DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017: Why Riverside Food Network is losing volunteers

The decision: how to spend next year's £45,000 for volunteer support: reimburse volunteers' travel costs, fund a part-time volunteer coordinator with online shift booking, or do both at a smaller scale. The brief and the data →

Verdict: ✓ Sound research
Research score: 96 of 100
Analysis rating: 1,221
Head to head, this task: won 10 of 19

Scorecard

Numbers 12 of 12 right

Question		Its answer	True
What percentage of active volunteers who responded chose 'The cost of travelling to the site' as a difficulty in Q2?	✓	37.2%	37.2%
What percentage of lapsed volunteers who responded chose 'The cost of travelling to the site' as a difficulty in Q2?	✓	40.2%	40.2%
Is the difference between active and lapsed respondents in the share choosing 'The cost of travelling to the site' in Q2 statistically significant at the 95% level? (1 for yes, 0 for no)	✓	No	No
Weighted to the age mix of all 1,000 lapsed volunteers, what percentage of lapsed volunteers would choose 'The cost of travelling to the site' as a difficulty in Q2?	✓	47.4%	47.4%
What percentage of lapsed respondents gave a scheduling reason as their main reason for stopping in Q3 (either of its first two options: shifts changed at short notice, or hard to arrange shifts)?	✓	42.9%	42.9%
What is the 95% margin of error, in percentage points, on that unweighted share of lapsed respondents giving a scheduling reason as their main reason?	✓	9.2 points	9.17 points
On average, how many difficulties did each respondent choose in Q2 (counting every option except 'None of these', which counts as zero), across all respondents?	✓	1.553	1.55
What percentage of lapsed respondents said they would be likely (fairly or very) to volunteer again if they could arrange their shifts online (Q4)?	✓	40.2%	40.2%
How many of the open-text answers mention shift scheduling (booking or swapping shifts, or last-minute changes or cancellations)?	✓	37	34
What percentage of the active volunteers invited completed the survey?	✓	52.4%	52.4%
What percentage of the lapsed volunteers invited completed the survey?	✓	11.2%	11.2%
If the lapsed respondents were representative, about how many of the 1,000 lapsed volunteers would give a scheduling reason (either of the first two Q3 options) as their main reason, using the unweighted share?	✓	429	429

Traps in the data 8 of 8 handled

✓Travel cost is the most-cited difficulty overall, but it is cited about as often by active volunteers (37%) as by lapsed ones (40%), so it does not explain who left. Short-notice shift changes (14% active against 52% lapsed), no way to book or swap shifts and not being told about changes differ sharply.
✓The operations lead believes volunteers leave because of travel costs. Among lapsed respondents, 43% give a scheduling reason as their main reason against 12% travel cost.
✓Q2 is multi-select: respondents chose 1.6 difficulties on average, so columns add up to more than 100%.
✓52% of active volunteers responded but only 11% of lapsed ones, so the lapsed base is small (112) and those who replied may differ from the 89% who did not (for example, still feeling some attachment).
✓Volunteers aged 65 or over are 43% of respondents but about 26% of volunteers in the database; younger volunteers cite travel cost more. Weighted to the lapsed age mix, travel cost among lapsed volunteers rises from 40% to 47%; a scheduling main reason goes from 43% to 41%, still well ahead of travel cost (21%).
✓Lapsed under-25s (base 11) mostly give travel cost as their main reason (8 of 11).
✓The travel-cost gap between lapsed and active respondents (3.0 points) is not significant at 95%.
✓40% of lapsed respondents say they would be likely to volunteer again with online booking: a stated intention about a hypothetical, from a small and self-selected base.

The analysis

Recommendation

Choose the 'both at smaller scale' option, but with the balance tilted toward a part-time volunteer coordinator plus online booking and reliable change communications as the core investment. Do not spend all £45,000 on universal travel reimbursement: travel cost is the most-mentioned single difficulty, but scheduling is the main stated reason for leaving (42.9% vs 11.6%), and the active-lapsed travel gap is not statistically significant. Add a ring-fenced travel-support pilot for under-25s and volunteers who name travel as their main barrier, rather than a universal scheme. For the chair, about 40% of lapsed respondents say online booking would make them likely to return, rising to 60% among scheduling-main lapsed, but this is not a reliable count of actual returns. For the volunteer manager, the under-25 data justify testing targeted travel support, but the evidence rests on only 11 lapsed under-25s.

What would change it

Evidence that online booking produces low actual reactivation/retention in a pilot, or that targeted travel support produces materially more shifts retained per pound, especially among under-25s, would shift the balance toward travel reimbursement. A well-powered under-25 study showing travel is the dominant causal barrier would also justify a larger travel scheme.

Findings

Scheduling, not travel, is the main reason lapsed volunteers give for stopping; this should anchor the spend decision.

High confidenceBase 112

Q3: shifts changed at short notice 29.5% plus hard to arrange shifts 13.4% = 42.9% (48/112); travel cost as main reason 11.6% (13/112). Q2 lapsed: shifts changed at short notice 51.8%, no easy way to arrange shifts 42.0%, not told about changes in good time 41.1%.
Travel cost is the single most-mentioned difficulty overall, but it is not significantly more common among lapsed than active volunteers and is not the dominant stated reason for leaving.

High confidenceBase 327

Q2 cost: active 37.2% (80/215) vs lapsed 40.2% (45/112); difference 3.0pp, 95% two-proportion test z=0.53, not significant. Q2 total: cost 38.2% is the highest single item, but Q3 main reason travel is only 11.6%.
Online booking has the strongest stated reactivation signal among lapsed volunteers, especially those who left for scheduling reasons.

Medium confidenceBase 112

Q4 net likely (4-5): 40.2% of all lapsed (45/112); 60.4% of scheduling-main lapsed (29/48); 14.3% of travel-main lapsed (2/14). This is stated intention, not a forecast of actual return.
Travel reimbursement has narrower stated appeal overall and is concentrated among the small travel-main lapsed group.

Medium confidenceBase 112

Q5 net likely: 26.8% of all lapsed (30/112); 57.1% of travel-main lapsed (8/14); 27.1% of scheduling-main lapsed (13/48). The travel-main subgroup base is only 14.
Under-25 lapsed volunteers point strongly to travel, but the subgroup evidence is very thin; targeted support is plausible but should be piloted rather than rolled out universally.

Low confidenceBase 11

Lapsed under 25: Q2 cost 81.8% (9/11), Q3 travel main reason 72.7% (8/11). Active under 25: Q2 cost 74.1% (20/27). Lapsed under-25s are 9.8% of lapsed respondents vs 22% of the lapsed population; weighting lapsed Q2 cost to population age gives 47.4%.
Active volunteers report fewer scheduling problems than lapsed volunteers, but more than a third still report travel cost, so support could improve current retention as well as reactivation.

High confidenceBase 215

Q2 active: shifts changed at short notice 14.4%, no easy way to arrange shifts 11.6%, not told about changes 7.4%, travel cost 37.2%, none of these 28.4%. Q2 lapsed: 51.8%, 42.0%, 41.1%, 40.2%, none 2.7%.
Open text echoes the structured findings: scheduling and communication are prominent, alongside travel and parking costs/distance.

Medium confidenceBase 109

37 of 109 open-text answers mention scheduling/booking/swapping or shift changes/cancellations; 31 mention travel costs, fares, parking, fuel or distance.

Caveats

Lapsed response is low: 112/1,000 completed (11.2%) vs active 215/410 (52.4%), so lapsed estimates are more uncertain and may be biased toward more engaged or more dissatisfied people.
Lapsed respondents under-represent under-25s: 9.8% of lapsed completes vs 22% of the lapsed population, so age-specific lapsed estimates need caution; weighting raises lapsed travel difficulty from 40.2% to about 47.4%.
Q4 and Q5 measure hypothetical stated intention, not actual return behaviour; they will overstate what online booking or travel reimbursement would achieve.
The under-25 lapsed base is only 11 and the travel-main lapsed base is 14, so subgroup percentages have wide margins of error and should not be treated as precise forecasts.
Q3 forces a single main reason, but barriers overlap; scheduling, travel, communication and circumstances can all contribute to stopping.
The survey has no cost data for online booking, coordination or reimbursement, so it cannot determine value for money or exact budget split.
Tables are unweighted; population age mix differs from respondent age mix, especially for lapsed volunteers.

Next steps

decisionApprove and implement a part-time volunteer coordinator with online shift booking, swapping and reliable change notifications.
experimentRun a time-limited travel-support pilot for under-25s and volunteers who name travel as a main barrier, covering fares, fuel, parking or a travel card.
researchDo follow-up interviews with lapsed volunteers, especially under-25s and scheduling-main leavers, to test why they left and what would actually bring them back.
monitorMonitor actual reactivation and retention monthly after booking and pilot launch, including shift fill, swaps, late cancellations and travel claims.

Open-text themes it coded

Shift scheduling, booking, swapping and last-minute changes 37Travel costs, fares, parking, fuel and distance 31Notice and communication about changes 18Nothing needs changing / already easy 38Recognition and feeling valued 2Training 1Parking and site access 6

The survey it planned

1 screening question and 10 questions, as the model wrote them.

S1
Have you completed at least one volunteer shift with Riverside Food Network in the last 12 months?
One answer
- Yes
- No
- I'm not sure
Continues if Yes
Q1
In the last 3 months, have you completed at least one volunteer shift with Riverside Food Network?
One answer
- Yes
- No
Q2
Which Riverside Food Network distribution site did you volunteer at most recently? If you volunteered at more than one site, please choose the one you attended most recently.
One answer
- Site 1
- Site 2
- Site 3
- Site 4
- Site 5
- Site 6
- Site 7
- Site 8
- Site 9
- I can't remember
Q3
Thinking about the last 12 months, what, if anything, has made volunteering at Riverside Food Network difficult? Please select all that apply. If none, select 'No difficulties'.
Any that apply
- Cost of travel (bus fares, fuel, parking)
- Time or difficulty of the journey
- Shift times or days did not suit me
- Booking or swapping shifts was inconvenient
- Communication with my site lead
- Physical demands of the role
- Work commitments
- Caring responsibilities
- Health reasons
- Feeling unsupported or unwelcome
- Lack of information or training
- Other reason
- No difficulties
Q4
How much do you agree or disagree with this statement? The cost of travelling to my volunteer site is a barrier to volunteering as often as I would like.
Scale

Scale 1-5: Strongly disagree to Strongly agree
Q5
In a typical month when you volunteered, about how much did you spend on travel to and from Riverside Food Network shifts (bus fares, fuel, parking, etc.)?
One answer
- £0
- £1–£5
- £6–£10
- £11–£20
- £21–£30
- £31 or more
- Don't know
- Prefer not to say
Q6
If Riverside Food Network reimbursed your travel costs, how much more likely would you be to volunteer, or to volunteer more often?
Scale

Scale 1-5: Not at all more likely to Much more likely
Q7
If Riverside Food Network introduced online shift booking and swapping, so you could book or swap shifts without phoning or messaging your site lead, how much more likely would you be to volunteer, or to volunteer more often?
Scale

Scale 1-5: Not at all more likely to Much more likely
Q8
You said you have not completed a volunteer shift in the last 3 months. What are the main reasons you stopped volunteering with Riverside Food Network? Please select up to three.
Any that apply
- Travel costs (bus fares, fuel, parking)
- Time or difficulty of the journey
- Shift times or days did not suit me
- Booking or swapping shifts was inconvenient
- Communication with my site lead
- Physical demands of the role
- Work commitments
- Caring responsibilities
- Health reasons
- Feeling unsupported or unwelcome
- I moved away or changed location
- Other reason
- Prefer not to say
Routing Shown only if Q1 is: No

Judges: assumptive
Having no shifts in the last three months does not necessarily mean someone has stopped volunteering. Respondents on a temporary break or volunteering infrequently are nevertheless asked to give reasons they stopped.
It is shown to everyone with no shift in the last 3 months, but asks why they 'stopped volunteering'. Some of these people may only be on a break or between seasonal shifts and still see themselves as volunteers. There is no option for 'I haven't stopped'.
Q9
Which, if any, of the following would make you consider returning to volunteer at Riverside Food Network? Please select all that apply.
Any that apply
- Reimbursement of travel costs
- Online shift booking and swapping
- More flexible shift times
- Better communication or support from the site lead
- Nothing would make me consider returning
- Other
- Don't know
Routing Shown only if Q1 is: No
Q10
What is your age?
One answer
- 16–24
- 25–34
- 35–44
- 45–54
- 55–64
- 65–74
- 75 or older
- Prefer not to say

Sample plan

Invite everyone on the volunteer database who completed at least one shift in the last 12 months: about 410 active volunteers (at least one shift in the last 3 months) and about 1,000 lapsed volunteers (no shift in the last 3 months; about 1,410 invitations in total). Send by email and SMS with a unique link, and send two reminders. Target about 330 completes. Set monitoring quotas to reach at least 30 completes per distribution site and at least 10 lapsed respondents per site where available; boost under-represented sites and lapsed respondents with reminders. Use database site and active/lapsed status for invitation and weighting, and validate with Q1 and Q2. Precision warning: ±7 percentage points at 95% confidence for each of 9 sites requires about 196 completes per site under worst-case simple random sampling, about 1,764 completes in total. With about 330 completes, average site-level precision will be roughly ±15–16 percentage points, so site-level results will be indicative only and must be reported with confidence intervals rather than as meeting the ±7-point requirement. If trustees require ±7 points per site, the survey as specified is infeasible; they would need to fund a much larger census/recruitment exercise or accept pooled/site-group reporting and city-level estimates.