Research and analysis

Promoting equity, diversity and inclusion in volunteering

Published 3 February 2025

Applies to England

This research was commissioned under the 2022 to 2024 Sunak Conservative government.

 1. Acknowledgements

This research was commissioned by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) in the summer of 2023.

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the DCMS Volunteering and Tackling Loneliness Team for their management of the project and their valuable input and support. We extend our thanks to James Richardson and Georgina Colton for their project leadership and contributions throughout the process.

This project was conducted by independent researchers, Basis Social, in partnership with New Philanthropy Capital (NPC). It forms part of a wider programme of work commissioned by DCMS under the Volunteering Research Managed Services work programme.

Finally, we would like to extend a large thank you to all the research participants (including expert stakeholders and volunteer-involving organisations) who gave up their time to participate in this research and share their experiences with us.

This research was conducted by:

Victoria Harkness - Senior Director, Basis Social

Rosie McLeod – Senior Associate, Basis Social

Tom Curran – Associate Director, Basis Social

Dan Lemmon – Senior Research Executive, Basis Social 

Katie Boswell – Associate Director, NPC

John Williams – Senior Consultant, NPC

Penny Nkrumah – Innovation and Product Manager, NPC 

This report has been peer reviewed by:

Shazia Ginai – Markey Research Society ED&I Council Member, Colour Of Research (CORe) former Board Chair, and Women in Research (WIRe) Advisory Board member.

For further information about this report please email: social@basisresearch.co.uk.

2. Key messages

This research explores the effectiveness of different interventions and practices in equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI), with an emphasis on smaller volunteer-involving organisations (VIOs) and those led by minority or minoritised communities. It aims to identify what types of interventions government and wider stakeholders should champion and support others in the sector to implement, including DCMS’s role.

It involved a desk review of academic and grey literature alongside deep dives into specific organisations and their approaches to EDI. This was followed by 29 online in-depth qualitative interviews with 19 VIOs and 10 expert stakeholders across the voluntary sector (conducted between August 2023 to February 2024).

The research found that what is needed and ‘what works’ to improve EDI depends on the assets and culture of the organisation. Enablers and barriers tended to reflect VIOs’ position within communities, and the extent to which they prioritised EDI more broadly. Key themes identified included: relatability (with volunteers encouraged by a purpose or cause connected to EDI, and seeing leadership which reflects and represents the community); commitment (investing time and money in EDI if it is to remain on the organisational agenda); and, having an inclusive culture (which includes decisive responses to prejudice and discrimination). The nature of the challenging post-pandemic context in which organisations are operating was also seen to have made volunteer recruitment and retention more challenging, particularly for under-represented and minoritised groups.

In terms of EDI practice, designing more inclusive recruitment practices appeared to be yielding results. In volunteer onboarding, taking measures to increase accessibility and offer tailored training were receiving positive feedback. Volunteer management has been a critical factor in VIOs’ work to improve the volunteer experience, including their ability to manage sensitive and challenging scenarios. Finally, adopting more systematic processes for gathering feedback was helping VIOs actively use this information to improve their offer and increase retention.

The research uncovered a range of interventions government and wider stakeholders should champion and support others in the sector to implement. While VIOs want to improve their EDI, capacity was a key barrier to implementation. Dedicated grants and support were therefore prioritised, with funder expectations already recognised as a lever for change. ‘Funder plus’ offers, which include a budget line for EDI in volunteering, would be welcomed both for the additional resource they provide and for the mindset shift they enable. There were mixed views on the role and need for standardised data on EDI; the key debate being whether it would help VIOs in practice and how it would be resourced. There was a strong appetite for resources and guidance that VIOs can use to improve their practice, which infrastructure organisations are considered well placed to provide. Training and tailored guidance were also considered critical to cater to the wide diversity of the sector, as was good practice sharing. DCMS could use its convening power for direction setting, helping to unlock resources from other funders, and for sustaining engagement.

3. Executive summary

3.1 Overview

Improving the equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) of volunteering in England is a ministerial and departmental priority for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). It’s also a key theme of the Vision for Volunteering (2022), a ten-year collaborative project that sets out a view of what volunteering needs to look like by 2032. Whilst the evidence on the benefits of volunteering to individuals and communities is strong, some groups are less likely to volunteer, are more likely to experience barriers to volunteering, and are more likely to have fewer positive experiences when volunteering. However, there is relatively little evidence on organisational approaches to improving EDI within smaller volunteer-involving organisations (VIOs) and/or VIOs led by minority or minoritised communities.

Accordingly, this research explores the effectiveness of different interventions and practices in EDI across a range of different sized VIOs, with an emphasis on smaller organisations. The research is not intended to be representative of the sector, nor of smaller VIOs and VIOs led by minority or minoritised communities specifically. Nor is intended to provide a wholesale review of EDI practices across these groups. Rather, it aims to contribute new insights to the EDI debate and offer a helpful starting point from which to build consensus. It also offers an opportunity to bring together evidence from the two domains of volunteering research and research on improving EDI in the voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE) sector, to draw out learning and fill gaps in understanding. In turn, the research helps to identify what types of interventions government and wider stakeholders should champion and support others in the sector to implement. It also considers DCMS’s specific role in this, as the government department responsible for volunteering.

The project involved an initial scoping phase which included a desk review of academic and grey literature alongside deep dives into specific organisations and their approaches to EDI (conducted August 2023 – October 2023). This was followed by a mainstage of primary research (which forms the main focus for this report), which entailed 29 online in-depth qualitative interviews with 19 VIOs and 10 expert stakeholders across the voluntary sector (conducted November 2023 - February 2024).

This research has been commissioned by DCMS as part of a two-year Volunteering Research Managed Services (VRMS) call-off contract.

3.2 Main findings

Effectiveness of different interventions and practices in EDI across different sized VIOs

While there is some evidence from evaluations of publicly funded interventions about the outcomes of efforts to improve the EDI of volunteering, there is little from VIOs themselves. For smaller VIOs, Phase 2 of this research found that what is needed and ‘what works’ to improve EDI depends on the assets and culture of the organisation. Enablers and barriers tended to reflect VIOs’ position within communities, and the extent to which they prioritised EDI more broadly.

Based on the research, the following themes were identified.

• Relatability: A purpose or cause connected to EDI encouraged volunteers to commit support, while leadership and teams that reflected and represented the community helped volunteers identify with the organisation and feel included.
• Commitment and resource: Investment of time and/or money in EDI at the organisational level helped VIOs to prioritise it and prevent it from slipping down the agenda. Skills and resources were necessary to provide positive experiences for volunteers, and to offer flexibility, including through digital tools.
• Inclusive culture: This was considered important to volunteers’ sense of belonging, which included decisive responses to prejudice and discrimination.
• Challenging context: The wider factors of the pandemic, cost-of-living crisis, and a decline in supportive infrastructure for VIOs were thought to have made volunteer recruitment and retention more challenging, particularly for under-represented and minoritised groups.

Current practices among VIOs seeking to improve EDI in volunteering reflected the wider literature on what interventions should be pursued, and there was certainly an appetite for sharing good practice. Designing more inclusive recruitment practices appeared to be yielding positive results - for example, redesigning job roles, raising awareness of opportunities, and working to better understand and engage different groups. In volunteer onboarding, taking measures to increase accessibility and offer tailored training were receiving positive feedback. Volunteer management is time consuming and requires skilled staff, but has been a critical factor in VIOs’ work to improve the volunteer experience, including their ability to manage sensitive and challenging scenarios. Finally, adopting more systematic processes for gathering feedback was helping VIOs actively use this information to improve their offer and increase retention.

Types of interventions government and wider stakeholders should champion and support others in the sector to implement

Several studies suggest that improving organisations’ data collection on EDI is important to understanding the nature of the issues they face (NCVO, 2021; Hylton et al, 2019; ACEVO and Voice4Change, 2020). The extent to which the VIOs engaged through this research collected data on EDI varied, and approaches were fragmented. The main challenges were limited resources, incomplete data collection, data security and privacy, cultural sensitivities and inappropriate data categories. Stakeholders and VIOs interviewed held different views on the role and need for standardised data; the key debate being whether it would help VIOs in practice and how it would be resourced. They identified the benefits for VIOs as being able to use it to make improvements, streamline funders’ requests and share data publicly. Wider sector benefits were identified as quality and comparability of data, learning, permitting better directing of funding to underrepresented groups, and more funder accountability. To address VIO challenges, suggested actions included advising on thresholds for when to collect EDI data, agreeing practical and proportional standards for data collection, offering dedicated funding, not making data collection compulsory, and supporting with capacity and skills for data collection.

While VIOs wanted to improve in EDI, capacity was a key barrier to implementing many of the good ideas shared, as it required staff resources to introduce or improve. To implement these changes, VIOs sought additional, dedicated resource - in particular, staff with the capacity to focus on implementing EDI policies. Accordingly, when considering the types of wider interventions they would find most useful, VIOs prioritised dedicated grants and support. Funder expectations were already recognised as a lever for change, and the more aligned these were, the better. ‘Funder plus’ offers, which include a budget line for EDI in volunteering, would be welcomed both for the additional resource they provide and for the mindset shift they enable. There was a strong appetite for supportive resources and guidance that VIOs can use to improve their practice, which infrastructure organisations are considered well placed to provide. Training and tailored guidance were considered critical to catering to the wide diversity of the sector, and good practice sharing was also welcomed.

DCMS’s role in convening the wider sector in discussions around EDI in volunteering

DCMS is looked to as a catalyst in this area. Stakeholders and VIOs saw DCMS’s value in using its convening power for direction setting, helping to unlock resources from other funders, and in sustaining engagement. It could also play a role in helping to enable the setting of clearer expectations, and in education and support for good practice.

To best move a shared agenda forward, it would be helpful to convene around a common set of goals and aspirations for EDI, building on those already defined in the Vision for Volunteering’s section on equity and inclusion. This would help to build trust, offer greater clarity and reassurance that there is genuine cross-sector alignment on why EDI in volunteering matters, and what its promotion aims to achieve.

4. Introduction

4.1 Overview

This research explores the effectiveness of different interventions and practices in equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) across a range of different sized volunteer-involving organisations (VIOs), with an emphasis on smaller organisations. It aims to contribute new insights to the EDI debate and identify what types of interventions government and wider stakeholders should champion and support others in the sector to implement, including DCMS’s role in this.

4.2 Context and background

Improving the EDI of volunteering in England is a ministerial and departmental priority for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). One of DCMS’s goals is to encourage and enable a lifetime of participation for everybody, and to support more people to experience the benefits of activities such as volunteering. Whilst the evidence on the benefits of volunteering to individuals and communities is strong, some groups are less likely to volunteer, are more likely to experience barriers to volunteering, and are more likely to have fewer positive experiences when volunteering. Equity is also a key theme of the Vision for Volunteering (2022), a ten-year collaborative project that sets out a view of what volunteering needs to look like, and how this will make volunteers feel about their roles, by 2032. By making volunteering more accessible and welcoming to all, it can be a driving force in reducing social inequalities.

A range of activities are happening across the sector to improve EDI outcomes. There is also a significant body of data and evidence for understanding the factors which influence these outcomes. What so far appears to be lacking, however, is a comprehensive overview of the types of interventions that can help drive change, the evidence of their effectiveness, and learnings for successful implementation, including challenges, opportunities and barriers. There is also a benefit in bringing together evidence from the two domains of volunteering research and research on improving EDI in the voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE) sector, to draw out learning and fill gaps in understanding. This should strengthen people’s ability to take evidence-informed action on the specific area of EDI in volunteering.  

Accordingly, DCMS commissioned Basis Social and New Philanthropy Capital (NPC) to conduct further research into the current state of EDI in volunteering, looking at how VIOs could be better supported as a way to help sustain and promote EDI in volunteering into the future, including the role of DCMS in this.

This project forms part of a wider programme of work commissioned by DCMS under a two-year Volunteering Research Managed Services (VRMS) call-off contract, designed to fill knowledge gaps and develop useful evidence that can support policymakers and practitioners in the VCSE sector.

4.3 Research objectives

The research sought to:

• Provide evidence of the effectiveness of different interventions and practices in EDI across a mix of different sized VIOs (targeting a range of organisational size, but weighted to smaller organisations since less is known in this space) to help identify the types of interventions that work.
• From this, identify what types of interventions DCMS should champion and support others in the sector to implement.
• Consider how DCMS can convene the wider sector in discussions around EDI in volunteering, beyond the ‘usual suspects’ (which tend to be larger VIOs).

More specifically the research aimed to address the following questions (and it is these that the report that follows is focused on answering):

1. What are the enablers and barriers to improving EDI in volunteering?
2. What current EDI practices exist across the range of different VIOs, with a particular focus on smaller organisations?
3. What are the challenges and implications for how data on EDI is captured and used in relation to volunteering?
4. What do VIOs see as the role of DCMS in supporting and facilitating improved EDI in the sector?

Further information about the definitions used and scope of work is provided in Appendix 1.

4.4 Methodology

The focus for this research was informed by an initial scoping review conducted by Basis Social, NPC and London Economics during Spring 2023, as part of the wider VRMS contract. Following this, a two-staged method was adopted for the research. This approach was deliberately iterative, ensuring any primary research built on existing evidence and literature.

Phase 1 – scoping

This consisted of multiple strands of desk research, including a literature review of academic and grey literature, and deep dives into specific organisations’ approaches to EDI. From this a methodology for Phase 2 was designed and agreed in consultation with DCMS (August– October 2023).

Phase 2 – primary research.

The research team conducted 29 online in-depth qualitative interviews with individuals from the following key groups, framed around a high-level volunteering ‘user journey’ (November 2023 - February 2024): 

• Small sized VIOs (x9)
• Medium sized VIOs (x10)
• Expert stakeholders in EDI in the voluntary sector (x10)

VIO size was determined using the scale found in the National Council for Voluntary Organisations’ (NCVO) UK Civil Society Almanac (Tabassum, 2023).

Further technical information about the methodology is provided in Appendix 2. This includes a breakdown of the organisations and stakeholders who took part.

4.5 Note on interpretation

This report draws mainly on the findings of the Phase 2 primary research. It includes insights gleaned through the existing evidence and scoping phase to provide useful context.

The research is not intended to be representative of the sector or all organisations operating in the EDI space. Rather it is intended to act as a starting point for discussion, and this should be borne in mind when reading the report.

The approach to sampling was purposive with additional snowballing, which aimed to reach geographic and sectoral breadth with an emphasis on smaller organisations. Stakeholders reflected expert knowledge of the sector, EDI and volunteering.

Qualitative research is designed to be illustrative, detailed and exploratory. It offers insights into the perceptions, feelings and behaviours of people (or, in this case, representatives of organisations) rather than quantifiable conclusions from a statistically representative sample. This has been reflected in the evidence presented in this report.

Verbatim quotes have been used throughout this report to help to illustrate points made in the main narrative.

5. Phase 1 – Context setting

This section provides a summary of findings from the Phase 1 scoping work, and stakeholders’ and VIOs’ reactions to it. This is helpful in offering context to the findings presented from Phase 2.

5.1 The evidence around EDI in volunteering

There is a growing body of research into which groups are more or less likely to be involved in volunteering. Groups less likely to be involved in volunteering are:

• people aged 25 to35 years old (DCMS, 2023)
• British Asians, in particular British Asian women (Hylton et al, 2019)
• people aged 46 and over who also identify as Black, Asian or another ethnic minority group (Hylton et al, 2019)
• people from lower socio-economic backgrounds (Donohue et al, 2020).
• people without a degree (Donohue et al, 2020)
• those unemployed or not working (Donohue et al, 2020).
• disabled people with physical, multiple and/or more severe conditions (Donohue et al, 2022)

Certain groups have been shown to face specific and intersecting barriers to volunteering. For example, Spirit of 2012’s Volunteering Together report (Donahue et al, 2022) highlights an array of practical and cultural barriers faced by people with disabilities, limiting fair access to opportunities. Other reports identify ethnic minorities experiencing some barriers more acutely than their White British counterparts, for example, in relation to caring responsibilities, needing to study, and the lack of information on opportunities and who offers them (Hylton et al, 2019).

In terms of the experience of volunteering, the recent DCMS-funded Time Well Spent 2023: Volunteering among the Global Majority report (2023) found certain groups were more likely to experience feelings of exclusion and a lack of satisfaction. Global majority volunteers (people of Indigenous, African, Asian, Latin American descent) were twice as likely to feel excluded compared with volunteers overall (12% vs 6%) and less likely to feel a sense of belonging to the organisation (77% vs 84%). These findings also resonated with the stakeholders and VIOs interviewed during Phase 2 of this research.

There is evidence of racism and discrimination in the charity and volunteering sector. A 2020 survey found 68% of respondents reported experiencing, witnessing or hearing stories about racism in their time in the charity sector (ACEVO and Voices4Change, 2020). Reports also found disabled volunteers facing stigma, stereotypes and bias, but that charities’ actions on EDI could expose them to ‘culture war’ debates that distracted and diminished their impact (Chan et al, 2022).

Existing evidence also shows the successive challenges the COVID pandemic and cost-of-living crisis are having on volunteering. This includes both participation in volunteering overall, and also the diversity of those volunteering, with formal volunteer participation declining across almost all ethnic groups in the most recent Community Life Survey from 2021/22 (DCMS, 2023). While this survey identifies which groups are over- or under- represented, there is less insight into specific organisations, groups and activities, partly due to the lack of data from VIOs.

5.2 Reflections on the state of EDI in volunteering today

The stakeholders and VIOs interviewed in this research both recognised a skew towards White middle-class people in formal volunteering activity. They also suggested existing evidence is framed narrowly, so gives only a partial picture of the state of play. Stakeholders, in particular, emphasised several themes which help to bring nuance and a wider framing of the issues, outlined below.

Strong variation by sector, and clustering by areas and organisations

National averages could mask patterns in who is volunteering and where. Stakeholders suggested some sectors do ‘better’ on diversity. For example, the environmental sector’s low diversity, as highlighted by a recent report by RACE (Racial Action for the Climate Emergency, 2023) was contrasted with the arts sector. Some of this variation was attributed to statutory funders’ practices, as their requirements can dictate VIOs’ priorities. Interviewees saw Arts Council England (a DCMS arms-length body), for example, as having influenced arts organisations to focus on diversity, as well as equity and inclusion. 

The EDI of volunteering reflects wider sector and structural inequalities

Stakeholders argued that the EDI of volunteering relates to the EDI of the ‘social sector’ and VIOs more broadly. VIOs in general were considered unrepresentative, with stakeholders perceiving them as often staffed by people with more social and financial capital to help those with less. They felt this reflected, but also compounded, inequalities. The Vision for Volunteering, and the NCVO’s recent publication of the Time Well Spent: Volunteering among the Global Majority research (2023), have kept EDI in volunteering on the sector-level agenda. Stakeholders suggested the Black Lives Matter movement and the work of organisations like Charity So White have also increased visibility of these issues in recent years.

The invisibility of informal activity

Informal and micro-volunteering activities were believed to be more reflective and inclusive of diverse communities, but are less likely to stand out, especially since they are less well featured in the quantitative evidence base. This prompted concern that informal volunteering risked being overlooked as it tends to be harder to measure and report on, thereby possibly missing out on recognition and resourcing.

Intensifying pressure on VCSE organisations

Stakeholders stressed that the combined effects of a cost-of-living crisis and challenging funding environment meant that voluntary and community organisations face pressure to meet increasing demand for services with fewer financial resources (see also CAF, Charity Resilience Index 2024). Volunteer capacity is thereby decreased for other initiatives due to this demand on delivering services. Thus, a VIO’s priority to maximise their volunteer numbers could conflict with making volunteer provision more inclusive and equitable, and/or increasing volunteer diversity. Stakeholders agreed with existing research suggesting VIOs should support fair access to voluntary activities for groups with different needs and behaviours (Carregha et al, 2022), but they questioned whether they could realistically make these changes without additional funding.

Ensuring EDI is not misrepresented as a participation issue

Stakeholders emphasised that people experiencing economic and place-based disadvantage (which intersects with ethnicity and disability) were already stretched by paid and unpaid work obligations, compounded by the cost-of-living crisis. They may therefore lack the capacity in time and resources to engage in formal volunteering, particularly given many already provide informal support and care within their networks and communities.

Transactional vs relational volunteering

Some stakeholders saw a distinction between more ‘transactional’ volunteering opportunities (characterised as highly formalised service delivery, such as delivering prescriptions as an NHS responder) and ‘relational’ activity (where the emphasis is on social connection, mutual benefit and offering something useful to the volunteer, such as local befriending). They felt it was important that volunteering opportunities offered a relational element, so benefits to volunteers were prioritised, and they were never seen as ‘free labour’.

How diversity is being conceived of

Stakeholders suggested government should have a clear definition of equity, diversity, and inclusion as part of its funding programmes, to ensure there is common understanding of the intended impact and objectives of that funding stream. For example, on diversity, whether this is considered at organisational or sector level, and to be clear it would never be about increasing participation among those who don’t have capacity.

6. Phase 2 - Key findings

The remainder of this report is focused on answering the four key research questions, with each taken in turn.

6.1 Q1: What are the enablers and barriers to improving EDI in volunteering?

The enablers and barriers VIOs face in improving EDI in volunteering are influenced by how they understand EDI, as well as the attributes and behaviours of their organisation. These different elements are explored below.

How VIOs understand and interpret EDI in volunteering

For the VIOs interviewed, visible diversity was the most clearly understood aspect of EDI in relation to volunteering. They saw equity and inclusion as being achieved by their staff’s actions and behaviours, and the culture they cultivated, and that this type of setting could increase and maintain diversity. Specific interpretations are discussed below.

Equity: Though some VIOs conflated it with equality, others understood it as follows:

• Addressing the unique barriers that different groups face.

• Making reasonable adjustments to enable participation, such as accommodating language needs, disability and mental health.

• Being flexible, for example, with volunteer references or providing travel expenses.

Example goal for VIOs: Access for any volunteer to be able to participate effectively.

Diversity: VIOs were aware of the term diversity, and there was a tendency to lump all of EDI into visible diversity. It was broadly understood as follows:

• Demographic differences, whether these be around ethnicity, religion, gender, sexual orientation or disability.
• Representation of the different demographic groups within the community they operate in.

Many VIOs actively sought diversity, embedding it into policies and practices, particularly during recruitment. Intersectionality was used as a term by a minority of VIOs, but some stakeholders were concerned with the extent to which VIOs understood it.

Example goal: Volunteers (including organisational board members) to more closely reflect the community they work with.

Inclusion: Inclusion was seen to be about creating welcoming spaces for volunteers to feel confident and capable to participate. Sometimes it was unclear how this translated into volunteering practices. VIOs mentioned efforts to remove barriers to accessing volunteering opportunities, particularly for those with physical disabilities, such as making premises more accessible.

Example goal: To feel comfortable, to be heard.

Most stakeholders’ views reflected Vision for Volunteering (2022) perspectives on what equity and inclusion mean, and on appropriate goals for an organisation and the wider sector. While the vision suggests the sector is not inclusive in terms of levels of participation, many stakeholders were keen to ensure this was not misunderstood to mean that raising participation should be a goal for people for whom time, financial resources and additional responsibilities (such as caring for family members and others) are a significant barrier.

Telling somebody who’s in that situation, ‘oh why don’t you use your free time to…’ – ‘well I have no free time. I’m running to just make the ends meet’. So that’s a significant barrier.” - Stakeholder

Barriers and enablers to EDI in volunteering

At the volunteer level, existing literature covers a range of barriers and enablers to volunteering, and large social survey datasets provide a good indication of the prevalence of different barriers. However, the literature also highlights the need to situate analysis of barriers within a deeper understanding of the cultural context and lived experience of different groups, and there’s no single framework. To bring frameworks together, it’s possible to classify barriers by combining two models of behaviour change: COM-B^{[footnote 1]}and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF)^{[footnote 2]}. Together, they provide an evidence-based system for classifying reasons why a given behaviour (in this case, participation in volunteering) may or may not occur, with a practical intervention focus. See Appendix 3 for an overview of the main barriers to volunteering identified in the literature against this framework.

In terms of VIOs’ own actions, there are distinct attributes some VIOs possess that they feel enable them to deliver EDI goals. Conversely, the VIOs that lacked those same attributes found that they faced significant barriers to achieving EDI goals. Some of these enablers were inherent to the organisation itself due to its purpose and founders, so were difficult to adopt. Others were based on choices and decisions. These attributes are explored below.

Purpose and cause that connect with EDI: Having success with EDI in volunteering could be closely linked to the purpose and cause of the organisation itself. Where facets of equity, diversity, or inclusion were part of the organisation’s everyday work, strategy, and broader societal goals, this attracted a more diverse set of volunteers. VIOs suggested that volunteers from minority groups were more likely to connect with causes they already interacted with and/or which addressed inequalities they themselves experienced. As such, they would commit time and energy to the organisation - for instance, someone choosing to volunteer for an immigration-focused organisation because they believe the immigration system needs to support people better. These VIOs tended to see EDI as embedded in their practices, rather than an external concept that they had to learn.

We are here for the women and the women from marginalised communities. If we don’t support them, how are they going to move forward? So ultimately, we’ve created an environment where they can grow. At the heart of that, EDI is part of it… we couldn’t do it without creating that foundation for them to participate fully.” - VIO

Some cultural values can also be an impediment to inclusion. An organisation’s particular cause could be inclusive to some groups, but exclude others due to their beliefs, including religious values. For example, one VIO that supported Muslim communities faced a backlash when promoting LGBTQ+ content on social media.

This month is the LGBT month in the UK. So, I was speaking to someone in charge of our social media that was supposed to put up a post… then we had the whole fight, because some of our clients are also Muslim, we try to explain to them that inasmuch as you’re Muslim, it’s a diversity firm and we embrace everyone.” - VIO

Representative leadership and teams: Similarly, having diverse and representative leadership, staff and existing volunteers was felt to help VIOs relate to volunteers from diverse and marginalised communities. If volunteers identified with the people they were volunteering for and with, they tended to feel less isolated. This could generate a positive experience and keep them coming back.

Just where we are, we’re reaching those individuals and we’re very much embedded in the community, where there’s trust and rapport. So, people know that this is where you go if you want to be empowering yourself and it’s a safe space.” - VIO

Conversely, where VIOs lacked diversity in their leadership, staff and current volunteer base, they felt they could be less appealing to minority groups when recruiting volunteers. A tension emerged between wanting to become more diverse as an organisation and lacking the diversity to appeal to diverse volunteers.

If you’re trying to get people to feel part of it, they need to be drawn into something that they recognise as wanting to be a part of.” - VIO

One VIO suggested they would also struggle to engage volunteers if they lacked multilingual staff or volunteers who spoke a volunteer’s language, as formal interpreter services are often expensive and beyond the budget for most VIOs.

Organisational commitment and investment: VIOs and stakeholders saw having a holistic commitment to improving EDI, recognising its importance and being willing to invest in it as critical, though many of the VIOs consulted had not taken this step.

One of the key things is trying to make sure that inclusion is built in, rather than bolted on, so that it’s a starting point for how people are thinking about their opportunities…the organisation as a whole and what they’re trying to do. So is it being looked at a strategic level as well as the monitoring information, the money.” - Stakeholder

Interviewees reported that having organisational goals, supported by adequately resourced action plans, helped to keep EDI higher on the agenda for organisations. At times this could be at the expense of other initiatives.

I think part of it is a real commitment to doing it… like, right, we’re putting budget aside to have someone come in and help us with this. And actually, I know we’re really busy, but this is just as important as that.” - VIO

By contrast, a minority of the smaller VIOs consulted had not considered the extent to which EDI could be an issue in volunteering, so had made no effort to prioritise it.

Some VIOs, particularly smaller ones, indicated that finding the time, resource and headspace to consider changes to improve the EDI of their activities was a significant barrier, unless it had been explicitly prioritised by leadership. For example, VIOs reported a range of barriers to making volunteering opportunities and facilities accessible to those with disabilities, primarily due to cost, such as adjustments like wheelchair accessibility modifications.

More broadly, financial issues for both organisations and their volunteers are a well documented barrier to participation. Improving EDI can be costly and can require significant investment. To illustrate, since 2021 the National Trust has invested £5.5 million on improving physical access for disabled people to more than 150 of its sites, benefitting workers, volunteers and visitors (National Trust, 2023).

The Human Appeal report (2023) suggests that to combat growing disenchantment amongst volunteers from an ethnic minority background the rewards to volunteering need to be increased. Changes in government policy surrounding public funding to local community spaces used by volunteers, and grants to support volunteers and their outgoings, were all suggested as providing a greater incentive for ethnic minority volunteers to take part. Similarly, research conducted by the Consortium for Stronger LGBTQ+ Communities (2020) found that 46% of their member organisations were struggling to fund projects, and 44% were struggling to fund core services.

Fostering an inclusive culture: Making a concerted effort to foster a welcoming environment that embraces everyone was seen as important to EDI in volunteering. Some VIOs said that setting rigid goals and targets might be less effective than a genuine embrace of all individuals they encounter, including volunteers. For example, one VIO talked about trying to learn different languages used by volunteers to help them feel included and welcome.

As a trustee board, we have learned how to say please and thank you and hello and goodbye in all of the native languages [of the volunteers]. We haven’t gone ‘Where do you come from?’ We’ve gone ‘How do I say thank you in your language?’” - VIO

As part of this, being assertive and responsive to prejudice and discrimination was also key, which meant having clear policies and mechanisms around how instances of discrimination can be reported and addressed.

It’s important to have your kind of processes and policies in place that would address… any concerns raised by a volunteer that are related to the kind of EDI area. So, if someone felt discriminated in any way because of their culture, their disability, that they should feel confident in raising that issue with a designated individual.” - VIO

Skilled management resource to support positive experiences: Another key enabler was VIOs’ ability to properly coordinate and support their volunteers. Several VIOs had invested in dedicated volunteer managers and coordinators to foster positive experiences, particularly for volunteers with diverse and additional needs. They saw positive experiences as a pull factor for potential volunteers.

We have a paid member of staff who is working with those volunteers. And one of our aims is also to make sure that volunteering with us is for their benefit as well… as part of that, we have people wanting to come and work with us… we try to create an organisation that is greater than the sum of its parts. And that is actually a space that is very, very supportive for people working in a difficult area.” - VIO

However, volunteer management is difficult and requires time, resource, and commitment from VIOs to be effective – so this was a barrier to those without the dedicated resource.

Resource to offer flexibility on when and how to volunteer, with what skill sets: Closely linked to capacity and resource was the issue of being able to offer flexibility around how often, when, and in what ways people could volunteer. The latest Community Life Survey data shows that formal volunteering numbers in 2021/22 were the lowest participation rates since data collection on the survey began in 2012 (DCMS, 2023). Similarly, VIOs reported finding the ways in which people wanted to commit their time to voluntary causes is changing. There was the belief that people are less likely to commit to longer term volunteering opportunities; instead favouring one-off, informal and micro-volunteering style opportunities. Offering flexibility across the volunteer user journey was therefore seen as integral to catering to diverse and additional needs. For some, this would require them to reorient how they function as an organisation, meaning significant coordination, capacity and scale, which many VIOs felt they lacked. Smaller VIOs that offered specific and skilled services often needed committed and skilled volunteers, and faced challenges whenever they had to train new volunteers due to the amount of work it required from staff members. Offering flexibility to volunteers in this context was even more challenging.

Six weeks is not enough for me to train someone in certain things that we wanted that person to do… It’s not like two or three hours, it’s a lot. So, you need to supervise [the volunteer] almost like a staff member. There’s no money that follows and you still have as many staff members available as you’ve had before. So if it’s inflexible like that, either we don’t take that person or we don’t provide them with a good experience.” - VIO

Some VIOs require volunteers to hold specific sets of skills or qualifications, meaning they could unintentionally exclude groups who lacked these. For example, one VIO needed highly skilled volunteers for the services they provide, and so developed a relationship with a local university to recruit recent graduates from relevant courses. In turn, their recruitment was limited to the demographic groups that enrol on those courses, meaning those who may not have access to these courses are excluded. 

I think because we are needing people who’ve gone through higher education… but because we are looking at the tertiary sector, we are therefore looking at, I guess, a reduced range of people from socio-economic backgrounds.” - VIO

While not without challenges, it helped for VIOs to display flexibility in the range of volunteering roles available, with a range of skills welcomed. Spirit of 2012’s report, Volunteering Together: Inclusive Volunteering and Disabled People (Donahue et al, 2022), states that to make volunteering more inclusive for those with disabilities, VIOs should make a more concerted effort to adjust to volunteer needs, rather than impairments, in line with the social model of disability. This means making volunteering opportunities more accessible and supporting those with disabilities to volunteer in a way that fits their needs. For example, major national charities such as the RNIB and SCOPE both have measures in place to enable their volunteers to contribute, such as offering remote volunteering roles. It could also include offering flexibility to volunteers so that volunteering opportunities are compatible with other commitments - for example, Carers UK offers flexible opportunities so volunteers can contribute in meaningful ways that suit their caring responsibilities.

Using digital tools effectively

Increasingly, digital tools are being used across the volunteer user journey to engage with and manage volunteers. Tools, including social media, can help local organisations expand their engagement to communities beyond the usual suspects and reach more diverse (and younger) potential volunteers.

Recruiting and retaining a representative or diverse group of people also worked with recruiting students. We’ve had a fair number of students come through our programme, particularly on the social media and communication side.” - VIO

However, it was acknowledged that this poses challenges for groups that are more likely to be digitally excluded. Digital access is a key barrier which risks excluding certain groups. It’s not just about who has access – skills and confidence are critical to engagement as well. According to the British Academy (2022), there are disparities in levels and types of digital access, digital skills, usage and outcomes. Many people simply aren’t interested in engaging in the digital world: 26% of people still don’t understand the benefits of being online and what they stand to gain, and 32% of those offline say ‘nothing’ could encourage them to use the internet (Lloyds Bank Essential Digital Skills, 2021, cited in Allman, 2022). To promote EDI, there is a recognised need to offer better access and opportunity to engage digitally. For example, the Digital Poverty Alliance’s (DPA’s) National Delivery Plan (2023) advocates for a new UK-wide Digital Inclusion Strategy to update and replace the 2014 version. Many people would be motivated to get online or improve skills with the right support, and evidence shows people prefer to receive support from trusted individuals and organisations they already know (Allman, 2022). The DPA notes that although there are numerous examples across the UK of community-based organisations providing digital inclusion support, this support is not always well coordinated and joined-up.

Evidence on the impact of digital volunteering on EDI is fairly limited, with a reported potential to exacerbate existing disparities as well as offering a solution for addressing them. For example, research by Ackerman and Manatschal (2023), while drawing on non-UK audiences, finds that online volunteering seems to be both a remedy for existing inequalities in volunteering, and a way to reinforce existing patterns of social participation in increasingly digitised societies. Further research suggests that on the one hand, online volunteering has the potential to promote social inclusion in the context of EDI as people can volunteer their time and skills regardless of location or physical abilities, with increased flexibility, lower costs and the ability to reach volunteers across locations and backgrounds. On the other hand, some people remain at risk of exclusion, primarily due to their access to and skills in digital technology (Ochoa-Daderska et al, 2023).

Broader challenges associated with recruiting and retaining volunteers

Many VIOs interviewed for this research were now facing challenges with recruiting and retaining any volunteers. These VIOs found themselves in a position where they felt they must take whoever they could get, rather than invest time on purposefully diversifying their volunteer base.

I think because we are struggling with any volunteers at the moment… there’s been that bit of a we just need to onboard the volunteer and we’re not really measuring [EDI] so much because it’s actually, we [just] need a volunteer.” - VIO

Some VIOs felt that large sections of the public view volunteering as an activity for certain groups. One VIO said potential volunteers think it is an activity for older, White and retired people, which mirrors the findings from the most recently available Community Life Survey, in that these groups are over-represented in volunteering nationally (DCMS, 2023).

Stakeholders saw COVID-19 and the cost-of-living crisis as having worsened progress on EDI in volunteering. Particularly for disabled people, these recent challenges were “a massive factor in inhibiting the progress that was being made in the space”.

Infrastructure and strategic alignment

Stakeholders as well as VIOs emphasised the role a supportive infrastructure played for VIOs. Local authorities, volunteer centres, Councils for Voluntary Services (CVSs) and funders were all considered important players in equipping VIOs to use volunteers effectively and to improve their practices towards better EDI.

In any local area where there is strong support by the local authority or other funders for volunteer centres and where you have that volunteer centre really dedicated to equity, diversity and inclusion, you’ll have a stronger kind of more robust offering from the organisations in that area in EDI and how they involve local people.” - Stakeholder

Some VIOs and stakeholders felt there was a lack of overarching support across the sector, with local authorities and local infrastructure organisations (LIOs) that historically could support them with EDI being weaker than they once were.

We’ve also seen over the last 15 years a lack of resource and finances available as austerity has hit local authorities to support these grassroots community organisations, to develop those community relationships which are at the heart of creating a community which people can then volunteer and be actively involved.” - Stakeholder

Research published by the National Association for Voluntary and Community Action (NAVCA) found that LIOs are working under increasingly difficult financial circumstances, as the cost-of-living crisis continues, and they experience the impact of funding cuts to local authority service provision, meaning they must diversify their income streams (MacMillan et al, 2022).

6.2 Q2. What current EDI practices exist across the range of different VIOs, with a particular focus on smaller organisations?

While this research interviewed just a small sample of VIOs (around half of which are classed as small under the NCVO’s UK Civil Society Almanac scale (Tabassum, 2023)), it was notable that their current EDI practices varied according to their organisation’s purpose, staff and motivations. To illustrate this, the typology below suggests four kinds of VIO orientation, which can be used to help explain a range of practices uncovered across the volunteer user journey. These differences between organisations were also discussed by stakeholders in this research.

Motivations for EDI in volunteering

1. ‘By and for’: VIOs led or run by the communities they serve and/or the people who use their services. These organisations reported being motivated by EDI in volunteering as it is inherent to their cause and credibility – such as a grassroots asylum support service. They believe everybody benefits from EDI: staff, volunteers, users, and society.

2. Community development: Some VIOs and stakeholders described using volunteering and participation to help build social capital and skills in a community. These organisations tended to see their approach as EDI-focused because they aimed to broaden access to volunteering – such as a VIO supporting an underserved community in a deprived area. They described a motivation to build volunteers’ relationships and skills.

3. Service user: VIOs providing professionalised services sometimes sought volunteers with similar experiences to their service users in order to support service delivery through lived experience. They saw this as a way to optimise service users’ experience because they were relatable and understood the group – such as a VIO providing residential retreats to young people facing exclusion, seeking volunteers with similar previous experiences.

4. Delivery focus: VIOs focused on delivery, with little in terms of requirements to who is volunteering, such as a food bank. Their organisational purpose is ‘service’ to a community. They reported having given little consideration to the EDI of volunteering, or the volunteer experience.

In the Phase 2 interviews, ‘by and for’ VIOs and those with a community development orientation tended to describe EDI for volunteers as part of the organisation’s wider ethos. As it was already embedded in their values and practices, they tended to see it as more ‘organic’ to the organisation, and had informal approaches to pursuing it. Diverse participation and a sense of inclusion came more ‘easily’ to these organisations, as they found volunteers related to the cause and/or staff. They may have gathered informal feedback from volunteers, shared knowledge through relationships they had built, and did not feel it was necessary to have extensive and formalised EDI strategies. For example, one participant organisation who fell into the ‘by and for’ category said:

No, we don’t have any goals, for sure. And I don’t think it is our focus because it’s our actual practice. Does that make sense? We have never theorised it because we’ve just been busy doing it, practically. British full bodied first language speakers are a minority in my organisation, and so I guess it was our ultimate priority, but we didn’t realise, we just went ahead and did it… it just happened organically.” - VIO

By contrast, the service user focused VIOs interviewed, who were often delivering professionalised services, tended to depend on formalised plans and goals to introduce changes. These aimed to make those VIOs more attractive and inclusive to the volunteers they thought were under-represented or were not currently being included well. This could involve creating a broader strategy, laying out the organisational commitment to improving EDI. It would often determine the actions to be taken to achieve measurable targets and outcomes, such as increasing the representation of certain communities among staff and volunteers. For example, one service user-focused VIO said:

We always update our business action plan and that’s always updated, and EDI is always written into it… And it is a target set, but you don’t always meet that target… It is one of the goals for representation from underrepresented groups and individuals.” - VIO

Finally, a small number of ‘delivery-focused’ organisations that were interviewed tended to lack either formal or informal approaches to EDI in their volunteering, beyond equalities policies for staff and volunteers. One VIO did not feel they needed an EDI strategy given that they represented and served vulnerable members of their small and localised community.

Practices and interventions across the volunteer journey

To support VIO reflection, this research structured discussions about current practices using a ‘volunteer journey’, which aimed to capture the key elements of recruitment, onboarding, volunteer management, and feedback and retention. This was a framing developed during wider VRMS contract scoping work to support research discussion. These are now discussed in turn.

Recruitment

A common recommendation across both wider studies, (ACEVO and Voices4Change, 2020; Donahue et al, 2022; Smith et al, 2021) and a commitment among many organisations interviewed in this research, was to implement more inclusive recruitment strategies for volunteers.

Interventions explored among the VIOs interviewed at this stage tended to involve drives to engage more diverse volunteers. This was in spite of the increased challenges associated with recruiting volunteers post-pandemic.

VIOs taking formal approaches, particularly service user orientated VIOs, reported setting EDI recruitment targets. For example, one VIO that supported refugees and asylum seekers had set a target of having 50% of their trustees having ‘lived experience’, and they had also set up a lived experience advisory board. This had been particularly successful in building trust and confidence in the organisation.

I think the fact that one, we’ve got our advisory board and I think the fact that our members can see, wow, they’re members and they’re taking a role in the organisation, I think that builds confidence.” - VIO

When focusing EDI approaches on recruitment, some VIOs were investing in volunteer coordinators to manage their recruitment processes, as they felt it required dedicated staff time for it to be effective. The extent to which this was having a measurable impact on EDI performance was unclear, although it was seen as positive for effectively recruiting more diverse volunteers, primarily because it promotes positive experiences through that process.

If you’re lucky and you’ve managed to get some funding for a few years, to have a volunteer coordinator to really structure it and make it a really meaningful experience, you have really good experiences of that, both the individual and the organisation.” - Stakeholder

Other predominantly delivery focused VIOs had sought agreements and partnerships with other community groups. For example, one VIO had recently reached out to several other VIOs that represented different groups that were currently underrepresented in their volunteering. This had enabled them to tap into communities that they would otherwise struggle to access.

We’re now working with other partners from other parts of the city to try and get some form of equity from underrepresented groups and include them within the programmes as well. So that work is continuing as we go on.” - VIO

Some were rebranding their communications to appeal to more volunteers and beginning to take ‘digital first’ approaches that utilised social media to reach new (and younger) audiences. Often this involved developing new materials to highlight the organisation’s commitment to EDI. Social media was seen as a useful tool to expand their outreach to a wider range of audiences than more traditional methods like leafleting.

We’re in the process of making a new recruitment video that’s kind of highlighting a bit more diversity within the team.” - VIO

Existing volunteers were seen as a recruitment gateway. Several VIOs were using communications and requesting word-of-mouth recommendations to promote the benefits of volunteering to target volunteers. Central to this was ensuring that when VIOs did engage diverse volunteers, they ensured they had positive experiences to share with their network and communities. VIOs had found this to be an effective and low-cost method in attracting new volunteers from diverse groups.

Word of mouth is another good one. Volunteers with a good, positive experience of the organisation going out, talking to other individuals and encouraging them to become volunteers. And that’s worked really well. So they’re the goodies there and they don’t cost too much to sort out either.”- VIO

The literature suggests that deploying different ways to test candidates, for example, valuing lived experience and a connection to the vision of the organisation (ACEVO and Voices4Change, 2020), could support more inclusive recruitment. Many VIOs interviewed in this research were also aware that to recruit more diverse volunteers, they needed capability to accommodate more diverse needs. Some had begun rewriting their volunteering opportunities so they were more accessible, both by reducing the specificity of skills required, and offering more options on time commitment. This redesign was enabled by having a dedicated volunteer manager or organiser.

Those VIOs who took more informal approaches (meaning that lacked explicit planning) were more likely to conduct outreach through their networks (as opposed to a formal partnership). This involved visiting other community spaces and events, talking to other VIO leaders and staff, and using word of mouth to spread their reach. However, the informality of the approach made these informal approaches hard to measure, meaning the extent to which they were effective as an EDI recruitment practice was unclear.

Onboarding

The literature shows many examples of training and guidance for volunteers and wider staff aimed at supporting culture change. Literature on larger organisations, for example, the Centre for Ageing Better’s Age Friendly and inclusive guide to Volunteering (2018) stresses the importance of organisations being welcoming, celebrating achievements, and making volunteers feel valued and useful. Meanwhile, Stonewall has run the Diversity Champions Programme since 2001. This seeks to be more inclusive of LGBTQI+ people. The National Trust has an internal Inclusion and Wellbeing Planner that seeks to celebrate important events for a wide range of groups (National Trust, 2023).

When it comes to volunteer onboarding, VIOs interviewed in this research focused on offering higher levels of accessibility - for example, offering both online and face-to-face training, so that those with mobility issues could participate in whatever way suited them.

There was also a focus on supporting volunteers to have the most positive experiences possible. For example, one VIO was keen not to throw new volunteers “in at the deep end”, instead offering them a tailored programme of learning that matched activities with their interests. They felt that as a result they were able to secure more diverse volunteers for the long term.

If they want to work with children and young people, they’ll go on to our youth programme, our youth inclusion project, and they won’t be just thrown in at the deep end, they’ll be put with an existing volunteer and there will be a member of staff.” - VIO

Some interviewees also saw training both staff and senior volunteers on how to handle issues like instances of discrimination as an important part of ensuring more positive experiences for all volunteers throughout the volunteer user journey. VIOs saw this as part of fostering a more inclusive culture.

Volunteer management

VIOs often felt that being flexible and offering tailored support that caters to an individual’s needs was integral to EDI in volunteering. This could range from offering practical support like expenses, to motivational support, like mentoring. One VIO recalled how they made special adjustments to make sure a Muslim volunteer had access to a prayer room, who then went on to stay committed to the charity for a long time. They felt that being flexible and making these sorts of adjustments was key to keeping volunteers committed long term.

We had a Muslim lady who was volunteering with us… we didn’t have a prayer room at the time. So, she’s come to us and she said, ‘I need to do X, Y and Z’ and we said ‘okay’… we got it settled and she remained with us for five years.” - VIO

Whereas community development focused VIOs generally took a tailored, personalised approach, more service-user focused VIOs had to more consciously add this dimension to their support, and work on stronger ‘offers’ and benefits to volunteers. It helped when senior leadership had recognised this would be time consuming and would take skills to coordinate effectively.

VIOs also reported having to manage sensitive and challenging scenarios involving their volunteers, including incidences of discrimination. Certain VIOs were able to employ dedicated volunteer coordinators to be responsible for volunteer management. Whereas for those with less capacity and resources, staff wore many hats, of which volunteer management was only one. Ultimately, this could limit the extent to which they could offer the level of flexibility required for volunteers with diverse and specific support needs.

Feedback and retention

VIOs often suggested that creating an environment where volunteers feel confident to give feedback helped both individuals to feel welcome and the VIO to make improvements. Those who had experienced problems with inclusivity tended to use more formal feedback mechanisms and had a more systematic process for actively learning from it.

VIOs made concerted efforts to be open to hearing constructive feedback from volunteers and reflecting on what could have been done better. This also included having reporting processes in place for incidences of discrimination. These practices were seen as one of the ways VIOs could help a wider range of volunteers have positive experiences, and key to improving their offer to volunteers.

We need to take on some learning outcomes from new volunteers as well, around EDI. And we need to learn from that, not just as a staff, but our volunteer team as well, and the wider organisation with the board… As long as we have continuous learning and written into our action plans and stuff like that, then I think we’ll carry on going down the right road.” - VIO

Summary of motivations, challenges and helpful practices

Table 1 below summarises how the orientation of the VIO’s that were interviewed influenced their motivations and enablers, their specific challenges, and actions that could help them improve the EDI of their volunteering.

Table 1: EDI orientation of VIOs

Orientation	Motivations	Enablers	Challenges	Useful practices
‘By and for’	EDI inherent to cause and credibility Everybody benefits when organisations ‘walk the talk’	Representative leadership/ teams EDI embedded in strategy Purpose, cause connects with people	Making assumptions all works well, as not monitoring practice or feedback systematically	Make aims and practices explicit Formalise feedback processes
Community development	Build volunteers’ skills and social capital Social cohesion	Focus on inclusivity and enabling participation Offer flexibility	Intensive investment of time	Articulate and evaluate benefits
Service user	Volunteers with common lived experience to service users improves service outcomes	Strong VIO motivation ‘Pool’ of former service users to recruit from	Staff/leadership not relatable Volunteer ‘offer’ not appealing – need clear benefits	Commit and invest in EDI at organisation-al level Skilled coordination Co-develop volunteer offer
Traditional delivery	Efficient delivery of goods/ support	n/a	EDI a ‘nice to have’, easily deprioritised	Explore what EDI means to the VIO

Wider initiatives and drivers

At the sector level, there are many current and previous examples of publicly funded initiatives to improve EDI, such as the youth-focused National Citizen Service (2011 – present), the age-focused Second Half Fund (2016 - 2019) and Helping Out (2019/2020), the Community Organisers Programme (2011 – 2015) and Place-Based Social Action Programme (2017 - 2025) (community-focussed), and the disability focused Access to Volunteering Fund (2009/10). Initiatives targeting funders are also encouraging them towards more EDI awareness and transparency, such as the DEI Data Group’s development of a DEI Data Standard (DEI Data Group, 2021).

Recent years have seen the development of a range of resources and guidance from sector level initiatives and organisations such as NCVO’s guidance (NCVO, 2021), the Vision for Volunteering (2022) and the Belong toolkit (Belong, 2023) for embedding social cohesion. However, the extent to which VIOs (particularly smaller ones) are aware of this guidance and have made steps to introduce recommended practices seemed limited amongst those consulted. Stakeholders and VIOs did describe a range of initiatives influencing VIOs’ practices. They both reported that funders were becoming increasingly interested in diversity metrics (discussed in more detail in section Q3, below). This was seen to help VIOs evaluate their practices, but was inefficient where funders were inconsistent in the metrics requested and VIOs lacked capacity to collate them.

Stakeholders commented on the creation of ‘access pots’ and bursaries to drive the engagement of certain groups. There was mention of such a pot being used by the Red Cross’s Inspired Action programme, which aimed to remove barriers to volunteering for young disabled and non-disabled people. Ringfenced funding for EDI, such as offering an additional 25% funding to a grant, was found to increase VIOs’ ability to support participation. Interestingly in this case, the money was rarely used as changes weren’t expensive, but it enabled a shift in mindset: it was ‘liberating’ for VIOs to know they could cover costs if needed and encouraged them to act.

Actually, just knowing something’s there makes you know you will be able to look after the needs of those participants.” - Stakeholder

More broadly, funders offering support for VIOs to improve EDI as part of a grant could free them up to give more attention to recruitment policy, such as by offering access to consultants to help with systems and policies. Stakeholders saw this ‘funder plus’ provision as an important lever. These issues are explored in more depth in an evaluation of the DCMS 50+ Volunteering Programme (Smith et al, 2021).

Not only does it get them up to speed to the latest and enhance their capacity, but also frees some time for the key people.” - Stakeholder

Smaller VIOs found voluntary sector infrastructure organisations useful in enabling EDI practices across the user journey. Infrastructure organisations conduct brokerage between volunteers and VIOs, which can ease the burden of volunteer recruitment and management on VIOs without their own volunteer coordinators. Similarly, local councils provided useful services to help VIOs develop better EDI practices, such as anti-racism training for staff.

6.3 Q3. What are the challenges and implications for how data on EDI is captured and used in relation to volunteering?

Data on EDI in volunteering could have a key role to play in supporting improvements. Recent years have seen an increased focus on improving how data on EDI in volunteering is collected, while valuable data sets, such as the Community Life Survey, have shed light on the representation of certain groups in formal and informal volunteering. However, there are still significant gaps in understanding, and multiple studies have suggested that more extensive and higher quality data collection by organisations is needed to understand the nature of issues relating to EDI within organisations (NCVO, 2021; Hylton et al, 2019; ACEVO and Voice4Change, 2020). Further, having a greater understanding of EDI within an organisation allows senior leaders to set targets and expectations that can be tracked (ACEVO and Voices4Change, 2020).

This research aimed to explore the state of data collection practices and challenges, and the case for standardisation.

Current data collection practices across VIOs

The extent to which the VIOs engaged through this research collected data relating to EDI varied. Some were not collecting any at all, either because they lacked the capacity, skills, or awareness of why it would be important or useful. Where VIOs were collecting data relevant to EDI, their approaches were inconsistent and fragmented, and differed significantly depending on the needs of the organisation. Their motivations for collecting this data were equally as varied, with some VIOs only collecting EDI data as part of funding exercises and grant application processes; often lamenting the added burden and ‘red tape’ this brought. Others saw collecting and analysing this data as intrinsically useful for monitoring, accountability, and used it to track the diversity of their volunteer force against their EDI recruitment targets.

Until I have a strategy that actually tells me what I’m doing with that, I’m just collecting more data points, but actually not using them. So, what’s the point?” - VIO

In addition, VIOs using a diverse range of approaches to data collection in turn meant that the types of characteristics that were being monitored were equally as fragmented. This presents further challenges for EDI data standardisation.

Challenges in collecting data relevant to EDI

Those collecting and analysing EDI data highlighted a range of associated challenges.

Limited resources: Many VIOs lacked the capacity to collect and use EDI data strategically because of limited resources and competing priorities. For example, one VIO had collected and used EDI data effectively, but was only able to do so because of a specific grant for an advanced data management system. In this context, VIOs with fewer volunteers felt it was more proportionate to rely on personal knowledge and informal relationships rather than formal data collection, though this meant they missed opportunities for structured analysis.

Incomplete data collection: VIOs struggled to obtain complete EDI data as not all volunteers participate in the data collection process or fully complete forms. Some VIOs reported that certain groups they work with can lack trust in institutions and would not voluntarily share this information.

These things are very sensitive…if people are fleeing religious persecution or persecution because of their gender, that’s also highly sensitive stuff and a lot of people are not going to want others to know that. So that’s why building that trust is really important. So, we try and garner information in different ways as much as possible.” - VIO

Data security and privacy

Ensuring the security and anonymity of sensitive EDI data requires specific knowledge, skills and technical capacity. Smaller VIOs were concerned about their capability to manage risks related to GDPR and data security.

We’re a small organisation, so the challenge will be…using that data in a way that doesn’t risk exposing people… so making sure we’ve got data that is robust enough to use meaningfully, I think will be a challenge in a small organisation.” - VIO

Cultural sensitivity

Collecting data on certain demographic characteristics, such as sexuality, could be inappropriate in certain cultural and religious contexts, deterring participation in data collection. Some said typical data collection processes, like surveys, were also western centric and alien to some global majority volunteers. For some volunteers, VIOs felt trust must be built in order for volunteers to be willing to share information.

I think there needs to be some flexibility in how information is gathered. Some people are illiterate in their own language, let alone in English. So, you can’t ask them to fill a survey…funders look at these things… from a very British point of view.” - VIO

Inappropriate data categories

Demographic breakdowns were sometimes seen as undermining an organisation’s work. These VIOs felt that allowing users to self-define their identity rather than use predefined categories (for example, for race or gender) was more meaningful, but harder to analyse. Similarly, ethnicity categories were found to mask differences between ethnic groups.

The case for EDI data collection

The research explored how to address data collection challenges with stakeholders and VIOs. Overall, they held different views on whether and how to advance EDI data collection and use, and what constitutes reasonable expectations upon VIOs. The key point of debate was who the primary user of the data should be, with some only interested in VIOs’ usage, and others seeing a wider value. VIOs with the least interest in EDI data were small, informal organisations, with their volunteers already well known to them, or those that use very light touch, informal events and engagements with a low threshold for participation.

Benefits for VIOs in collecting EDI data

VIOs that were collecting EDI data on their volunteers described several benefits. Stakeholders generally felt that VIOs themselves should be the primary user of this data. Stakeholders with a stronger emphasis on relational community building and informal volunteering were overall more sceptical, as they were concerned about high burden and low use value for smaller VIOs, unless separate funding was provided to support its collection and use.

Monitoring for improvements and accountability

VIOs could see benefits in being able to spot disparities and gaps in who is volunteering or staying with them, and some had oversight structures which required them to explain such gaps to their board.  If data collection could be resourced, most VIOs agreed it was useful. While some VIOs felt they “see it – it’s glaringly obvious” who they are working with, they also acknowledged not all differences are visible.

Can share results for fundraising

VIOs collecting this data described publishing it as part of their reports, to help with fundraising. As a lot of VIOs’ EDI data collection choices are funder driven, making funder expectations and support an important lever and enabler for change. By contrast, VIOs which didn’t rely on grant funding were on the whole less inclined to collect EDI data on volunteers.

Can share results to help build credibility

VIOs and stakeholders saw the value in VIOs being able to share results that would show the community, wider public and potential volunteers that the organisation was inclusive and/or reflective of a community; partly through the demographic make-up of its volunteers, as well as staff. This was seen to increase their relatability and could help when trying to engage more diverse groups of volunteers.

Benefits for others, and the sector

Most stakeholders saw EDI data collection on volunteers as important to the sector’s progress and for improvements in EDI. In particular, funders need to know who they are funding - meaning who the VIO successfully engages - and can help drive improvements in EDI if they have that information available to them.

Features that would address VIO challenges

Responding to the key challenges VIOs were facing with EDI data collection, VIOs and stakeholders explored what might help to address them.

Better resourcing

While some VIOs were not likely to change their practices of their own volition, they were more open to collecting data if it was resourced and incentivised. Stakeholders and VIOs alike agreed that an initiative which increased VIOs’ data collection obligations would need additional resources. For example, one VIO accessed grant funding from Lloyds Bank Foundation to put a data management system in place for this purpose.

Deterrent to volunteering where trust is low

To avoid discomfort or deterring people from volunteering, VIOs and stakeholders suggested giving volunteers an opt-out from sharing their personal data, and for answering individual questions that a person deemed intrusive or likely to increase personal vulnerability, for example, sexuality.

Concerns around sharing and collating

Some VIOs felt their volunteers would distrust government institutions which may use personal data. Stakeholders suggested an independent infrastructure organisation collating EDI data at sector level should be the lead if there was to be any cross-sector initiative.

The case for EDI data standardisation

Stakeholders and VIOs considered the benefits and disadvantages of standardising data for VIOs and for the sector. They also saw conflicting benefits of standardised versus non-standardised data for different parties; those with direct data-facing roles made the strongest case for standardisation.

The benefits of standardisation were seen as follows -

Streamlines data requests from funders

VIOs described different funders asking for different EDI data on volunteers, an inefficiency which meant VIOs had to report the same information using different categories, for example, Chinese being included in ‘Asian’ or treated as a separate ethnicity category. Standardising EDI data collection could streamline funders’ requests and save VIOs considerable time, a key rationale for the DEI Data Standard (DEI Data Group, 2021) for funders. Another stakeholder was already looking at standardising data for social cohesion in collaboration with a government department.

Quality and comparability

Standardisation of data categories is thought to be essential to the quality and comparability of data across the sector more widely.

Learning

Standardisation was seen to enable more transparent and high quality data in the sector, providing opportunities to learn from those who are ‘lifting and shifting’ - meaning improving representation of communities through their work.

Directing funding flows to underrepresented groups

A standard format was thought to help funders use this information to give to those who represent communities well and/or are making efforts in their EDI, partly evidenced through their proactive monitoring and use of data to improve.

The disadvantages of standardisation were seen as follows -

Insufficient VIO benefit

While VIOs and sceptical stakeholders recognised the benefits of standardised data collection on EDI in volunteering, many still doubted that it would benefit communities and VIOs enough to warrant the extra resource entailed to develop a standard, support its uptake, and potentially to collate data from VIOs.

Even where funders might cover VIO costs for doing this, some stakeholders and VIOs queried whether it was the best use of that time and money: would the benefits outweigh the disadvantages? This would be because they worked in small scale or informal settings where the data would be unlikely to be used to help their decisions.

Low capacity and skills

Stakeholders with direct experience of the DEI Data Standard (DEI Data Group, 2021) suggested that clear guidance, alongside human hand-holding support, are both important to introducing standardised data collection approaches and shifting funder requests. This would address concerns such as data security and privacy, clarifying data categories, and making the change to processes as efficient as possible.

Disproportionate for light-touch volunteering

Particularly for informal volunteering and for light-touch or one-off volunteering activities, VIOs were concerned that a standardised approach wouldn’t fit their situation. They therefore saw value in putting conditions around data collection and how it should be undertaken. For example, setting thresholds for the level of activity that would qualify for volunteer forms, sampling a cross-section of volunteers rather than requiring all volunteers to complete information, and using waves of information gathering, rather than at every event/interaction.

6.4 Q4. What do VIOs see as the role of DCMS in supporting and facilitating improved EDI in the sector?

While the promotion of EDI in volunteering is something that all organisations, funders and infrastructure organisations play a part in, VIOs and stakeholders were also encouraged to reflect specifically on DCMS’s role. To support discussion interviewees were prompted with several areas of potential support, collated by DCMS. While VIOs’ and stakeholders’ responses were broadly aligned, they emphasised different areas, so are reported separately below.

VIO priorities for support

There were several overarching themes in VIOs’ feedback on what could help in promoting EDI in volunteering.

Higher expectations around EDI efforts should be matched by support

Given the challenging operating context, VIOs felt any interventions to promote EDI in volunteering should support them and ease burdens. Thus, any increased expectations around VIOs’ practices to improve EDI should be accompanied by increased support to do so, as VIOs assumed it would take resource, capacity and time.

Be clear about how changes will benefit organisations, the sector, and population: VIOs appeared much more motivated where they could see clear benefits to the organisation in terms of achieving outcomes, coherence with mission, or strong commitment to EDI. Those who had given it less prior thought would more clearly benefit from learning more about it through peers, or being guided by peer norms and funders’ expectations, where relevant.

Practical help

Previous experiences with talking to and agenda setting with government were not always felt to have delivered tangible results, but guidance and suggestions were very welcome all the same.

The several areas of potential support prompted during the interviews, and stakeholders’ and VIOs’ responses to them, are discussed below in priority order of their importance. Note that during interviews these options were framed in terms of what DCMS could do to support the EDI of volunteering. However, in practice, these options could also be implemented by other parts of government and/or the sector.

1. Grants and funding: VIOs’ limited resources and capacity heavily influenced their ability to approach and improve EDI. Therefore, grants and funding were seen as a key part of enabling organisations to increasingly direct capacity and resource towards EDI. Funding did not necessarily have to come directly from government, but “there needs to be clarity that we are going to be supported”. - VIO.
2. Education, training, and skills: VIOs were motivated to improve EDI, but often lacked the knowledge and skills to do so. To gain an understanding of how to approach EDI in volunteering and develop the skills to implement interventions, free and tailored training was seen as important: “I’m always looking for training, and free training.” - VIO.
3. Strategic development: Having clear direction on EDI from government and sector level organisations was seen as helping more VIOs move in the right direction. However, strategy needs to be co-created with local voices and embedded at local, regional, and national levels for VIOs to buy in: “Strategic development is good, but who is going to do strategic development if it’s not embedded locally?”  - VIO.
4. Resources, guidance, and best practice: VIOs and stakeholders’ views on providing resources and guidance were mixed, with some seeing them as practical tools that can aid them in addressing EDI, and others feeling ‘toolkits’ have been done and aren’t very useful: “You get various toolkits… I don’t find them necessarily practical.” - VIO.
5. Championing leading organisations: Some VIOs, particularly smaller ones, saw benefits through the potential added publicity that being championed could bring. But, there was hesitation from some around whether this was in keeping with their values, as it could create unhealthy competition: “It’s quite nice to be recognised… but, it shouldn’t be at others’ expense.” - VIO.
6. Standardising data collection: As discussed in Q3 above, this lever divided VIOs. Some were keen to understand more about the issues at hand and saw the intrinsic benefits related to having standardised data on EDI for the sector as a whole. Others saw it as an unworkable burden: “If there is any more red tape dumped on me, I’ll writhe.” - VIO. All felt that standardisation would require dedicated resource and support.
7. Convening: Convening was the least popular lever presented to the VIOs. There was a feeling that “we’ve had roundtables” and not much had been achieved as a result. VIOs felt that communication between government and VIOs is still inherently positive, but lacks meaning without direction and tangible outcomes.

Strategic alignment and resource: views on DCMS’s role

Stakeholders were positive about DCMS’s value in supporting the sector to advance EDI in the volunteering ecosystem. They took a clearer view than VIOs on how to co-create a shared agenda, and tended to agree that DCMS was most useful in bringing strategic alignment to various actors and funding work, as described below.

Use convening power for direction setting: Though VIOs were less interested in convening, stakeholders recognised DCMS’s role in its convening power among wider parties - particularly among those that wouldn’t ordinarily come together. DCMS could reimagine itself as a catalyst and co-creator, building a vision and national policy agenda that could act as a catalyst to others. Here, stakeholders emphasised that any agenda or commitment should be co-created and facilitated, rather than imposed on the sector. Plans for a supportive ecosystem for volunteering could be co-developed and aligned to the Vision for Volunteering (2022), for example.

It shouldn’t be seen as something just driven by government alone or dictated through legislation. It should be much more collaborative.” - Stakeholder

Statutory funders were named an important group to align with , as their expectations and incentives influence large swathes of the sector. Funders like Sport England, the National Lottery Community Fund, Heritage Lottery and Arts Council England could set expectations and drive VIO practices, including data collection and through guidance to grantees.

DCMS has the power to get the statutory funders to really engage with this.”- Stakeholder

On national events in the volunteering space, DCMS was also seen to have a lot of control and levers for influence. These large volunteer programmes - for example, at Euro 2028 or City of Culture - were considered great opportunities to talk about EDI and set expectations in a clearer way.

Government’s role is to use its convening power and set the national policy.”- Stakeholder

Given concerns about financial pressures in the voluntary sector, with challenging months ahead, all stakeholders saw DCMS’s direct funding as an important part of their role by providing resources such as guidance and training. Resources and support were all called for.

In other areas, particularly provision of resources, stakeholders suggested DCMS should resource work, but not be the sole voice. Instead, they could fund independent infrastructure bodies such as NCVO, since they are a trusted and credible voice among VIOs on these issues.

Unlock resource by levering in funding: As well as providing direction, DCMS’s influencing power was hoped to unlock resource from private and philanthropic bodies, and other government departments. For example, aligning work in this space with Cabinet Office and the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) and encouraging them to build EDI into contracts and funding. Stakeholders also saw private businesses and private philanthropy as easily guided by a clear agenda and likely to follow suit with support to resource better EDI.

It’s about using the position of government to lever in additional support.”- Stakeholder

Sustain engagement

This area was felt to have suffered from inconsistent attention, yet needed long-term work. Keeping EDI on the agenda beyond one government term was deemed essential to progress. Stakeholders wanted to see continued support and sustained, continual engagement.

The most important thing is, you can have all of those things for the season, but if they fall off next season, we will have this conversation again and again. So really, it’s a longer-term commitment that’s needed, not just for one Parliament.” - Stakeholder

7. Concluding remarks

In conclusion, and drawing on insights from research participants, this research has offered new insights into the effectiveness of different interventions and practices in EDI within volunteering.

7.1 Key reflections

While there is limited evidence among many VIOs - as practice is still in its early stages - for smaller VIOs in particular, the research found that what is needed, and ‘what works’ to improve EDI, depends on the assets and culture of the organisation. Enablers and barriers tend to reflect VIOs’ position within communities, and the extent to which they prioritise EDI within their organisation.

Current good practice among VIOs largely supports the wider literature on what interventions should be pursued, with promising examples of approaches across the user journey. Promoting an inclusive culture is key to EDI, which takes commitment and investment from senior leadership. The research has shown that designing more inclusive recruitment practices is already yielding positive results. Meanwhile, VIOs with the capacity to use skilled volunteer managers find they can make changes that improve the volunteer experience, including training other staff and volunteers on anti-racism and actively using feedback to make improvements.

In terms of the types of interventions that government and wider stakeholders should champion, there’s a need among VIOs for training and good practice sharing, while supporting more experimentation and exploration. Training and tailored guidance are considered critical to cater to the wide diversity of the sector, and infrastructure organisations are considered well placed to meet this. Within this, improving data collection on EDI in volunteering is recognised as promoting change, but guidance is sought to help VIOs with this, and costs need to be covered.

Funder expectations are already recognised as a lever for change, and the more aligned these are, the better. ‘Funder plus’ offers, which include a budget line for EDI in volunteering, are welcomed for the resource, but importantly for the mindset shift they enable too. The financing of change is a sticking point for many VIOs - capacity is a key barrier to many of the good ideas shared, which takes resources to introduce or improve. To implement these changes, VIOs need additional, dedicated resources.

On DCMS’s role in convening the wider sector, the department and wider government are considered important enablers, and there’s appetite for building a shared agenda. DCMS is looked to as a catalyst for releasing other resources, partly through its role in facilitating clearer expectations, education and support for good practice, particularly among funders. To best move an agenda forward, it would be helpful to confirm common buy-in to goals, like those defined in the Vision for Volunteering’s section on equity and inclusion. This could include returning to a broader vision: articulating why EDI in volunteering matters, and why it benefits people at every level; from volunteers, VIOs and the sector, to the wider population. This would help to build trust, offering greater clarity and reassurance that there is genuine cross-sector alignment.

7.2 Ideas for further consideration

In aid of a shared agenda, further considerations below apply directly to DCMS, to government and to stakeholders in the sector more broadly too.

Strengthening trust in the goals of EDI in volunteering

Stakeholders and VIOs sought further confirmation that government and funders do not see ‘under-represented’ non-volunteers as extra capacity for supporting service delivery given many face multiple disadvantage, meaning that this is recognised in discussion of participation. This is a matter of reassurance.

How to focus the agenda on the volunteer experience and the broader value of EDI

Alongside this, for VIOs, the volunteer experience was often a secondary priority to: a) finding capacity for delivery; and b) service users’ experience. This points to a tension between VIO short-term operational objectives, and wider sector-driven interests to improve EDI. Given this tension for VIOs, dedicated funding was seen as critical to moving the dial on inclusive and equitable practices, with an emphasis on wider goals and values.

How to ensure informal activity stays firmly on the agenda

Given informal volunteering was perceived to be more inclusive (meaning a recognition that people from minority groups may be choosing to volunteer, but less formally), yet less developed in national evidence, stakeholders were concerned it could be devalued. While informal volunteering is covered in the Community Life Survey (DCMS, 2023), and while other research in the wake of the pandemic has also sought to gain insight into the rise of mutual aid (Tiratelli and Kaye, 2020), finding ways to capture its prevalence and value was considered a priority, including how to expand beyond the language of ‘volunteer’ (seen as disengaging for some groups).

How to reflect ‘what matters’ appropriately in data

Data and measurement are key to defining value, identifying goals, assigning accountability and assessing progress. Recognising the great diversity of activity and organisational types in the social sector, stakeholders and VIOs stressed that what ‘good’ looks like, and what would constitute ‘improvement’, is highly context dependent. Regarding EDI data collection, an agenda should prioritise the use value for VIOs, acknowledge the data collection burden, and be resourced and incentivised accordingly. In addition, VIOs’ improvements to monitoring, evaluation and learning about volunteer experience is considered essential to improving their practice. 

8. Appendices

Appendix 1: Definitions and scope

NPC defines EDI in the following ways and it was agreed that this research would approach EDI using these definitions.

Definitions for other key terms used in the report are also listed below.

EDI: This acronym stands for Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. While each of these is a significant concept in its own right, EDI recognises the interconnected nature of the terms and the importance of achieving all three of them together. Using the famous party metaphor of long-time educator Verna Myers, ‘diversity’ is being asked to the party, ‘inclusion’ is being asked to dance, and ‘equity’ is having an accessibility ramp to the door (NPC, 2023).

Diversity: This is about recognising, respecting, and valuing each other’s differences. A big part of it is to acknowledge the importance of diverse representation and to celebrate it. The differences we might recognise could be based on race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, socio-economic status, age, health, disability, neurodiversity, religious beliefs, political beliefs, or other ideologies (NPC, 2023).

Equity: This is about ensuring everyone has access to the same opportunities. Equity recognises that advantages and barriers exist and that, as a result, we all don’t start from the same place; we all come from diverse backgrounds. Therefore, equity promotes fairness and justice (NPC, 2023).

Inclusion: This is about everyone feeling valued and welcomed within a given setting (for example your team, workplace, or industry). Creating an environment where people are able to tell their story and participate freely and fully in decision-making processes. Creating inclusive environments requires overcoming power dynamics and barriers that may exclude people (NPC, 2023).

Intersectionality: According to the Market Research Society (Staig, 2021) “intersectionality means that people in more than one minoritised group have different experiences of the world from people in only one of those groups; it is important because it relates to experiences of privilege in some cases, and discrimination or disadvantage in others. For example, a Black woman will experience gender issues differently to a White woman because of the intersection of race with gender; she will also experience racial issues differently to a Black man. The concept of intersectionality can apply to many of the different ways we can define ourselves including race, gender, sexuality, disability, religion, class, education, economic status and nationality – and this is by no means the full list.”

Minorities/Minoritised communities: Minoritised communities are defined as “individuals and populations, including numerical majorities, whose collective cultural, economic, political and social power has been eroded through the targeting of identity in active processes that sustain structures of hegemony” (Selvarajah et al, 2020). The term is growing in popularity versus ‘ethnic minorities’ as it moves beyond definitions based on numerical minorities, to emphasise structural explanations for inequalities and the role of power.

Appendix 2: Technical note

Phase 1 - scoping

The research began with a four-stage literature review, conducted by NPC and Basis Social between August and October 2023. This was used to inform the design of the Phase 2 mainstage.

Step 1- Identifying key reports by reviewing both the document library and London Economics’ data audit, both of which were delivered as part of the VRMS scoping phase (further information is available from DCMS).

Step 2 – Keyword and purposive searches on Google to investigate what organisations in the volunteering sector are doing to improve EDI.

Step 3 – Keyword searches of the combined academic database of the University of Amsterdam to search across various academic databases to quickly survey relevant academic articles, not all of which are open access, to identify any studies which evaluated the effectiveness of interventions to improve EDI, and/or extracted learnings for implementation. Research pre-dating 2013 was excluded to narrow the search return parameters.

Step 4 – Purposive searching of key organisations involved in volunteering compiled by Basis Social, drawing on learning of the sector gathered to date, to identify further resources and to examine what the organisations themselves are doing to improve the EDI of volunteering. This was designed as a toe-dip, and not a comprehensive mapping exercise of what VIOs are doing in the EDI space. This involved reviewing the publicly available information found on organisation’s websites, such as published strategy documents and any further grey literature related to EDI.

The following organisation’s websites were surveyed for further literature and information relating to their approaches to EDI:

• Carers UK
• Consortium for stronger LGBT+ Communities
• Disability Advice Service Lambeth
• Girlguiding
• National Trust
• NAVCA
• NCVO
• Revolving Doors
• RNIB
• Samaritans
• SCOPE
• Social Justice Collective
• Stonewall
• Voices 4 Change England

A full bibliography, details of key organisations and sources searched, together with the search term strategy adopted, were captured in a separate Excel document, which is available upon request from DCMS.

Phase 2 – primary research

Phase 2 took place during November 2023 - February 2024. During this period, Basis Social and NPC conducted 29 online qualitative interviews with individuals from the following groups:

• Small sized VIOs (x9)
• Medium sized VIOs (x10)
• Expert stakeholders in EDI in the voluntary sector (x10)

A purposive sampling approach was adopted. Recruitment was conducted by NPC and Basis Social using DCMS’s existing networks and working groups (together with NPC’s/Basis Social’s) as a starting point for creating a shortlist of target VIOs and stakeholders to speak to, from which snowballing was then adopted. Stakeholders engaged as part of the earlier scoping research, where EDI formed a particular interest area, were also re-contacted.

Table 2: List of stakeholders engaged through the research

Organisation	Activities - how the organisation spends its money (Source: Charity Commission)
Spirit of 2012	Spirit was founded to continue and recreate the spirit of pride, positivity and social connectedness that people experienced during the London 2012 Games. Spirit funds projects that bring people together - to learn something different, or experience something unique - that leave behind a social legacy of increased wellbeing at an individual level, as well as happier and more connected communities.
Esmee Fairbairn Foundation	We are one of the largest independent foundations in the UK. Our primary interests are in the arts, children and young people, the environment and social change.
Runnymede Trust	Runnymede is the leading independent think-tank on race equality and race relations in the UK. We generate intelligence for a multi-ethnic Britain through research, network building, leading debate, and policy engagement. Runnymede is working to build a Britain in which all citizens feel valued, enjoy equal opportunities, lead fulfilling lives, and share a common sense of belonging.
Community Organisers Ltd	The Charity operates mainly in England. Developing the capacity and skills of members of socially and economically disadvantaged communities so they are better able to identify, help and meet their needs and participate more fully in society. The education of the public in the theory and practices of community organising. The prevention and relief of poverty.
ACEVO	ACEVO is the UK’s largest network for Charity and Social Enterprise Leaders. For nearly 30 years, we have provided support, development and an inspiring, collective campaigning voice for our members across the UK, the leaders of small, community-based groups, ambitious medium-sized organisations, and well known, well-loved national and international not-for-profits.
NAVCA	Exert influence on government policy through the voice of local voluntary and community organisations. Enable Local Infrastructure Organisations to have strong governance and management and to provide inclusive services that enable voluntary and community organisations to meet the needs of the communities they represent.
The Ubele Initiative	An African diaspora led, infrastructure plus organisation, we believe in empowering Black and Minoritised communities in the UK, to act as catalysts for social and economic change. (NB: taken from their website, as they are not a registered charity)
Belong - The Cohesion and Integration Network	The Cohesion and Integration Network is an independent national Charity that aims to share good practice and connect neighbourhoods.
Disability Rights UK	Disability Rights UK is the largest UK organisation led by people with all types of impairment or health condition. We are disabled people leading change, working to strengthen the voice of disabled people to make our rights real and to create a society where everyone with lived experience of disability or health conditions can participate equally as full citizens.
Muslim Charities Forum	The Muslim Charities Forum is an umbrella organisation for Muslim-led international NGOs, based in the UK. Since our inception in 2007 we have promoted collaborative working and knowledge sharing while supporting our member organisations through advocacy, training and research.

We aimed to speak to a cross section of VIOs, particularly focusing on recruiting small and medium sized organisations. VIO size was determined using the scale found in the NCVO’s UK Civil Society Almanac (Tabassum, 2023). In addition, the research aimed to ensure the sample of VIOs included a range of geographies, demographic groups, and purposes.

Table 3: List of VIOs engaged through the research

Organisation	Size	Activities - how the organisation spends its money (Source: Charity Commission)
Bristol Hospitality Network	Medium	Facilitating a network of accommodation in private houses for adult destitute asylum seekers and refugees. Managing a house where a number of adult destitute asylum seekers and refugees can be provided with accommodation. Supporting the Asylum Seekers Allotment Project. Providing short term hardship grants to destitute asylum seekers and refugees who have no other source of income.
Robert Thompson Charities	Small	The Charity owns, maintains and manages - The Saltwood Village Hall for the benefit of the residents of Saltwood and surrounding areas - The Saltwood Almshouses in the prevention or relief of poverty by providing affordable housing. Any funds collected from renting Hall and weekly maintenance contributions from Almshouse residents go towards the maintenance improvement of properties accordingly.
Mosaik	Medium	Mosaik Education develops and delivers education and education support programmes that help refugees to access university.
Disabled Sailing Association Ltd	Small	We aim to give people with a disability the opportunity to enjoy a safe and pleasurable experience of seagoing sailing including short local cruising of about two to three hours and for the more adventurous, longer coastal passages.
Hartlepool Baby Bank	Small	Hartlepool Baby Bank provides good quality new and used equipment to families with young children or pregnant women across Hartlepool and the surrounding area. We aim to provide maternity items, clothing, safe sleeping spaces and hygiene products whilst offering support, advice and signposting.
Free to be kids	Medium	Free to Be Kids provides respite holidays, therapeutic adventures, after-school support and a range of year round residentials for children who are struggling with social or emotional difficulties, significant social/financial disadvantage or who are growing up in marginalised communities. Without our work, many would not have support or a break from often extremely difficult home circumstances.
Refugee Aid Taunton	Small	We carry out our objects by receiving donations from members of the public and distributing these to refugees, both in the local community and across the world. Any items unsuitable for distribution are sold at a reduced rate to the local community. We aim to be zero waste wherever possible, using all donated items in some form, donating to other charities where no other options are available.
Centre Pieces	Small	Promoting the recovery of adults in the London Borough of Bexley who experience or have experienced mental health problems by providing resources and support to enable them to participate in the arts. Activities include art workshops, exhibitions, educational visits, public art and other art activities. Centrepieces aims to promote understanding of mental health issues to the wider community.
York Women’s Counselling	Small	Counselling services for women in York who are experiencing difficulties as a result of current or past emotional stress or trauma.
Heartwize	Small	The charity provides resuscitation skills training in schools and in the wider community, aiming to improve bystander responses and thereby ensure the best possible chance of survival for members of the public who suffer a cardiac arrest in their homes or elsewhere in the community. The charity also promotes and supports the increased availability and use of public access defibrillators.
Wandsworth Mediation	Small	Offers a community mediation service and conflict resolution training.
The Breck Field Centre (BNENC)	Medium	BNENC works with all members of the community from birth to old age and provides facilities that were previously denied one of the poorest communities in the country. Providing children’s facilities as a nursery, youth projects, support for community groups, residents associations, church and school groups, health services, prevention/relief of poverty, armed force/emergency services efficiency.
Bridge Leicester	Medium	The relief of poverty, sickness and distress of individuals in need, in particular but not exclusively by the provision of shelter, food, clothes and advice, in accordance with a Christian ethos.
Luton Irish Forum	Medium	LIF was formed to give a voice to the Irish community in Luton and now, our welfare, social, and cultural services extend far beyond Luton and include Irish, Irish Traveller, and other communities.
Footprints Project	Medium	Footprints uses volunteers who we train as mentors to mentor and support ex-offenders leaving prison and returning to our area.
Shama Women’s Centre	Medium	Shama provides a range of activities that empower women to become more active economically, educationally and socially to develop their confidence, language, employability, physical and mental well being. Includes accredited training in IT, ESOL, dressmaking, counselling, holistic therapies, mentoring. On site Ofsted registered nursery. Women only sauna and gym.
International Community Organisation of Sunderland	Medium	We work with BME people in the North East of England, especially in Sunderland. We focus on those with limited access to information and support network, including migrants and refugees. We have a very good relationship and we enjoy the trust of the Eastern European community. We came to being in 2009 and have now converted to a CIO.
Global Link	Medium	Global Link is a Development Education Centre, providing creative and participatory learning experiences, to increase awareness of the global dimension and action towards a more fair and sustainable world. These include the eight key concepts of: global interdependence, values and perceptions, sustainable development, social justice, diversity, citizenship, human rights, and conflict resolution.
Scaitcliffe Community Centre	Small	Hiring of office space and rooms booking. Managing of neighbourhood Management project. Providing advice and information and sign posting to relevant agencies. Luncheon club and social interaction for 50+. One stop for local community.

Interviews were conducted using two semi-structured topic guides, one for each interviewee group. These guides included both cross-cutting and group-specific questions, enabling the research team to compare responses across different groups while also delving into their distinctive areas of experience and expertise. Stimulus was also used to generate discussion with interviewees. Copies of these topic guides and associated stimulus are available upon request.

With the interviewee’s permission, the interviews were audio and video recorded for analysis. The analysis process began with Basis Social and NPC convening an interviewer brainstorm to identify emerging themes from the interviews. Topline summaries were also created for each interviewee group, to allow the researchers to compare across them. The team then conducted systematic matrix analysis across all interviews using the key research questions to frame the process. This process unearthed a set of key themes sitting under each of the main research questions of the study. In the final stage before reporting, these themes were presented during a 90-minute workshop with DCMS colleagues, to gather their early reflections and feedback.

Note on interpretation

This report draws mainly on the findings of the Phase 2 primary research. It draws on the insights gleaned through the existing evidence and scoping phase to provide useful context.

This research is not intended to be representative of the sector nor of all organisations operating in the EDI space. Rather it is intended to act as a starting point for discussion, and this should be borne in mind when reading the report. The approach to sampling was purposive with additional snowballing, aiming to reach geographic and sectoral breadth with an emphasis on smaller organisations. Stakeholders reflected expert knowledge of the sector, EDI and volunteering.

Qualitative research is designed to be illustrative, detailed, and exploratory. It offers insights into the perceptions, feelings, and behaviours of people (or, in this case, representatives of organisations) rather than quantifiable conclusions from a statistically representative sample. This has been reflected in the evidence presented in this report. Verbatim quotes have been used throughout this report to help to illustrate points made in the main narrative.

Appendix 3: Behavioural factors which can influence who gets involved in volunteering

We classified barriers to EDI by combining two models of behaviour change: COM-B^{[footnote 3]} and the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF)^{[footnote 4]}. Together, they provide an evidence-based system for classifying reasons why a given behaviour (in this case, participation in volunteering) may or may not occur. The main advantage of using this system of classification is its practical, intervention focus. Both the COM-B and TDF models form part of the Behaviour Change Wheel, a framework developed by academics at the UCL Centre for Behaviour Change for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions.[ This framework links specific barriers to specific types of interventions, which can be used to provide a more standardised approach to thinking about how to drive change in the volunteering sector.

COM-B	COM-B	TDF	Findings
Capability	Physical	Physical	People with health conditions, mobility issues and disabilities may find it difficult to participate in voluntary activities. These barriers are associated more with older people and people with disabilities - in particular, disabled people with physical, severe and/or multiple impairments (Donahue et al, 2022).
Capability	Psychological	Knowledge	Knowledge barriers refer to people lacking understanding of how to get involved in volunteering, as well as the know-how to perform tasks associated with volunteering. Multiple knowledge barriers are indicated in the literature. These include: Language - speaking English may be a barrier for some people, for example, first generation migrants (Hylton et al, 2019). Understanding of how to get involved - multiple studies highlight a lack of awareness and understanding of where to find and take up volunteering offers. This is sometimes associated with people living in deprived areas, where fewer opportunities exist. Know-how to perform tasks and roles - for example, people lacking sufficient ‘volunteering literacy’ to understand what specific roles involve (Carregha et al, 2022). Digital literacy - may be a challenge in cases where accessing and performing volunteering roles requires use of a digital device, the internet or software. Groups affected may include older people and people with disabilities (Donohue et al, 2022).
Opportunity	Physical	Environmental	Physical opportunity/environmental barriers arise when people lack access to the physical resources required to participate in voluntary activity. These barriers were among the most frequently reported in the literature reviewed. Commonly cited barriers include: Time - time constraints are one of the most commonly reported barriers to getting involved in volunteering (Donahue et al, 2020). The causes of these constraints vary for different groups - for example, more women than men cite childcare responsibilities, while more men report work responsibilities as getting in the way of volunteering. Money - the literature highlights an array of financial costs associated with volunteering (e.g. transport, childcare and opportunity costs) (Donahue et al, 2020). These barriers were most commonly associated with factors like socio-economic status, income, employment and regional deprivation. Physical assets/equipment - for example, having access to a car is important for enabling people with mobility issues to take part in volunteering (Donahue et al, 2022). Physical infrastructure - for example, people lacking access to physical spaces (such as an office building or a community centre) within which to congregate and engage in voluntary activity, as well as local touchpoints for learning about volunteering offers (Mohan and Bulloch, 2012; Abrams et al, 2021).
Opportunity	Social	Social	Social norms and the words and actions of other people are an important influence on whether a person gets involved in volunteering. The literature highlights multiple spheres of social influence which may affect participation in volunteering. More commonly highlighted spheres of influence include: Family - for example, parents play a key role in whether their children decide to volunteer (Carragha et al, 2022). Community - how socially cohesive a community is influences the likelihood of people in the community to volunteer (Abrams et al, 2021). Volunteering has also been linked to how long a person has lived in one place (Mohan and Bulloch, 2012). Place-based interventions, such as DCMS’ Place-based Social Action Programme, are examples of how change can happen in the community sphere. Organisational - the culture and norms of volunteering organisations themselves can influence diversity and inclusion. Changing these for the better has been a major focus of EDI efforts by organisations over the past few years (Donahue et al, 2020).
Motivation	Reflective	Beliefs about capabilities	Some studies highlighted that people may doubt whether they will be able to perform volunteering roles, discouraging participation (Southby et al, 2019). These beliefs are closely tied into physical and psychological capability barriers. People who struggle physically or lack education in certain tasks may be more worried about whether they can perform certain tasks.
Motivation	Reflective	Beliefs about consequences	Some studies highlight concerns about negative consequences due to getting involved in volunteering. For example, one study suggested that people may be worried about being exploited, if they believe that politicians and funding commissioners are simply promoting volunteering as a ‘cheap option’ for running services (Colgan, 2014). On the flipside, more awareness raising about the benefits of volunteering (for example, as a source of skills development or to improve health and wellbeing) may help motivate more people to get involved.
Motivation	Reflective	Identity	Some studies discussed how people may view volunteering as incongruent with their professional or social identity, leading to the perception that volunteering is not for them. For example, British Asian groups have been found to associate voluntary activity with being out of work, and therefore not a role they should aspire to (Hylton et al, 2019).
Motivation	Reflective	Goals	Competing goals can limit participation in volunteering. For example, research into why South Asian women do not volunteer found that “free time is my time” - in other words, what spare time this group has is dedicated towards relaxation and personal enjoyment, rather than getting involved (Hylton et al, 2019). As this example indicates, sometimes what looks like an opportunity barrier (no time) is actually a motivational barrier (want to spend my free time in a way other than volunteering).
Motivation	Automatic	Emotion	Emotional barriers such as fear of rebuff, past negative experiences, or lack of confidence can deter individuals from participating in volunteering activities. Research has found that this is particularly evident among the older population living in deprived communities, who may feel that their contributions are not valued or appreciated (Joplin and Jones, 2018; Donahue et al, 2022). Past negative experiences also tie in closely to evidence of racism and discrimination in the volunteering and charity sector.

Appendix 4: Bibliography

Abrams, D. Broadwood, J. Lalot, F. Davies Hayon, K. & Dixon, A. (2021) ‘Beyond Us and Them - Societal Cohesion in Britain Through Eighteen Months of COVID-19’. Belong, Nuffield Foundation, University of Kent. Available online.

ACEVO & Voices4Change (2020) ‘Home Truths: Undoing racism and delivering real diversity in the charity sector’. ACEVO. Available online.

Ackermann, K. & Manatschal, A. (2018) ‘Online volunteering as a means to overcome unequal participation? The profiles of online and offline volunteers compared’. New Media & Society. Available online.

Allman, K. (2022) ‘UK Digital Poverty Evidence Review’. Digital Policy Alliance Community. Available online.

BELONG (2023) ‘The Power of Connection Toolkit’. BELONG Network. Available online.

British Academy (2022) ‘Understanding digital poverty and inequality in the UK: A summary of insights from our evidence reports’ . Available online.

CAF (2024) ‘Charity Resilience Index’. Available online.

Carregha, T. Wilkins, Z. Bulutoglu, K. Mwesiga, D. Theminimuelle, S. Zia, N. Morrison, E. Harries, R. Dr Dunn, W. Kamal, K. Kershaw, O. Dr Mycock, A. & Prof Flinders, M. (2022) ‘Volunteering Journeys: Growing the youth volunteering generation’ . Institute for Community Studies. Available online.

Chan, O. Farrow, A. Martin, A. Mercadante, S. Montague, M. Walker, C. McGarvey, A. Young, R. & Goodall, C. (2022) ‘The Road Ahead: finding a new practicality through uncertain times’. NCVO. Available online.

Colgan, F. Hunter, C. & McKearney, A. (2014) ‘Staying Alive: The impacts of Austerity Cuts on the LGBT Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) in England and Wales’. London Metropolitan University.

Consortium for Stronger LGBT+ Communities (2020) ‘Insight Report: A snapshot of the work of Consortium and our Membership during 2020’. Available online.

DCMS (2020) ‘Taking Part 2019/2020’. Available online.

DCMS (2023) ‘Official statistics: Community Life Survey 2021/22: Volunteering and charitable giving’. Available online.

DEI Data Group (2021) ‘The DEI Data Standard’. Funders Collaborative Hub Available online.

Digital Poverty Alliance (2023) ‘UK Digital Poverty National Delivery Plan’. Available online.

Donahue, K. McGarvey, A. Rooney, K. & Jochum, V. (2020) ‘Time Well Spent: Diversity and Volunteering’. NCVO. Available online.

Donahue, K. Goodall, C. Jochum, V. & Kameade, D. (2022) ‘Volunteering Together: Inclusive Volunteering and Disabled People’. Spirit of 2012. Available online.

Human Appeal (2023) ‘Diversity in UK Volunteering’. Available online.

Hylton, K. Lawton, R. Watt, W. Wright, H. & Williams, K. (2019) ‘Review of Literature, in the ABC of BAME New, mixed method research into black, Asian, and minority ethnic groups and their motivations and barriers to volunteering’. Jump Reports. Available online.

Joplin, K. & Jones, D. (2018) ‘Age friendly and inclusive volunteering: Review of community contributions in later life’. Centre for Aging Better. Available online.

Lloyds Bank (2021) ‘Lloyds Bank Essential Digital Skills Report’. Available online.

Macmillan, R. Leather, D. & Stuart, J. (2022) ‘Connecting Locally: local voluntary and community sector infrastructure in England’. Sheffield Hallam University Centre for Regional Economic and Social Research, NAVCA. Available online.

McGarvey, A. Kanemura, R. & Farrow, A. (2023) ‘Time well spent 2023: Volunteering among the global majority’. NCVO. Available online.

Mohan, J. & Bulloch, S. (2012) ‘The idea of a ‘civic core’: what are the overlaps between charitable giving, volunteering, and civic participation in England and Wales?’. Third Sector Research Centre. Available online.

National Trust (2023) ‘Everyone Welcome Inclusion and Diversity Progress Report’. Available online.

NCVO (2021) ‘Equity, diversity and inclusion in volunteering’. NCVO. Available online.

NPC (2023) ‘How to embed DEI into your grant-making cycle’. Civil Society Consulting. Available online.

Ochoa-Daderska, R. Ochoa-Daderska, G. Sánchez-García, J. Callarisa Fiol, L. Navikienė, Ž. Navikaite, J. Demirci, M. Gródek-Szostak, Z. Kopiec, A. & Ochoa Siguencia, L. (2023) ‘Social inclusion through digital learning and volunteering’. Available online.

RACE (2023) ‘The 2023 RACE Report’. SOS-UK. Available online.

Selvarajah, S. Deivanayagam, TA. Lasco, G. Scafe, S. White, A. Zembe-Mkabile, W. & Devakumar, S. (2020) ‘Categorisation and Minoritisation’. BMJ Global Health. Available online.

Smith, S. Stuart, J. King, D. Logue, C. Rossiter, W. & Vahidi, G. (2021) ‘Evaluation of the DCMS 50+ volunteering programme: final report’. Available online.

Southby, K. South, J. & Bagnall, A. (2019) ‘A rapid review of barriers to volunteering for potentially disadvantaged groups and implications for health inequalities’. International Journal for Third Sector Research. Available online.

Staig, J. (2021) ‘What is intersectionality? And why you need to know’. Market Research Society. Available online.

Tabassum, N. (2023) ‘UK Civil Society Almanac 2023’. NCVO. Available online.

Tiratelli, L. & Kaye, S. (2020) ‘Communities vs. Coronavirus: The Rise of Mutual Aid’. New Local. Available online.

University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research (2023) ‘Understanding Society: Waves 1-13, 2009-2022 and Harmonised BHPS: Waves 1-18, 1991-2009’. 18th Edition. UK Data Service. Available online.

Vision for Volunteering (2022) ‘The Vision for Volunteering’. Available online.

Appendix 5: Abbreviations

DCMS – Department for Culture, Media and Sport (UK government)

DEI – Diversity, equity, and inclusion

DPA – Digital Poverty Alliance

EDI – Equity, diversity, and inclusion

LIO – Local Infrastructure Organisation

NAVCA – National Association for Voluntary and Community Action

NCVO – National Council for Voluntary Organisations

NPC – New Philanthropy Capital

VCSE – Voluntary, Community and Social Enterprise

VIO – Volunteer-involving organisation

VRMS – Volunteering Research Managed Services

1. The COM-B model for behaviour change cites capability (C), opportunity (O), and motivation (M) as three key factors capable of changing behaviour, recognising behaviour is influenced by many factors. ↩

2. The Theoretical Domains Framework is intended to make behaviour change theories more accessible to implementation researchers by grouping factors that may influence behaviours. ↩

3. The COM-B model for behaviour change cites capability (C), opportunity (O), and motivation (M) as three key factors capable of changing behaviour, recognising behaviour is influenced by many factors. ↩

4. The Theoretical Domains Framework is intended to make behaviour change theories more accessible to implementation researchers by grouping factors that may influence behaviours. ↩