Thank you for your kind explanation and comments on my response. I also understand that the conflict surrounding the volunteering infrastructure in England was mostly between VCs and VCS. However, I am wondering if there wasn't any conflict in the roles and functions of the two entities at the local level in England. During the debate on volunteering infrastructure for the past two to three years, VCs had insisted that they were 'specialist volunteering infrastructure'. What does that mean? Wasn't there any conflict involved between VCs and CVSs? Can CVSs also be regarded as 'specialist volunteering infrastructure'? Your further comments are appreciated in advance.
To extend Rob's comments to another country, the United States has always experienced a similar situation with Volunteer Centers - some are independent charities, some are within United Way organizations, and the rest may be housed practically anywhere (state government, another charity, an educational institution, etc0. This has always been a bit confusing when trying to determine mission, identity, pattern of services,national affiliation, etc. Rob's answer is technically correct - local volunteer infrastructure organizations should best determine and reflect their own community's needs - but the reality, at least in the US, has turned out sometimes to be a bit messier and more politically contentious.
Chang-ho Lee,
Sun, 01/15/2006Steve McCurley, Editor, e-Volunteerism
Mon, 01/16/2006