The University of Ottawa's Centre for Global and Community Engagement (CGCE) launched two new initiatives in 2014 to increase student volunteering - Days of Service and the Community Engagement Residence Initiative. These initiatives were informed by data from the 2010 Canadian Survey on Giving, Volunteering and Participation which showed a drop in student volunteering after high school. The data also provided insights into student motivations and barriers. The CGCE collaborates with the e=mc2 project, which aims to improve community engagement. Through its initiatives, the CGCE seeks to develop students' lifelong commitment to volunteering and community participation.

1. CGCE – for internal use only 1
Engaging post- secondary students in their community-
The University of Ottawa Case Study
1. Introduction
In 2014, the Centre for Global and Community Engagement (CGCE) has launched two initiatives
that seek to provide University of Ottawa students with innovative ways to get them involved in
their surrounding community. These two initiatives are: Days of Service and the Community
Engagement Residence Initiative (CERI) which later on evolved to include the Friel (Residence)
Living Learning Community. These initiatives are born largely out of the analysis of 2010
Canadian Survey on Giving, Volunteering and Participation (CSGVP) data and in part from the
Centre’s experience since its inception in 2011. The CGCE is both a member of the e=mc2
project and a demonstration community. The e=mc2 project is a large interdisciplinary project
supported by Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) and the University of
Ottawa. The e=mc2 project aims to build stronger, more caring and resilient communities in
Canada through developing a better understanding of engagement. The underlying assumption
is that improved engagement will potentially lead to increased rates of giving and volunteering.
The Centre and the project e=mc2 share the same goal which is to contribute to the
development of youth`s life-long commitment and interest in volunteering, and actively
participating in positive community development.
The demonstration community is the University of Ottawa but we anticipate that the results of
this experience using the CSGVP data could be relevant and useful to many other Canadian
colleges and universities, and to a certain extent to community partners recruiting students as
volunteers from post-secondary institutions. The University of Ottawa is part of the U15
(Canada`s research intensive universities) and is connected to various local, provincial and
national networks.
The Centre offers a service to the community by helping match students to on-and off-campus
volunteer positions. The Centre also has its own programs and initiatives. Through this project,
the Centre has learned how matching initiatives to students` needs and motivations is key and
can, in the short-term, increase their levels of participation. Through this project, the Centre
learned how students can improve skills through even with very short-term community service
involvement, how these experiences can lead to subsequent community involvement, and how
they can help facilitate students’ integration to the campus. The e=mc2 project results and
CSGVP data have also had an impact on the Centre`s overall approach to communicating with
students and recruiting for its programs and initiatives. In 2015-2016, we will be able to
implement some of the learning of the project and validate further our assumptions.

2. CGCE – for internal use only 2
2. Community profile
The Centre for Global and Community Engagement (CGCE) was officially launched in October
2011. It was the first initiative launched under the Destination 2020 strategic plan. Its mandate
is to promote community engagement and social responsibility among its 43,000 students. As
noted in the 2010 Au Service du Monde Roundtable Summary report1, establishing what
became later CGCE, was part of a broader re-imagining of the place of the university in the
world. The University of Ottawa is strong in the traditional fields of university-based teaching
and research, the creation of the Centre offers the opportunity to expand the mandate and
vision of the University to include both traditional strengths and the emerging place of
practical, community based learning, teaching and research. Universities have seen remarkable
expansion in the community-based learning sector: Community Service Learning (CSL)
programs, for example, have grown from less than 10 programs in Canada to over 502. This
innovative learning format has yielded positive results documented in recent studies that
demonstrate that student engagement and retention are improved by CSL and volunteer
programs.3 In the United States over 900 such programs exist.
Since the early 2010s, many Canadian universities have put greater emphasis on community
engagement in their strategic plan. The University of Ottawa took the bold step of creating a
stand-alone Centre with the mandate of promoting both community service learning and
extracurricular volunteering activities. The Centre encourages students to volunteer locally,
nationally and internationally. The CSL Program initiated in 2004 and brought under the
umbrella of the Centre when it was created in 2011 remains a key offering. This program and
other offerings by the Centre support the University of Ottawa`s strategic mandate agreement
signed with the Government of Ontario to provide at least one experiential learning
opportunity to all its undergraduate students by 2020.
The Centre`s role is one of facilitator or connector between volunteer opportunities offered in
community and the University of Ottawa students. The Centre has a portal /database allowing
students to browse, identify and select volunteer opportunities from on- and off-campus
partner organizations. The Centre has also developed its own initiatives catering to different
student`s interests or service goals. Other complementary activities or services offered to
students by the Centre include the oversight of the co-curricular record (CCR) production, pre-
service orientation, international pre-departure and debriefing, pre-service orientation, team
leadership training, volunteer fairs, and community engagement scholarships.
Since its inception, the Centre has focused its efforts in raising awareness about its presence on
campus, worked with faculties and services to complement community engagement initiatives
1 Rachel Thibeault andKathryn Trevenen, Au service du monde Roundtable Report. June 2010. P.1.
2 CanadianAlliance for CommunityService Learning website, 2015.
3 See for example, Kuh,G.D. et al (2007). PiecingTogether the Student Success Puzzle. Hoboken, NJ. JosseyBass. See also
Sarah Gallini andBarbara Moely(2003). Service Learning andEngagement, Academic Challenge, and Retention. Michigan
Journal of CommunityService Learning. pp5-14.

3. CGCE – for internal use only 3
in place and/or in development. The Centre has also developed working relationships and
connections with community partners in the national capital region. It has also joined other
communities of practice locally, nationally and internationally. It is currently a member of the
OAVR, PAVR-O, VPMC, Volunteer Ottawa, Volunteer Canada, Ontario CSL network, CACSL,
IARSLCE, CCR network, the Talloires Network, in an effort to learn from others and share what it
has learned in terms of better practices to promote youth engagement.
Our reach
The Centre`s outreach has increased since its creation in 2011; the number of volunteering
placements listed in the Centre`s portal as part of classroom learning was about 1630 in 2013
and 1670 in extracurricular positions. Two years later, in mid-April 2015, the number of
students volunteering placements has grown to 4400 of which about 1700 were in the
Community Service Learning Program and 2700 in extracurricular volunteering activities. The
volunteering by students is carried out on- and off- campus by students. Much of the Centre`s
growth over the past few years comes from extracurricular volunteering. Currently about 10%
of the students population are involved in one way or another with CGCE activities; the target
has been set for 2020 at 25% or 10,000 students.
Annually, CGCE works with about 400 community partners in the National Capital Region
posting volunteering opportunities on its portal. About x % are based on campus. On-campus
options include students associations and clubs, faculties and other services. Other services
include but are not limited to Community Life, Housing Service, International Office and the
Student Federation of the University of Ottawa (SFUO). These partnerships and others have
helped improved the Centre’s ability to help meet students’ needs. Volunteering opportunities
available on campus or at proximity of the campus have a greater appeal to students.
Being an urban and large campus of 43,000 students, it is a challenge to get the word out to
students. Surveys carried out on campus by various services (e.g. uOttawa Communication
Directorate, Committee on the Quality of the Student Experience) have helped gain a better
understanding of the importance of using the right delivery channel(s). Students do tend to use
a combination of means to get informed or make decisions about what their life on campus.
Communications from peers, student associations or program of study, uOzone are key vehicles
that students use. Generic emails, posters and ads on TV have some level of effectiveness.
The Centre has learned from this experience on the importance of targeted in our messages
and to have multiple (and reputable) points of dissemination of the information, and to build
on well-established channels of communication instead of creating its own. For example,
working through the international office mailing list has proven very effective, creating a win-
win for both services.
An outreach strategy that has emerged in the last two years for the Centre was to put greater
emphasis on first-year and international students (e.g. welcoming week events and
promotional tables, welcoming bags). Reaching out first year students, and more specifically
student living in residence, is a key priority for 2015-2016. Our objectives are to facilitate their

4. CGCE – for internal use only 4
integration on campus through shorter-term volunteering, raise their awareness on the
Centre`s services, help them understand the benefits of volunteering and how they can access
a Co-Curricular Record (CCR) for the full duration of their studies.
3. What was the rationale for the collaboration between E=MC2 and this community?
The e=mc2 project is a large interdisciplinary project supported by Employment and Social
Development Canada (ESDC) and the University of Ottawa. The underlying assumption is that
improved engagement will potentially lead to increased rates of giving and volunteering. The
data provided by the 2010 Canadian Survey on Volunteering, Giving and Participating (CSGVP)
has helped the Centre better understand motivations and barriers to youth engagement and
more specifically of its target group (post-secondary youth). This data, combined with the
Centre`s data, its own experience, and existing communities of practice and literature, have
helped the Centre launched two new initiatives for the 2014-2015 academic year.
The e=mc2 project uses data from 2010 and 2007, with very similar questions and results. The
data sets included 30,000 Canadians, with approximately 4,000 of these within the age group of
15 to 24 years of age (the classic age grouping for youth). Within that group, the Centre has
reviewed more closely the data pertaining to youth in post-secondary institutions. For CSGVP,
post-secondary youth are full-time students, not yet graduated in the 15-24 years of age group.
In this section, we present the CSGVP data that was considered by the Centre and led to the
design of new initiatives:
 youth rates and amount of volunteering,
 youth’s self-reported motivations to volunteer, and
 barriers to engagement for youth.
Youth Rates and Amount of Volunteering:
CSGVP data on youth formal volunteering indicates that 58% of the 15-24 age group carry out
formal volunteering. Within that group, volunteering is frequent, but quite variable. As shown
on Figure 1, there is a significant drop in rates of engagement as students transition from high
school into post-secondary institutions, despite the potential large benefits both to themselves
and to their communities by remaining engaged through volunteering and direct helping. From
experience, this is a huge transition particularly if students are also moving from another town
or country. Xxx % of students attending uOttawa are from outside the national capital region;
around 9% of the total student population are international students.
Figure 1 - Percentage of Youth who indicated volunteering for an organization in previous 12
months, CSGVP, 2010

5. CGCE – for internal use only 5
As shown in figure 1, about 63% of post-secondary youth are involved in formal volunteering.
12% of post-secondary students indicated that they are required to volunteer compared to 7%
for the overall youth group. 75% of the post-secondary students who said they are required to
volunteer mentioned that their school is requiring them to do it. This still leaves quite a large
proportion of post-secondary youth who are motivated by other reasons.
The mean average of hours for the 15-24 years old is 130 hours which is the lowest average
number of hours in formal volunteering across age groups. As shown in Figure 2, there are
differences between the youth sub-groups. The post-secondary youth has a mean of 120
volunteer hours. High school students with the highest participation rate of 71% actually have
the lowest average number of hours followed by post-secondary youth. This suggests that in
this youth group, we have many more people “trying out” volunteering.
Figure 2 - Mean Hours volunteering for an organization in previous 12 months - those who
volunteered, CSGVP, 2010
Figure 3 shows that within post-secondary youth, we have, like in any of the other age groups,
different intensity of volunteering. We have those who volunteer quite a bit, namely 5% of the
group who volunteer more than 48 days a year all the way to 37% of this group who do not
volunteer at all.
71% 63% 52% 47% 44%
HS Student PS Student Grad/Mature Student Non-Student Youth Non-Youth
114 120
143
163 162
HS Student PS Student Grad/Mature Student Non-Student Youth Non-Youth

6. CGCE – for internal use only 6
Figure 3 - Intensity of volunteering carried out by youth, in % of the total, CSGVP, 2010
When comparing the CSGVP data on post-secondary students who do not volunteer (37%) with
the percentage of uOttawa students living in residences who did not volunteer during 2014-
2015 academic year (9 months) in figure 4, we note the significant difference, 60%, vs 37% for
the group as a whole. Even if we were to adjust data to include summer months, during which
students may have time to volunteer, it would be safe to assume the transition to post-
secondary institutions and other factors could explain such a lower rate of volunteering in first
year students living in residence in post-secondary institutions. It would be interesting to see if
there are differences with other cohorts of first year students (e.g. students living in shared
accommodation, with their parents or on their own).
Figure 4 - Amount of Volunteering by uOttawa First -year Students in residences, from
September2014- April 2015, uOttawa Housing Survey, 2015
29
37
48
53 56
22
16
14
13 11
32 26
19
16 16
12 16 13 13 13
5 5 6 6 5
HS Student PS Student Grad/Mature Student Non-Student Youth Non-Youth
more than 48 days
12 to 48 days
2 to 12 days
2 days or less
No days
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
No - did not volunteer at
all this year
Yes - volunteered between
1-10 hours in total
Yes - volunteered between
11-40 hours in total
Yes - volunteered between
41-80 hours in total
Yes - volunteered ove
hours in total
Percentageofstudents
Overall Friel

7. CGCE – for internal use only 7
Youth motivations to volunteer:
In Figure 5 are recorded the self-reported reasons for volunteering by youth. High school and
post-secondary youth tend to volunteer less because they are affected by a cause (for example,
family member has a specific disease) compared to non-youth (up over 60%). So volunteer
recruitment which emphasizes how issues impact on individuals may not be as effective an
overall approach for students compared to other age groups. But we also know that reaching
out to specific cohorts of students like environmental sciences students for an environmental
education community service project can be effective. Targeting specific groups for different
volunteering opportunities does have however implications when trying to scale up students’
level of participation or volunteering. Who is asking, when and how, is also critical.
Figure 5 - Reasons to volunteer for youth-Social Development, CSGVP, 2010
Friends and networks are important reasons to volunteer for approximately one half of all
volunteers. High school students tend to rate friends volunteering as the one of the highest
social reasons for volunteering and so do first-year students living in residence. The social
benefits of volunteering are also important for post-secondary youth as shown in Figure 13 and
would be a reason to join a shorter-term volunteering opportunity. Volunteer Canada has
developed an interesting tool which the Centre promotes to students to find out more about
the kind of volunteer they are, including whether they want to volunteer as a group or not. We
also often find that students are not sure about what they are looking for.
As shown in figure 6, self-development reasons are more important than social reasons overall.
Almost 80% of post-secondary youth mentioned that they volunteer to use skills; 2/3 of youth
want to explore their strengths and nearly 60% see their volunteering as an opportunity to
connect them to job opportunities.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Affected by cause Friends volunteer Develop network
HS Student PS Student Grad/Mature Student Non-Student Youth Non-Youth

8. CGCE – for internal use only 8
Figure 6 - Reasons to volunteer - Self Development, CSGVP, 2010
Again, when recruiting post-secondary youth as volunteers, opportunities where they are
having to use their skills, being challenged, and learning new things are more likely to meet
expectations, and therefore more likely to attract and retain volunteers. Volunteer
opportunities that are less challenging, repetitious, low-level, or “make work” are likely to not
meet expectations, unless there is a large social component which might work for a sub-group
who have social reasons as their primary reasons for volunteering. Not surprisingly, almost 60%
of the post-secondary students tend to view their volunteering as potentially a bridge into the
labour market. Again, when thinking about what makes a volunteering opportunity attractive,
this bridging aspect would be important to highlight, where it exists.
Figure 7 – Barriers to Volunteering for youth, CSGVP, 2010
Figure 7 show the barriers to volunteering as identified by youth. In terms of barriers to
volunteering, post-secondary youth reported that they were either not interested to volunteer
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Job opportunities Use skills Explore strengths
HS Student PS Student Grad/Mature Student Non-Student Youth Non-Youth
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Not interested Not asked Don't know how
HS Student PS Student Grad/Mature Student Non-Student Youth Non-Youth

9. CGCE – for internal use only 9
(20%), not asked (over 55%) or do not know how (almost 40%). Other studies have identified
the same barriers4. Interest in volunteering tends to increase with education level among
students. Granted that the college or university years are pretty busy times for students, at the
same time, it is also a period where interest can often be easily piqued – particularly if
combined with other areas of interest (sports, social activities, school, gaming, etc.) or skills
development as we saw from Figures 5 and 6 on youth’s motivations to volunteer.
Not asked is a particularly interesting reason reported by youth as to why they don’t volunteer,
and opens up all sorts of questions as to who and how we are asking young people to volunteer.
Over the last 15 months, the Centre has started to look more at this issue of not being asked
and aimed to get more insights from the evaluation. Some of the questions we would want to
answer include: Who is doing the asking? How directly do youth have to be asked? Does being
asked by a peer make any difference vs. an authority figure? Don’t know how is also a very
interesting reason for not volunteering or not volunteering more, especially when we think of
the various resources available (e.g. social media, internet). It would seemodd that over one in
three youth don’t know how they would go about volunteering or volunteering more. This
raises lots of questions as to how these resources are presented, perceived, their effectiveness,
etc. It would also be interesting to find out a bit more about this factor. Is it linked to how to
register, how to get there, how to find out whether this is a match to interests, not knowing
what to do when showing up at the placement? Learning more about this could help the
Centre and its partners improve their approach and in turn, could improve the rate of students
volunteering in that age group.
Figure 8 show suggests that over 55% of post-secondary students don’t want to make a long-
term commitment. For first year students, this can be linked to the transition to colleges or
university which is difficult. It can be even more difficult if students are moving to Ottawa from
a different city or country. When looking at the reasons why youth want to volunteer to use
Figure 8 - Reasons for not volunteering for youth, CSGVP, 2010
4 Richard A SundeenandSallyA. Raskoff. Ports ofEntryandObstacles:Teenagers' Access to Volunteer Activities Nonprofit
Management and Leadership. Volume 11, Issue 2, pages179–197, Winter 2000
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Can't make long term commitment Health or physical issues Associated costs
HS Student PS Student Grad/Mature Student Non-Student Youth Non-Youth

10. CGCE – for internal use only 10
skills and explore strengths –how much can this be achieved in relatively short term
commitments as figure 8 seems to suggest? This becomes a considerable challenge when
thinking about how to structure volunteering opportunities…not just for youth but overall. Or
is the issue that youth don’t want to commit until they are able to do a test run or make sure it
meets their needs.
Figure 9 - Volunteering outcomes - Skills, CSGVP, 2010
Figure 9 summarizes the key areas examined by CSGVP with respect to volunteering outcomes.
Generally youth report high skills development obtained as a result of their volunteering. This is
not surprising given the period of their lives. Skills that are developed include interpersonal,
communications and organizational skills. These skills are generally listed by employers as
essential and key to a successful transition into the labour market5. When volunteer
opportunities can help develop such skills they should be advertised as such. So the message is
not only about changing things or giving back, it should also be talking about how they can gain
the skills from their volunteering.
In CSGVP, about 40-60% of post-secondary students reported volunteering as a way to increase
job opportunities. We can see from Figure 10 that the outcome matches fairly close to the
original reasons for volunteering related to employment outcomes.
5 A few references onthe topic:to add2014 survey+ 2013 Deloitte +
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/08/the-thing-employers-look-for-when-hiring-recent-
graduates/378693/Addreference from deloitte andthe surveyfrom 2014.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Communications Interpersonal Organizational
HS Student PS Student Grad/Mature Student Non-Student Youth Non-You

11. CGCE – for internal use only 11
Figure 10 - Youth Volunteering Outcomes - Employment
In summary, considering the CSGVP data, the Centre proceeded with the launch of a shorter
community service opportunity called Day of Service that brings both a social component and a
connection to the community /campus. Given the Centre`s desire to raise students awareness
about the Centre`s presence upon their arrival on campus, we also decided to focus on students
in residence and international students and to organize shorter community service projects for
students living in residence. These opportunities were offered under banner of Community
Engagement Residence Initiative. With the creation of Friel Living Learning community on
community engagement, specific volunteering (short-term) activities were developed for that
residence. Some of the elements that helped shape these initiatives included:
 High proportion of youth in post-secondary institutions say they don`t want to make the
time commitment. Looking at the offering from the Centre, directly or via database, we
decided to fill that gap. We did not really have a `product`.
 We also decided to recruit community associations for this initiative as most of these
would have beautification or very short-term projects for which they may be looking for
volunteers. We wanted to make it clear that students were available for shorter
projects to avoid misunderstanding with the current pool of community partners who
tend to post individual placements (though later learned that some of the existing
partners were interested in one-day project).
 From the Centre`s past and current experience in matching students to volunteering
opportunities, we know that distance and transportation time can be a barrier for
students in choosing a location to volunteer. This combined with the CSGVP data on
time commitment made the Centre decide to identify one-day projects that were either
close by the University or that could be easily accessed by the transit system. Before
contacting community partners for this initiative, we mapped them in terms of ease of
transport.
 We know from experience that the transition from high school to university is a big one
and many students also are coming in residences from outside the region. Group
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Helped with a job Helped with employment chances
HS Student PS Student Grad/Mature Student Non-Student Youth Non-Youth

12. CGCE – for internal use only 12
volunteering opportunities could be promoted as a way to build their personal
networks, make new friends, be connected to their new city, and help integrate them
on the campus and/or residence life.
 International students are often challenged to find part-time work and /or in developing
their personal and professional networks. We tried to identify opportunities that could
also help them integrate in the Canadian context and possibly develop potential
connections to labour market (but this was not the original intent).
 Building on CSGVP data, promoting participation in these shorter community service
projects to students was not focusing only on giving back or providing an helping hand,
it would also highlight the social and self-development benefits.
 The CGSVP data has helped the Centre understand youth motivations to volunteer. In
fall 2014, a marketing and communication officer position was created to coordinate the
Centre`s approach to this communication and support the program team with the right
skills set and tools. Getting the word out and scaling up our ability to connect more
students to short-term volunteer placements could not happen without a significant
investment in both form and content. Messaging about the Day of Service was to
reflect the learning of CSGVP data. To support some of this work, In fall 2014, the
Centre also launched a new video to promote volunteering and the use of the Co-
Curricular Record to attest of a well-rounded university experience: “You are more than
your diploma’. The video was promoting the Co-curricular record but also encouraging
students to gain a more rounded experience while at the University of Ottawa.
4. Description of the intervention and its context
Days of Service Initiative
In April 2014, the Centre for Global and Community Engagement launched the Days of Service
initiative. Based on the success of that day, during the months of June and up to August 31,
2014, the Centre worked on defining the parameters of the initiative; identified community
partners and projects, finalized the application process, role and responsibilities, etc. .
Our assumption is that students would welcome providing them with a (very) short-term
volunteer opportunity allowing students to “dip their toe in the water” and explore
volunteering. Days of Service projects are defined as one-day volunteer opportunities where a
group of uOttawa students engage in a hands-on project in response to a need of a local
community partner. The group of students interact and work with community members
depending on the scale and scope of projects but allowing for the students to be working as a
group and not as individuals within a larger group of volunteers was essential if we were to
meet some of the objectives set for this initiative. Days of Service projects allow students to
meet other students to expand their personal networks. Days of Service are meant to be a
social volunteering activity designed to be fun, engaging and a direct response to a community
need.
From April 2014 until July 2015, a total of 25 Days of Service projects were accomplished in
different communities of the Capital Region. Two of these projects were offered in May and

13. CGCE – for internal use only 13
July 2015. A total of 271 Students assembled in various teams to take on community gardens,
participate in fundraising events, teach business workshops in local schools, and many more.
About 30 students did more than one Day of Service projects. Some students started as a
participant and became team leaders in other projects.
The Days of Service initiative has evolved throughout the year as it seeks to engage different
cohorts of students. Interest for these was high; we even had student associations that asked
the Centre to organize one as a team building exercise and/or as a way to enhance the
leadership skills of their executive team. Figures 11 and 12 show the profile of students who
participated in the Days of Service initiative since the first day in April 2014. 60% of
participating were international students.
Figure 11 - Participation of Students in 2104-2015 Days of Service, per Faculty( n=288)
F A C U LTY OF A R TS
F A C U LTY OF ED U CATION
F A C U LTY OF EN G IN EER IN G
F A C U LTY OF H EALTH S C I EN CES
F A C U LTY OF L AW
F A C U LTY OF S C IEN CE
F A C U LTY OF S OC IAL S C I EN CES
TEL F ER S C H OOL OF M AN AGEMENT
12%
1%
17%
4%
1%
22%
20%
23%

14. CGCE – for internal use only 14
Figure 12 - Participation of students in 2014-2015 Days of Service, per year of study (n=288)
The Days of Service initiative had projects reserved for Friel Residence students or for other
students in residence, other groups or was offered to the general student population. Overall,
it was relatively easy to fill all the volunteering positions and this person grew much faster than
other initiatives the Centre had launched which suggested an appetite for this type of short-
term project, which in turn, confirms the CSGVP data around youth not wanting long-term
commitment.
Good promotional efforts were carried out through targeted emails, through TV adverts,
posters, via the Housing Service staff, at promotional events, etc. One project received an
overwhelming level of interest particularly from international students; the Maple Syrup
community service project in the spring 2015.
Community Engagement Residence Initiative / Friel Living Learning community
In September 2014, the Centre for Global and Community Engagement and Housing Service
launched the Community Engagement Residence Initiative (CERI), an innovative approach to
the uOttawa residential experience. This initiative seeks to provide an opportunity for uOttawa
students living in University of Ottawa residences to collectively take part in community service
projects, an interactive way to meet other uOttawa students and get involved in the
community. The initiative is also meant to provide positive and constructive engagement
36%
20%14%
8%
20%
2%
Yea
Yea
Yea
Yea
Gra
N/A

15. CGCE – for internal use only 15
opportunities for uOttawa students living in residence as they learn about and execute
community service projects responding to community needs.
Providing positive engagement opportunities is the key to a successful residential experience
and the retention of uOttawa students. We started by providing a series of (very) short-term
volunteering opportunities targeting students in residence. They were promoted jointly by
CGCE and Housing Service via their respective channels. All direct email or newsletter
communication to students living in residence was handled by Housing Service staff.
During the 2014-2015 academic year, one of the residences, Friel, was designed as the Friel
Living Learning Community. The Friel Living Learning Community initiative is intended to
provide an opportunity for students living in that residence to collectively take part in
community service projects. A total of 5 projects were identified and implemented at the Friel
Residence, in September, October, January and April. Friel Residence has a dedicated
Residence Life Coordinator. This position worked with one CGCE staff to plan and implement
this initiative.
At the beginning of the academic year, the Centre was involved in the Community Advisors (CA)
training to inform them about the Centre`s activities, inform them on how to register for
volunteering positions and provide them with information on volunteering opportunities
arising. For Friel Residence, orientation was done on the specific opportunities organized for
that residence. Community Advisors are paid positions by Housing Service. They are provided
housing and a salary to cover 15 hours a week in overseeing their floor. Each floor has a
community advisor. For Friel, more hands-on training was provided to Community Advisors
who were to encourage their residents to participate in the Friel volunteering events as part of
the once of month programming activities that each community advisor is expected to
facilitate.
5. Evaluation Questions, Process and Methods:
Objectives/Focus:
Through the e=mc2 participatory field testing project, CGCE hoped to:
o Confirm CSGVP results for youth engagement per sub-groups (first year student to
fourth /fifth year students) in relation to uOttawa students
- Reasons for volunteering/Not volunteering
- Motivations to take part in community engagement
- Barriers to engage in community engagement
- Impact of short term volunteering on youth
o Determine if Days of Service and the Community Engagement Residence Initiative (CERI)
and Friel Living Learning community successfully engaged students and encouraged
them to want to continue to volunteer in the future
o Validate our assumptions that initial short term volunteering can lead to more
engagement including long term community engagement

16. CGCE – for internal use only 16
o Better understand student motivations, for the selected cohorts (first year vs 2nd 3rd or
4th year), in getting involved through these two CGCE initiatives (first year students,
international students, students clubs and organizations)
o Define the elements of an ideal volunteer activity or pathway that would successfully
plant a seed for a lifetime commitment to community engagement
Evaluation Methods
The logic model is provided in annex:
Process:
 Carry out an online survey of all first year students living in residence and Days of
Service participants by April 2015.
 Host two focus groups of Friel Residents (those who participated and those who did not
participate before students leave the campus allowing us to further analyze and
conclude the survey results (April 2015).
 Conduct focus group with Friel Residence `s Community advisors Days of service project
in March/April 2015
 Conduct individual phone interviews with participating Community Partners in
May/June 2015
 Review profile of students who participated in Days of Service and Friel Residence
projects in the Centre’s database to determine if they have continued to volunteer (July
2015), learn more about their profile, year of study and interests, if they had
volunteered before to supplement information collected from the online surveys and
focus groups.
 Carry out a baseline survey of Friel Residence students in September 2015
 Hold in-depth interviews in Fall 2015 (September/October 2015) with students who
participated in Days of Service and Friel residence initiatives after they had time to
reflect on their participation
 National Housing Survey in April 2016: Ask the same four questions on volunteering
patterns in the 2015-2016 to be able to compare before and after the rate of
volunteering in the CERI and in Friel Living Learning Community.
Lessons learned
While most of the evaluation processes took place as planned, we were not able to have a
focus group of non-participants from the Friel Residence. We had one student who did not
participate in Friel Volunteering events who joined the focus group with Friel Residence
participants. April is always a challenging month as students are finalizing term papers and/or
getting ready for exams. Even with the prizes, the student participation to the focus groups
was a bit low: 6 students on the Friel focus group and 7 on the Days of Service focus group.
Housing Service had planned to carry out the national housing survey in April so we had to
schedule Friel residents online survey after, which means that we did not use the focus group

17. CGCE – for internal use only 17
to gain complementary information and we had less students around. Next year the Friel
Residence online survey would need to take place before the Housing Survey so that the focus
group discussions can build on the results of the online and avoid being during exams or during
moving out and be able to have higher participation rate. Prizes were not enough to elicit
participation.
Lessons learned discussions were held between CGCE and Housing staff working on the Friel
Living learning community. This led to the development of a logic model including specific
indicators for the Friel Living Learning Community and a specific timeline of activities for 2015-
2016. Careful planning of timing of the surveys and focus groups will need to be integrated to
the timeline.
6. Evaluation findings
6.1 Days of Service
Based on the focus group and online survey 6, Days of Service projects are largely supported by
students looking to explore short term volunteering, get a “foot in the door” and meet new
people. This feeds into CSGVP data that making a commitment for longer term involvement is
not as attractive among youth.
Days of Service also seems to work because it is generally a group experience – nice to be with
a group so can navigate more easily, more comfortable that heading out to somewhere new on
their own, particularly true for students from outside the National Capital Region. Students are
especially looking for Days of Service placements that allow them to explore the Ottawa
community and Canadian culture, work with kids, joy of helping others and work with
environmental causes or outdoor projects. Days of Service were appealing to international
students or first year residence students. Ultimately, a key rewarding aspect of a Days of
Service experience for students was the ability to interact with community members.
There are a few things we have learned from students about their experience and why they
participated. While it is important to be sensible to weather and the timing of outdoor
projects, providing a range of timing for projects (evenings and weekends), and to provide
student volunteers with as many logistics as possible to best prepare them are essential.
Timing of these events in the academic year is very important if we want to elicit participation,
particularly for first-year students. It needs to be carefully weighted so it does not interact with
6 All DOS participants were invitedto participate to the online survey. Onlyone reminder was sent. 78 students (or 31%)
completedthe survey. 86% of these respondents participatedinone Dayof Service while 12% participatedin2 or more Days
of service. 50% of the students participated insome other form of volunteering: 10% had done the CommunityService
Learning program, 36% other type of extracurricular volunteering, 18% had volunteeredontheir own. Respondents were:
mainlyfor Telfer (26%), Social Sciences(22%) andEngineering (19%). Interms ofyear of study: 1st year (31%), 2nd year (26%),
3rd year (21%), Graduate Studies (14%). Female at 76% and male at 24%. 91% of those whoresponded to the surveyare living
awayfrom home: Respondents were in sharedhousing (35%), inUniversityresidence (33%), live on their own (23% ) and9%
live withtheir parents.

18. CGCE – for internal use only 18
key academic dates. Students can start planning once they have their schedule. Days of Service
during the Reading Week Day of Service were suggested (towards the end of the week) as
students are looking for ways to connect among those not going back home, particularly in the
fall one.
Many of the students who volunteered for Days of Service projects were already volunteering.
For them, getting involved with these projects was not for them a way to try out volunteering.
Other factors were at play, including getting to know the city/their community. One student
who moved to study at uOttawa from another city told us that being new to Ottawa, she
participated in a Day of Service with the Food Bank to connect herself with the organization in
Ottawa as she used to volunteer for her local food bank in her home town. She has plans to
continue with that volunteering now that she has the connections.
Through the analysis of the results, the e=mc2 project has helped the Centre better
understand, and more work is still required, that we need to carefully craft our messages when
recruiting volunteers or promoting volunteering opportunities. Promotion is key but so is the
timing of it. Days of Service were promoted through emails, social media, posters, mini-
posters in residence and near elevators. This combination of methods has proved to relatively
efficient. Using student leaders to encourage participation was not a factor as important for
the general student population compared to first year students.
Consider connecting Days of Service participants on social media to allow them to build on the
connections they made from the volunteer opportunity may encourage further volunteering or
help maintaining the personal networks developed during the activity. It is important to the
Centre to tailor its recruitment approach to the different cohorts. More work needs to be
done at the promotional tables to personalize the service. Some students said that when they
interact with the centre staff, they don’t want to be told to go to the community engagement
navigator (database where volunteering opportunities are posted) to browse; more direct and
personalized service needs to be provided to get them started.
The Navigator itself still proves to be a challenge on its interface. It may be time to rethink the
promotional material for explaining students how to explore the Navigator. Creating a user-
friendly diagram or step-by-step would encourage first time users.
Even a very short-term activity has to be well organized. Clear understanding and expectations
are important. One event was described as really rushed and last-minute – not knowing what
to do, not training, not sure of language. Community Partners need to take the time. The
event that was noted as such was an event where more volunteer positions were created due
to the success in the call for applications.
Days of Service also seems to work because it is generally a group experience – nice to be with
a group so can navigate more easily, more comfortable that heading out to somewhere new on
their own. Depending on the student, we hear gaining valuable experience and skills (customer
service, painting) to be noted. On the first OCH project for example, which was a painting

19. CGCE – for internal use only 19
project, many students had expressed pride in having learned how to paint as they had planned
to use these skills set when moving in their own apartment. Many of the participants on that
first project were international (x %). While when some further paint projects were suggested,
one international student took the time to react and mention its dissatisfaction regarding the
fact that this project was proposed to international students and that they could do more.
Many international students would like to gain the skills to be able to work in the Canadian
labor market and landing a job is at time challenging as its for Canadian-born students in the
current economic context.
The focus group supported the findings of the online survey and provided more insights. The
Days of service concept was heavily supported: “short and sweet”, “convenient”, “would just
be watching movies anyway – gets me moving”, “no long-term commitment”, “see a different
part of the city”. Students were motivated by the people and saw their participation in them a
win-win “you don’t lose anything – it is meaningful, you are making a contribution but it is
really short-term”. A Day of Service provides a foot in the door – “you can go check things out
without having to make a commitment. I figure out how to get there, who is working there,
etc. and then can continue on if I want to. Having it organized helps students with the
introduction to an organization since they sometimes find that contacting them on their own is
daunting.
Supported by CGSVP data and e=mc2 surveys conducted, as show in figure xx, students list
“Didn’t have enough time because of course load (76%)” as the top reason for not volunteering
more. There is a real need to look at the timing of the volunteering opportunities, and to
consider different promotional methods and materials. Some students indicated that exams
are no longer confined to a specific block of weeks so it has more to do to timing of
recruitment. Some students wished for opportunities in the summer and during reading weeks.
There could be option to have a longer Days of Service (2-3 days) scheduled on either end or in
the middle of reading weeks might be of interest. These periods could be options for those
staying on campus or looking for ways to connect.
During the implementation, we saw that the response to posting Days of Service positions
could be uneven. When asked about the type of volunteering opportunities during the focus
group that they would consider, students mentioned that they would like to see more
opportunities for volunteering on campus. Some noted that they would like to volunteer in
areas more closely aligned with their studies, but it is challenging to find opportunities off
campus that align with what they are studying – wondering if there might be opportunities on
campus (e.g., research?) that would allow them to volunteer in areas more closely to what they
are studying. Pointed out that some CSL opportunities are not really all that related to the
course work (e.g., clerical duties in MP office).
6.2 CERI/ Friel Living Learning Community
We carried out a survey of students in Friel Residence after the uOttawa Housing Service Survey
The total number of students in Friel Residence in 2014-2015 was 380 students. 48 Students

20. CGCE – for internal use only 20
completed the online survey or 12%. Timing was perhaps an issue, which explains the lower
participation rate. A focus group was held with students (1 non-participant and four
participants). We also had a meeting with the Community Advisors (CAs) to debrief their
experience of the year, gather their opinion on the way forward.
Shorter volunteering events like Days of Service allows students to meet people, recognize
others in residence etc. It is particularly a great volunteer option for first year students.
Students agree that one-day volunteer opportunities for first year students are effective in
getting them acclimated to volunteering here at uOttawa. First year students having
participated in Friel DOS/volunteer activities are considering longer term volunteering beyond.
Ottawa is considered a “big city”. Focus on local neighborhood is likely a good move to allay
some of the concern/fears of moving further out into the city during the first few months.
Short-term, local-based activities seemquite attractive as a concept to participants. This feeds
into CSGVP findings that making a commitment for longer term involvement is not as attractive
among youth. While shorter term project met a need, the timing of these volunteer events is
critical. One of the approaches taken in 2014-2015 was to promote event directly via the
Community Advisors at their monthly meetings. The Residence Life Coordinator also emailed
residents. During the first six week orientation, residents and CAs were invited to learn more
about the volunteering opportunities. The monthly meetings were to be used as a way to
promote these events.
Good timing of these volunteering events is key with this particular group. More could have
been done to communicate the schedule (Five events were organized for Friel in 2014-2105 –
some students heard of some events and not of others). From the focus group, the first
month, if not the first semester, is particularly challenging for students and they do not seem to
be actively seeking out new opportunities or new people given the high level of novelty within
which they are already immersed (residence, classes, city). Perhaps November/pre-exam time
is a more appropriate time for more targeted activities/recruitment for engagement to make a
connection before the Christmas break. While all students are in first year, for have already
volunteering quite a bit and could be looking at the fall once things have settled down and they
are able to see what the routine is going to be moving forward. We also heard via the online
survey that it is important to provide the schedule of events so that students can determine if
they can fit these in their schedule. Some students suggested that the October study break
could also be a good opportunity for students not going home.
How we promote these volunteering opportunities is also important. Communication of
activities seems to be a challenge - links directly to CSGVP data of “didn’t know about
activities” “nobody asked” – some of this might be linked to timing of when activities took place
and how they were advertised. There seems to be a need to be a need to use more champions
or face-to-face contact. One of the focus group student who did not participate in the Friel
Volunteer events said that she might have if someone had talked to her. Not all Community
Advisors organized their monthly meetings. Recruitment needs to be obvious and direct with
this group. Based on the focus group discussions, it also seems important to present “menus”

21. CGCE – for internal use only 21
“I know that after the cupcake event, I
felt really good about what I had done for
the kids.”And “For the people that had
done the haunted house, you sawthe
kids firsthand.Itwas rewarding.”
Community advisor,
Friel Residence, 2015
of opportunities, and continuously – when they are busy they are not “looking” but will go
ahead and do something if asked or if it is clearly presented to them Various messages about
the newsletters; some students loved getting them, some didn’t know how to sign up for them,
others said that housing and CGCE should somehow ‘combine their information and
newsletters’.
For residences, a key recruitment tool for Days of Service is the Community Advisors.
Promoting volunteering opportunities to this group from the very beginning of the year
including their August training is something to continue and build on. As there will be about
4500 students in residences in the fall 2015, having trained community advisors on the benefits
of volunteering and how to disseminate information could be a great way to boost our rate of
volunteering, particularly if students find events that they can go to with their friends on their
floor. Helping Community Advisors understand options for volunteering available on campus
will be an important strategy. Providing CAs with the right tools too is important As shown on
figure 13, for residences, Community Advisors do play a role in encouraging participation but
much less than initially though. According to the online survey, CAs come after 1) timing of
the volunteer event 2) friends participating at the event 3) opportunity to make new friends; 4)
learn new skills /to have potential reference when applying to job in future
Providing a calendar of volunteer activities (Days of Service or other volunteer opportunities)
for students in residence would be a good investment. Identifying champions on each floor
would also be a good way to encourage participation. Figure 13 also confirms the importance of
going to a shorter community service activity with friends or as a way to make new friends for
that age group. This changes overtime however when we compare the group of Days of Service
participants who rated lower the social aspects.
When recruiting or promoting volunteering opportunities, there is a need to present things
more clearly. In focus groups, it was suggested to prepare a timeline but also show options.
Suggestions were: “First we will help you meet your roommate, your floor, your building, your
campus – then when you are ready, you can volunteer in the community through various
opportunities”.
The role of Community Advisors (CAs) at Friel LLC
Community Advisors play a key role in student residence life, and they were a key
implementing arm of the Friel Living Learning Community this year. A meeting was organized
with the eight CAs to gather their perspective on what happened this year. A reminder that
Students at Friel did not know this year when they register for Friel residence that it would
become a Living Learning Community in community engagement.
At the focus group, CAs said that there was a general disinterest of
students living in Friel this year to participate in the volunteer events.
In the end about x students in Friel residence participated in these
events. CAs commented a bit like in the students’ focus groups that

22. CGCE – for internal use only 22
while the first events were well planned, there was a long stretch without any events or
volunteer opportunities that were apparent to the residents; events were too spread out. 2
events at the beginning (BBQ and the Haunted House and then there was very little in terms of
visibility. The feeling was that we needed to keep the energy up, be more consistent if we were
to elicit more students participation or reach out to those who did not volunteer at all during
the year, either at Friel volunteer events or any other volunteering opportunity.
They suggested to prepare a timeline of community engagement events to achieve this. CAs
confirmed that the primary reason students don’t volunteer more is the lack of time. Events
that don’t require long term commitments are best. When it is closer to midterms, it is more
important to have short volunteer opportunities that are closer to campus. For promotion, find
ways to be more visible to students from the beginning of the year; events were too spread
out. 2 events
Community Advisors noted that many of those who volunteered this year, have mostly
volunteered before coming to live in the residence. These are students who have a habit of
volunteering and are utilizing it as a means to get involved in the community here. They
echoed the students’ feedback that having contact with community members is very important.
There are mixed feelings as to the ideal time to introduce community engagement to First year
students. Some say that the first 6 weeks is a key time to peak students’ interest with
volunteering. Tell them about it and introduce something after that. Others felt that students
are slightly overwhelmed. The key may be to strike the right balance. Offer it, but don’t
necessarily have expectations about the participation rate. Students are most curious at the
beginning; of learning about ways to get involved, what is around Friel, getting to know people.
This is the ideal time to capture their interest, otherwise it will be very difficult to capture their
attention when things get busy but at least they will know it’s available and why it could be a
good thing to do later when things settled.
Regarding location of projects, CAs were opinion that events need to be as close to the
residence as possible. The events that were in the lobby had the most participation rates from
Friel students, particularly in the first semester.
What CAs need in future: They need a volunteer events schedule with all the events for Friel
and other Days of Service if possible so that they can inform their students. Making posters
was a consensus of support that they could utilize. For them, it is a lot of work and they find
they don’t look all that professional. Students will also have more confidence walking into these
events. They encourage using the reading week particularly for those students who are from
other countries for example who do not go home. One of the Community Advisor had done
one of the Alternative student break initiative that the Centre organizes with partners on- and
off-campus and said he was able to meet lots of people. Small events would be great during
that week. Community Advisors agreed that the promotion should include information on how
it is good for the community but also for students. Students are still looking to see what’s in it
for them and this again confirms some of the CSGVP data.

23. CGCE – for internal use only 23
Understanding first-year students in Residence
uOttawa Housing Service carried out a survey in April 2015 in all its residences. At the request
of the CGCE, four questions it introduced four questions at the end of the survey. Figure 12
presents the amount of volunteering carried out by students in residence. Friel Residence
became at the beginning of the 2014-2015 academic year the Friel Living Learning Community
with a focus on community engagement. It should be noted that in 2014-2015, students in
Friel residence were not recruited with the information that Friel was to become a community
engagement residence. In 2015-2016, Friel Residence was promoted as such and was the 2nd
top choice by students. Unfortunately, we do not have a baseline for that year to be able to
compare on the Days of service initiative has contributed to the students` participation. Total
number of students who completed the survey across eight residences is 1327 of which 120
responded were from Friel Residence.
Overall, most students who do volunteer, commit to less than 40 hours per year but we need to
be careful to compare to CSGVP because the period is shorter (9 months instead of 12). Out of
the students who volunteered this year during their academic year, 81% of students volunteer
less than 40 hours; 85% of students in Friel volunteer less than 40 hours.
Figure 13 - Amount of volunteering7 among first-year students living in residence in 2013-
2014 (sept- April), Housing Survey, April 2015
As shown in Figure 13, when asked about their interests for volunteer when returning to the
University in September 2015, top choices for students in residence are (in order) for volunteer
7 Volunteer definitionwas provided: Someone who donates hisor her time or efforts for a cause or organisationwithout being
paid. Thisincludesvolunteering inthe community, participatingincampus clubs, etc.)
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
No - did not volunteer at all
this year
Yes - volunteered between
1-10 hours in total
Yes - volunteered between
11-40 hours in total
Yes - volunteered between
41-80 hours in total
Yes - volunteere
hours in to
Percentageofstudents
Responses to the question
Overall Friel

24. CGCE – for internal use only 24
placements related to their fields of study, that help them build and practice work-related skills
and that help them make new friends, build personal network The level of engagement of
students across residences varies from one residence to another. Friel Residence was slightly
higher (43.3%) as compared to the average (39.8%) of all residences. This may be because of
the Friel volunteer events but attribution is difficult to make. We don`t have a baseline to be
able to compare if any of these volunteering is first-time volunteering or not due to lack of
baseline. There is a plan to do a baseline for the Friel Residents in September 2015. The fact
that the Friel was advertised as a Living learning community in community engagement, this
may attract in September 2015 students who are already volunteers. Our baseline will be able
to clarify this.
Looking at Figure 12, we can see that uOttawa students who were in residence this pas year
and returning on campus in September 2015 would like to see more volunteering linked to their
program of study. This suggests that when community service projects are more tailored to a
program of study we should promote to the right cohort of students to maximize return on
effort. Days of Service promotion will be kept as a lighter, more fun undertaking to develop or
build personal networks.
Figure 14 - Top Volunteering opportunities that students are looking for when returning on
campus in 2015-2016, Housing Survey, April 2015
More analysis on students volunteering at Friel Residence volunteer events vs Days of
Service:
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
All uOttawa r
Friel Residenc

25. CGCE – for internal use only 25
When comparing the Friel Residents and Days of Service online survey responses, we see some
very similar responses except when it comes to how these short-term volunteering can
provided an opportunity to learn about the community, opportunity to learn new skills which
are much higher for Days of Service participants. We need to remember that students who
participated in Days of Service were a more diverse group, from first- year to graduate school.
Many of them had volunteered before.
For Friel Residents, the fact that friends were participating in these events was a much stronger
appeal to participate in the Friel volunteer events as shown in figure 12. We must take into
account in planning Friel volunteer events this year, we kept in mind to make them fun so that
they may have influence the much lower score on that link to program of study (0% for Friel
student) for Friel participants. As shown in figure 16, the connection to field of study is a top
interest when returning on campus when compared to the Housing survey. It is also true for
days of Service participants who shown an even higher level of interest in figure 16.
It is important to find ways to connect with first year students from the very beginning. Putting
a pamphlet in the 1st year kit is a great way to let them know about volunteering ‘It’s a golden
bag. We want to know what’s going on!’ Perhaps include a new promo tool on how to activate
your CE Navigator account and how to find volunteer opportunities. Students are learning
about the Community Engagement Navigator too late; many of them are only learning about it
at the end of the first semester and thus miss opportunities. We lost many first year students
with the fact that they had to match themselves to the placement; how can we make it as easy
as we can for them to understand the navigator/sign up?
Figure 15 Top ' Very important and somewhat important` reasons (more than one reasons
could be provided for participating in … Friel Volunteering events/… Days of Service

26. CGCE – for internal use only 26
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%

27. CGCE – for internal use only 27
Figure 16 - Top `Strongly Agree/Somewhat Agree` for not volunteering more
Figure 17 - Top outcomes `Strongly Agree/Somewhat Agree` on how volunteering in (...)
affected how view volunteering and future plans
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Didn’t have
enough time
because of
courseload
Didn’t have
enough time
because of part-
time job,
extracurricular
activities or
sports (58%)
Didn’t hear
about the
opportunities
Didn’t know
where to sign
up
Did'nt know the
expectations or
skills required
Didn't know
anyone
participating in
these events
Was not
interested
Da
Fr
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Days of S
Friel resi

28. CGCE – for internal use only 28
Figure 18 `Very interested /somewhat interested" elements in the following type of
volunteering opportunities
Does short-term volunteering and contribute to getting students to continue to volunteer.
Figure 15 provided some insights on students interest to continue after shorter-term
volunteering, we noted that Day of Service participants had a higher level of interest (over
90%0 compared to 56% for Friel residents. While Friel participants had similar results to days of
service participants on how they view volunteering and the gains they made in in relation to
interaction with people who are different, they score much lower I all other categories. This
could suggest that the shorter opportunity has not led an interest to volunteer more. Were the
type of opportunities provided an influence on these score?
Many participants to Day of Service had already volunteered on campus, off- campus through
the Centre or of their own initiative. We have noticed that 30 students did more than one Day
of Service and some of them took on the Team Leader position after they had participated as
member of a group.
When reviewing the information on the navigator (which is not a perfect tool to measure re-
occurrence particularly if student are not looking to build their co-curicular record, we noted
that of the 271 students who did Days of service or events for Friel (shorter- term volunteering),
we noted that x % had other placements after their first day of service.
The Community Partners` perspective:
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
are related to my
program of study
allow me to
participate with
people I know
help me make
new friends and
build personal
networks
help me become
more involved in
campus activities
help me build a
network of
contects in the
local community
help me develop
and practice skills
that will be
attractive to
employers
are of short
duration/limite
time
commitment

29. CGCE – for internal use only 29
The Days of Service initiative and shorter volunteering opportunities integrated in the CERI/Friel
Living and learning community was overwhelmingly successful in 2014-2015. All of the
community partners were satisfied and would like to participate again. For the evaluation,
community partners that participated in the Days of Service initiative during the 2014-2015
academic year were interviewed over the phone about their experience. The same 12
questions were asked for each community partner. The purpose of the survey was to assess the
value of the initiative to community partners, to determine whether any changes should be
made to ensure that the benefits were mutual, and to find out if they are interested in
participating again next year. This survey was conducted in May 2015. A total of 8 community
partners participated in the survey, out of the 12 who participated in DOS from September 1st
2014 to April 30th 2015 (fall 2014 and winter 2015 semesters). This is a participation rate of
67%.
100% of the responding community partners said that the DOS met their project goals. Most
were very enthusiastic about this fact. But the general consensus was that the community
partners were not actively seeking and do not need long-term volunteers. They were extremely
happy to have the manpower of uOttawa volunteers for a single day.
100% of the CP respondents were satisfied overall by the quality uOttawa volunteers we
provided. The students met their expectations, although some CPs noted some issues on some
of the volunteers. They include: there were no shows. Level of initiative was generally good
except for a few. Language was mentioned as a barrier for one student. There were a few no
shows and some reported inappropriate clothing and too much use of cellphones while on the
job. There were some comments around the level of preparation and understanding of the
tasks. One community partner who had a group of first year students who received a group of
first year students said they could have been more serious and needed to improve on their
professional attitude. This activity was an opportunity to network and improve their skills.
Some aspects of the DOS partnership that went particularly well according to the CP
respondents: “[Students demonstrated a] caring attitude for the community. Extending
opportunity to bring [the] community together. Breaking the stereotypes.” “Team Leader
communication with volunteers.” 2 different community partners reported that student
volunteers were particularly great because the community needed an infusion of youthful
energy. The students filled a void for capable/strong people in the community and were able to
do heavy physical labour.
100% of the CP respondents would like to repeat the DOS program next year and are actively
planning these events. Some would also like more info about other program such as community
service learning (CSL) program. 1 community partner was able to retain a long term volunteer.
5 out of the eight community partners showed interest about the Community Engagement
Residence Initiative (CERI) and the specific themes that the Friel Living Learning Community
would be working on in 2015-2016.

30. CGCE – for internal use only 30
7. Discussions:
The Centre will continue to offer the Days of Service initiative to the general student population
while addressing some of the issues identified by students and Community Partners:
Type of Volunteer opportunities: On the types of volunteer activities that are effective for
Days of Service, students mentioned, activities that seem to be interesting: Kids (for some),
quintessential Ottawa/Eastern Canada cultural events, environment/outside activities (if not
too cold), physical activities, activities that are short duration (particularly for first year
students). Some students asked for activities that would link to their program of study. Some
students really wanted to do something “different” than what they are studying. We also see
this among older professionals – if I do strategic planning all day, don’t really want to do this as
a volunteer. Wanting to take a break and stretch might be useful to consider when describing
opportunities – not all students see it as a way to build a CV. Or perhaps build a CV in a more
well-rounded way. Some noted that they would like to volunteer in areas more closely aligned
with their studies, but it is challenging to find opportunities off campus that align with what
they are studying – wondering if there might be opportunities on campus (e.g., research?) that
would allow them to volunteer in areas more closely to what they are studying. The Centre
will continue to provide a diversity of shorter community service projects and promote them as
such. For residence students, having them propose projects is not very realistic for first
semester; perhaps in second semester.
Identify volunteer opportunities close to the campus. Students like the fact that their short-
term volunteering allowed them to experience local culture, the city of Ottawa, and experience
volunteering. Ottawa is considered a “big city”. Focus on local neighborhood is likely a good
move to allay some of the concern/fears of moving further out into the city during the first few
months. Use the baseline information to be able to better tweak the volunteering
opportunities.
Schedule: Prepare and make available a Friel Volunteer Event Schedule and ensure wide
dissemination is the way forward in residences. Students appreciate knowing a “volunteer
schedule”; knowing when and where they can volunteer and they can plan accordingly. As Friel
was promoted to students as a community engagement, expectations need to be managed A
menu of opportunities will also be shared with CAs for students interested in other
volunteering options.
Timing of volunteering is important: It is important to find ways to connect with first year
students from the very beginning. Putting a pamphlet in the 1st year kit is a great way to let
them know about volunteering ‘It’s a golden bag. We want to know what’s going on!’ Perhaps
include a new promo tool on how to activate your CE Navigator account and how to find
volunteer opportunities.

31. CGCE – for internal use only 31
On the events themselves, many agree that evenings and weekends are the best time to
volunteer, although some students go home and/or work on weekends. If we are to hold
weekday activities, the evenings are the best and students can anticipate as they know their
weekly schedule. Events should avoid busy periods (e.g. exam periods). There is definitely
some interest in having volunteer options during Reading Week (October and February).
Perhaps offering a Day of Service during each Reading Week (second half of the week) and
promoting it to students in residence will give them the opportunity to break up the week and
get involved.
Logistics are important: When students volunteer, they want to feel that they are prepared
and are doing it well – challenges with lack of briefing and training for one event was
highlighted. Pre-event training or on-site training should be re-visited with community partner.
The process is that for now the team leader is provided the information to the placement to get
to the address much easier. We should also consider debriefing sessions as students were
interested in the opportunity to continue building the friendships. Clear understanding and
expectations are important. Community partners need to be approving hours quicker after
volunteer events or Days of Service. While the task may not be glorious or the external factors
are tough (weather, logistics), the connections with community members were one of the main
highlights
CCR Recognition: Some students say that they can “volunteer on their own”, but they choose
to do so with the Centre because of the recognition with the CCR. Others say that they don’t
care about the validation of the hours, they just want to volunteer. Focus should be on first –
year student to inform them about this tool and how to use it so it is a complete record while
studying. Students in 2nd year and above do not value the tool as much if they do a lot of
volunteering and only a portion can be showing on the document.
Communication and Marketing of opportunities is critical to recruitment: Communication of
CGCE programs, events, and CCR are much more visible on campus this year but there are still
problems. For students in residence, more explicit timeline and timing for events will be
communicated to residents and Community Advisor. Better tool will be organized on how to
register for activities will be One student suggested regular tables to promote specific
opportunities. Students are seeing posters in residence (posters and mini-posters on doors
were found to very effective) but the registration to these events still problematic. One
example was the Students appreciate that the promotion is more apparent (posters, social
media, emails), making volunteering more accessible. Students would like to be connected to
fellow student volunteers on a more long-term basis after events so we are considering
creating a Facebook group or email exchange (as opposed to BCC all participants). We need
improve recruitment methods (bringing promotional table and staff to speak about various
opportunities available to students. Seems important to present “menus” of opportunities, and
continuously – when they are busy they are not “looking” but will go ahead and do something if
asked or if it is clearly presented to them. Recruitment needs to be obvious and direct.
Holding events in residence for first year students are effective as they are convenient and
accessible. Students would also like to see more events on campus. Large-scale sporting

32. CGCE – for internal use only 32
events such as the Panda Game are a great opportunity to engage students with the
community, the University of Ottawa culture, as well as volunteering
Other CGCE recommendations: Some specific suggestions were provided for the navigator
where the volunteering posting are posted. These included: Clearer description, more timely
clean-up on the navigator to remove expired placements (E.g. Winterlude – remove these
placements when the date is past for example), make the date of the event clearer for Days of
Service, to provide clearer information on the placement description. One CA mentioned t had
a tough time getting students to commit because of the Navigator.
Invest in training for volunteering to improve professional attitude, improve preparation by
students for the placement. CGCE is to ensure that Community partners understand their role
in briefing, clarifying tasks and training.
8. Conclusions
The project has helped the Centre improve its ability to fulfill its mandate which is to encourage
students to volunteer in their community during their stay at uOttawa. Thanks to the CSGVP
data, we were able to start the Days of Service Initiative which has evolved to meet the needs
of different sub-groups. The information obtained from the evaluation is currently being
analyzed and used to develop our communication plan and approaches to students. We
understand the importance of addressing the needs of youth and will be modifying our
approach in 2015-2016 building on these learning. The e=mc2 project has confirmed the
that students do not want to make long-term commitment but there is a way to engage them
particularly after their second year. Timing and how we promote volunteering emphasizing
what the outcomes gained by the student might be are key to increase volunteering rates. Very
short-term volunteer events short-term play a useful role to students particularly those new to
the city or campus as a way to connect them to the community or their neighborhood. For first
year students living in residence, these events play a great role to meet new people, do it with
friends participating. Tapping into Community Advisors is important but so would be to
identify champions on each floor to bring their friends. When projects allow to build skills,
make it part of the recruitment message. Time is precious particularly for students in first year,
it is important to time well volunteering opportunities even those like Days of Service. Friel
Living Learning community need to have a timeline shared with students from the beginning
and where they can see events and decide which one they will participate in. Engaging with
students should be ongoing in various aspects of community engagement should be regular.
We should avoid leaving longs stretch of time. Pre-service orientation on how to be a good
volunteer (e.g. professional attitude) could be offered on a voluntary basis while team leaders
and community partners should make process approved.
Elements of interest and that has led to some changes in our modus operandi is how Days of
Service could be helping students to integrate to their campus , to the local culture and new
city and how when we know this we can further tweak the recruitment. Another element that

33. CGCE – for internal use only 33
will be used to adjust our strategy will be the fact that connecting volunteering to field of study
is coming as early as in second year. We had initially thought that the interest for field of study
would be more towards year 3 or 4. Our community partners tend to also like students who
are more established in their program of study. This will meant to provide the space for
students to learn.
Whether short term volunteering through Days of Service leads to long term volunteering is not
as clear mainly because we did not have a baseline but interviews to be carried out in the fall
with students who volunteered in 2014-2015 may tell us more about this aspect. The work
done at Friel in 2015-2016 can also help us figure a bit more conclusively.
Most learning outcomes from e=mc2 are actioned by CGCE within the funding envelope the
Centre has. The data will be disseminated to faculties and services and be also presented at an
upcoming IARLSCE conference in Boston.
uOttawa students in a short-term volunteering position can fill a void in the community,
infusing the community with youthful enthusiasm. This can be a win-win. Understanding
students’ motivations from this particular age group is helpful to other post-secondary
institutions but as well to community partners who are receiving these groups. Taking the time
to explain tasks or technical aspects of a particular which in turn increase students learning
We can improve the experience for everyone involved by better informing our students of the
rules of professionalism. Community partners need to take the time to clarify their
expectations. Perhaps in the days before a DOS, students should receive an email from the
CGCE, informing them of appropriate standards of dress and cell phone use. We should try to
emphasize that as uOttawa volunteers, they are also ambassadors of the University, but more
importantly they are ambassadors of themselves. Volunteering is an opportunity to make a
great first impression on future employers.
We should emphasize to students that once they sign up for a DOS, they are required to fulfill
this commitment. They should avoid cancellations whenever possible. If they have no other
choice, students need to inform the team leader as soon as possible so that he or she can notify
the CP. This way, the CP will be able to readjust the plan for the day if needed.
There may be language barriers since many of the students participating in DOS are
international students. We should advise CPs of this fact beforehand, and encourage the team
leaders to support any students who are struggling with language. We might consider having a
buddy systemfor these students, and match them to a native speaker.
If any modifications are made to the Community Engagement Navigator in the future, we
should suggest that they include a feature that sends an automatic email reminder to the CP
contact when students enter hours in their timesheets. Since this feature does not yet exist, the
placement officer in charge of DOS should review periodically the timesheets module to scan if
DOS timesheets are approved and ask the WSS to send a reminder email to the CP.

34. CGCE – for internal use only 34
9. Next Steps:
Couple of actions point for the Centre in the coming year:
 From the uOttawa Housing service survey in April 2015, we were able to determine a bit
better the volunteering profile of students at the end of the year. As no baseline was
carried out, it`s difficult to compare but this information combined with the results of the
focus groups but we do plan to have a baseline for Friel LLC in September 2015 to allow us
to identify volunteering patterns before and after. We plan to follow-up with the group
that Days of Service participants and students in residence who participated in the
volunteer events in Friel to validate our assumption that short-term volunteering can lead
to longer engagement.
 Using both the e=mc2 project results and building on living learning community literature8
develop a more structured and explicit timeline of activities for Friel Living Learning
Community .
 Develop orientation sessions for students targeting mainly students in residence. In this
training, CGCE would explore `what is good volunteer session` for first-year students or any
other interested students.
 Ensure CP understands the importance of briefing the team leader and students on the
activities and what their tasks are.
 Improve CGCE staff/volunteers outreach through:
 A bit of revamping of the Centre’s approach during drop hours, at promotional tables
will be taking place for 2015-2016 so students get a more personalized approach
when they come in. Take the time to know their interest, motivations to better
direct them. While this was for the most part in place, we also plan to have more
hands-on information on volunteer placements at promotional tables or have ways
to help students narrow their choices when they don’t know.
 Review and adjust the 2015-2016 timeline for promotion
 See how best to improve usability of navigator on mobiles or androids;
 Working closely with Housing service as it relates to Friel Living Learning Community,
train CA in residences and provide them the tools to be effective in planning and
implementing community engagement activities throughout the year. Identify ways
to identify champions /super volunteers in Friel Residence and use them as
dissemination points or for recruitment.
8 Stassen, Martha L.A. Student Outcomes:The impact of varying living-learning communitymodels. Research inHigher
Educations. Vol. 44 No. 5. Octobre 2003. P. 582 and fromInkelas, KarenKurotsuchi, ZaneetaE Dave, Kisten E. Vogt and
Jeannie Brown Leonard. Living Learning Programs andFirst-generation college students academic andsocial transition to
college. ResearchinHigher Education Vol. 48. No 4. June 2006