here.

But with the number of issues that legislators have to know about, it’s almost impossible to get their attention on anything unless you go and speak with them.

Ken Chapman: Lobbying is not a bad thing. It got a bad name because of the American experience, but in the Canadian experience I think it contributes a lot to good democracy. What people mistakenly think, in the Alberta context, is that a lobbyist gives you better access. That’s not my experience. The Alberta government and all Alberta political parties are very open, easy to get in touch with and are eager to speak with citizens.

Ghitter: Most of the major oil and gas companies – in fact all of them in Calgary – have departments that deal with what they call “government relations.” The people who are hired there are generally those who have worked in government. They may have worked in ministers’ offices and end up in the private sector where they are well paid to lobby the government. Sometimes that can go too far. Sometimes favouritism enters into it and the public perception is that these corporations have bought their way into programs, even though they may not be the best or even programs that are necessary.

Lynch: In the old days, going to speak with politicians was what good citizens – people who were involved – did. But in the last 10 years, it has developed into a bit of an art form. There are now people who, under the guise of government relations, lobby all the time because they feel that the legislators are not aware of the issues and the implications of either policy or funding decisions if they don’t have that kind of knowledge.

People often think that lobbying is directly about money, but it’s also about public policy, and public policy doesn’t always translate into money. For the non-profit sector, it’s an understanding that everything that non-profits do is exactly in the same constituency as the government. What government tries to do is create quality-
of-life opportunities, and for non-profit organizations that’s exactly what we do, too.

Chapman: Former ministers and senior bureaucrats who lobby do have an edge.

There are cooling-off periods to make sure that there’s some integrity to the process. But by the same token, people who have had direct experience by sitting in caucus meetings know how legislative sausages are actually made. Those of us who’ve never sat in on those meetings don’t have that advantage. The contrarian position is that people who have been on the inside have a relatively ideological basis and can sometimes be very narrow in their perspective and have trouble accommodating or accepting other points of view.

Ghitter: I’m very much in favour of registering lobbyists, and ensuring that those who have worked in government, either elected or otherwise, shall not be allowed to lobby for a period of time after leaving government. I’m all in favour of having public disclosure as to meetings that occur between lobbyists and government officials, be they bureaucrats or the politicians themselves, because it can go too far.

If you look at the example of the United States, it’s really made their government – in my view – dysfunctional. The lobbyists in Washington – and they’re everywhere – have huge amounts of money at their disposal and, to a degree, end up owning the politicians.

Lynch: There is a sense that the non-profits are always taking, and so our voices are not as strong as the voice of the Chamber of Commerce. The reason there is a dichotomy is that most legislators, when they hear the word non-profit, think social services, or that they’re asking for money. And so what lobbying has to do in the next 24 to 36 months provincially, is to get legislators to understand that the non-profit sector involves every single ministry and that it is not a throwaway, but an investment of money.

The question of lobbying is always a very difficult one because I don’t think that anybody in the non-profit sector calls themselves a lobbyist, nor do any us of call ourselves government-relations experts. We’re basically transferring information in a very specific way so that people will understand the impact of the decisions they make.

Chapman: In Alberta, the rules governing lobbyists are not strict. Compared to other jurisdictions, we are relatively late in getting into the process of registering lobbyists and the rules are straightforward and simple. They’re naive compared to some jurisdictions. The federal government has a much more rigorous approach. Alberta is not placing a great deal of obligation on lobbyists. You have to declare who you’re acting for, and what kind of activities you’ll be engaging in, including grass-roots activities. For example, if you plan to organize a campaign to approach an MLA, you have to register the fact that you will be doing that.

Ghitter: Lobbyists should be required to disclose the meetings they have had with the bureaucrats and politicians and what topic was discussed. If your competitor hires a lobbyist, it means that your competitor is smarter than you because they’ve hired someone who can explain their point of view, their product, their services. So you’re compelled to come forward and make sure that you’re not outdone, and that you will have someone who can equally explain your position. That’s the nature of the beast. It’s something you live with because there will always be that aspect of political life.

There should be a code of ethics for lobbyists. Anything you can do to enhance the standards, to encourage a positive public perception of lobbying rather than the negative perception that exists with many would be a favourable thing. Registered lobbyists should have their own association and ensure the highest standards of ethics in the conduct of their activities.

Lynch: I don’t think that people who lobby in the non-profit sector should be registered. We don’t need less civic engagement. We need more civic engagement. And why would we make it more difficult for people to talk to their MLAs – who are supposed to talk to people about their issues of concern. Why the legislation creating a registry for lobbyists should include non-profits is beyond me. It might be OK for the big charities, foundations and for universities, but 51% of the 19,000 volunteer organizations in Alberta are entirely volunteer driven – they have no staff and they don’t need any more impediments about who they can talk to.

You cannot legislate honesty. All the legislation in the world cannot stop some people from acting dishonestly. Either our community supports ethical decision-
making or it doesn’t!

Chapman: Businesses are having a tough time adjusting to this. They are now registering more extensively, but in the past they didn’t call it lobbying; they called it quiet diplomacy. They would get together with ministers and senior officials over dinner, or on the golf course, and have a quiet chat about the problems. And they would do it behind closed doors. You’re still allowed to do that, but now people know who’s behind those doors. But we’re still not sure what they’re talking about and what is being accomplished. So I don’t think we’ve gone nearly far enough in terms of public disclosure. I think every person involved in government relations should have to register.

THE FINAL WORD

Get used to it. Lobbying has become a fact of business life, for enterprises big and small. Smaller organizations advance their causes through industry or professional associations. Large corporations pay careful attention to their government-relations sections. Lobbying is a tool that, like any other, can be used for ethical or unethical means. As Karen Lynch points out, you can’t legislate honesty. And as we have learned from Ken Chapman, the rules are still pretty loose.

The panel raises a number of important questions. Should the same rules that apply to for-profit corporations apply to volunteer organizations? Where do organizations in the education and health-care sectors fit? And who can answer the ethical question of whether people who have served or worked in government should be able to make a better-than-good living trying to persuade their former colleagues to go in certain directions.

Read more: http://albertaventure.com/2010/04/to-lobby-or-not-to-lobby/2/#ixzz0xeXhwpqc
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives