Sign inTest your prompt

Benchmarks / SurveyBench / Why Riverside Food Network is losing volunteers / Gemini 3.8 Flash

Measured by Spring Prompt

Gemini 3.8 Flash: 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
✗ Not sound
Research score
90 of 100
Analysis rating
898
Head to head, this task
won 6 of 10

Why it is not sound

The analysis

  • Missed a trap: 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%).

Scorecard

Numbers 12 of 12 right

QuestionIts answerTrue
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)✓NoNo
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 points9.17 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?✓1.551.55
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)?✓3634
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?✓429429

Traps in the data 7 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

Allocate the majority of the £45,000 budget to hiring a part-time volunteer coordinator and procuring a modern, mobile-friendly volunteer scheduling platform (Option 2), while ring-fencing a modest targeted bursary (e.g., £5,000-£7,500) for need-based or under-25 travel reimbursement. Full blanket travel reimbursement would consume the entire fund without resolving the operational root cause (scheduling and communication failure) that drives over 50% of volunteer churn.

What would change it

If a cost-modelling audit shows that a digital rota tool and part-time coordinator can be sustained on less than £25,000 annually while blanket travel reimbursement claims across 410 active volunteers average under £15,000 annually, a 50/50 split would be viable. Conversely, if volunteer drop-off among under-25s threatens essential shift capacity at critical sites that older volunteers cannot staff, the travel fund proportion should be increased.

Findings

  1. Travel cost is a widespread friction point for current volunteers, but scheduling failure is the primary driver of actual drop-off.

    High confidenceBase 327

    37.2% of active and 40.2% of lapsed volunteers selected travel cost as a difficulty (not statistically significant, p > 0.05). However, only 11.6% of lapsed volunteers cited travel costs as their main reason for leaving, compared to 42.9% who cited scheduling problems (29.5% shifts changed at short notice, 13.4% hard to arrange/swap). If including lack of timely communication (12.5%), rota administration accounts for 55.4% of attrition.

  2. Online shift booking has greater re-engagement leverage than travel reimbursement across the lapsed volunteer base.

    Medium confidenceBase 112

    40.2% of lapsed volunteers report they would be likely (23.2% fairly, 17.0% very) to return if online shift booking were introduced, rising to 60.4% among those who left due to scheduling issues. In contrast, only 26.8% of lapsed volunteers report they would be likely to return if travel costs were reimbursed.

  3. The travel burden is disproportionately concentrated among under-25 volunteers, but this reflects a small segment of the overall volunteer pool.

    Medium confidenceBase 27

    74.1% of under-25 respondents identified travel cost as a difficulty in Q2, and 72.7% of lapsed under-25s cited it as their primary reason for leaving. However, under-25s make up only 18% of the active roster and 22% of lapsed volunteers, and the lapsed under-25 survey base is small (n=11).

  4. Manual rota coordination across 9 separate sites creates severe communication breakdowns and volunteer dissatisfaction.

    High confidenceBase 112

    Among lapsed volunteers, 51.8% reported short-notice shift changes and 41.1% reported not being told about changes in good time. In Q1 open text, 36 separate volunteers specifically cited frustration with ad-hoc messaging, unnotified shift cancellations, or inability to self-manage swaps.

Caveats

  • Response rate among lapsed volunteers was only 11.2% (112/1,000), indicating potential non-response bias where dissatisfied volunteers or those still somewhat engaged were more likely to respond.
  • The survey over-represented volunteers aged 65 and over (43.1% in sample vs 26.3% in combined population) and under-represented under-25s (8.3% vs 20.9%), requiring age-weighting when evaluating citywide trends.
  • The sample sizes for subgroup analyses are small (e.g., only 11 lapsed under-25 respondents), so youth-specific percentage breakdowns carry wide margins of error.
  • Stated intent to return (Q4 and Q5) measures hypothetical interest rather than committed behavior; actual reactivation rates are typically 30-50% of survey intent.

Next steps

  • decisionSelect and procure an off-the-shelf volunteer management and self-service scheduling software (e.g., Better Impact, Rosterfy, or TeamKinetic) to replace site-level spreadsheets.
  • decisionDraft job description and recruit a part-time Volunteer Coordinator funded by the grant.
  • experimentPilot an Under-25 / Student Travel Hardship Fund capped at £5,000 across high-cost transit routes.
  • experimentRun a targeted reactivation campaign to the 1,000 lapsed volunteers announcing self-service online booking.
  • monitorTrack volunteer retention, shift fill rates, and short-notice cancellations across all 9 sites on a monthly dashboard.

Open-text themes it coded

Self-service shift booking and swapping 21Short-notice cancellations and poor rota communication 18Travel fares and fuel expenses 24Parking availability and parking charges 6Satisfied with current arrangements / No change needed 38Volunteer recognition and initial training 4

The survey it planned

2 screening questions and 10 questions, as the model wrote them.

  1. S1

    Have you volunteered with Riverside Food Network at any point in the past 12 months?

    One answer
    • Yes
    • No

    Continues if Yes

  2. S2

    When did you last complete a volunteer shift with Riverside Food Network?

    One answer
    • Within the last 3 months
    • Between 4 and 12 months ago
    • More than 12 months ago

    Continues if Within the last 3 months; Between 4 and 12 months ago

  3. Q1

    Which Riverside Food Network site have you volunteered at most often in the past 12 months?

    One answer
    • Site 1
    • Site 2
    • Site 3
    • Site 4
    • Site 5
    • Site 6
    • Site 7
    • Site 8
    • Site 9
  4. Q2

    Which age group do you belong to?

    One answer
    • 18–24
    • 25–34
    • 35–49
    • 50–64
    • 65 or over
    • Prefer not to say
  5. Q3

    On a typical shift, roughly how much out-of-pocket travel expense (such as bus/train fares, fuel, or parking) do you spend to get to and from your volunteering site?

    One answer
    • £0 (I walk, cycle, or get a free lift)
    • Under £2.50
    • £2.50 to £5.00
    • £5.01 to £7.50
    • More than £7.50
  6. Q4

    Which of the following challenges, if any, have you experienced while volunteering with Riverside Food Network? (Select all that apply)

    Any that apply
    • The cost of public transport fares or vehicle parking
    • Difficulty arranging or swapping shifts via phone calls or messages with the site lead
    • Not being able to see available shifts ahead of time
    • Shift times clashing with paid work or family commitments
    • Physical strain or fatigue during shifts
    • Unclear communication or lack of support on site
    • I have not experienced any significant difficulties
  7. Q5

    How easy or difficult has it been for you to arrange, book, or swap shifts by contacting your site lead?

    Scale

    Scale 1-5: Very difficult to Very easy

    Judges: assumptive

    It assumes everyone has experience arranging shifts by contacting a site lead. There is no response for volunteers who have not used that process.

    It assumes the respondent has tried to arrange, book, or swap shifts by contacting the site lead and provides no N/A option.

  8. Q6

    What were the main reasons you stopped or paused volunteering with Riverside Food Network? (Select up to 3)

    Any that apply
    • Travel costs (bus fares, petrol, parking) became too expensive
    • Too difficult or time-consuming to coordinate shifts with the site lead
    • Changes in personal commitments (new job, family, caregiving)
    • Health issues or physical demands of the role
    • Moved away from the area
    • Did not feel valued or supported
    • Site opening hours or shift times did not suit me
    • Other

    Routing Shown only if S2 is: Between 4 and 12 months ago

  9. Q7

    If Riverside Food Network fully reimbursed your travel expenses (public transport fares or parking costs), how would this affect your volunteering?

    One answer
    • I would definitely return / increase my shifts
    • I might return / increase my shifts
    • It would make no difference to how often I volunteer
    • Not applicable (I do not incur travel costs)
    Judges: ambiguous

    The response options allow increased volunteering or no change, but not decreased volunteering. 'Fully reimbursed your travel expenses' also conflicts with the narrower parenthetical list: respondents paying for petrol cannot tell whether their costs would be covered.

    Reimbursement is defined as public transport fares or parking only. Q3 counts fuel as a travel cost, so drivers cannot tell whether their fuel would be covered.

  10. Q8

    If Riverside Food Network introduced an online system or mobile app where you could view open shifts and instantly book or swap them, how would this affect your volunteering?

    One answer
    • I would definitely return / increase my shifts
    • I might return / increase my shifts
    • It would make no difference to how often I volunteer
    • I would prefer to keep contacting my site lead directly
  11. Q9

    Next year, Riverside Food Network has a fixed budget of £45,000 to invest in volunteer support. If only one of the following could be funded, which would make the biggest positive difference to you?

    One answer
    • Option A: Full reimbursement of travel costs (bus fares and parking)
    • Option B: A part-time volunteer coordinator and an easy online shift-booking app
    • Option C: A hybrid scheme (a partial travel subsidy plus a simpler online booking tool)
    • None of these would make a difference to me
  12. Q10

    Is there anything else that has made volunteering difficult, or that Riverside Food Network could do to support you better?

    Open text
Sample plan

Census deployment via email and SMS to all 1,410 individuals on the database who completed a shift in the past 12 months (410 active, ~1,000 lapsed). Target: ~330 completed responses (~23% overall response rate), stratified by status (~100 active, ~230 lapsed) and site (~37 completes per site across the 9 distribution sites). Precision note for trustees: Across the full network, n=330 yields a margin of error of ±4.7% at 95% confidence (N=1,410). However, at the individual site level (n≈37 of ~156 volunteers per site), the achievable precision with finite population correction is approximately ±13.8% at 95% confidence. Achieving the trustees' desired ±7% precision per site would require ~95 completes per site (855 total completes), which exceeds the 330-complete budget and database size; site-level comparisons will therefore report confidence intervals accordingly or group similar sites into tiers.