Page 1 of 26

First Report of the National 

Evaluation of RSVP Volunteers 
Page 2 of 26

First Report of the National Evaluation of RSVP 

Volunteers

October 2015 

Authors 

This study was conducted by researchers from JBS International in Burlingame, CA, 

pursuant to a contract between the Corporation for National and Community Service, a 

federal agency of the United States Government, and JBS International: 

Annie Georges, Ph.D., Senior Research Associate 

Susan Gabbard, Ph.D., Vice President 

Ashley Wendell Kranjac, M.A., Research Assistant 

Acknowledgements 

We would like to thank all the project directors, staff, and volunteers who made this study 

possible. 

Citation 

Georges, A., Gabbard, S., & Kranjac, A.W. (2015). First Report of the National 

Evaluation of RSVP Volunteers. North Bethesda, MD: JBS International, Inc. 

This report is in the public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is 

granted. Upon request, this material will be made available in alternative formats for people 

with disabilities. 
Page 3 of 26

First Report of the National Evaluation of RSVP 

Volunteers 

October 2015 

Contents 

Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... 6

Background of the RSVP Program ................................................................................................................................. 8

Objective of the RSVP Volunteer Study .......................................................................................................................... 9

Evaluation Questions...................................................................................................................................................... 9

Methods ......................................................................................................................................................................... 9

Findings ........................................................................................................................................................................11

Characteristics of Volunteers ..............................................................................................................11

Length of Service and Types of Service Activities ...............................................................................16

Differences by Gender ........................................................................................................................21

Differences by Age ..............................................................................................................................21

Differences by Length of Service.........................................................................................................23

Summary and Discussion .............................................................................................................................................24

Future Research ...........................................................................................................................................................24
Page 4 of 26

List of Figures 

Figure 1 Distribution of RSVP Volunteers by Age .......................................................................................11

Figure 2 Gender Distribution of RSVP Volunteers ......................................................................................12

Figure 3 . Educational Attainment of RSVP Volunteers ..............................................................................13

Figure 4 Marital Status of RSVP Volunteers ................................................................................................14

Figure 5 Veteran Status of RSVP Volunteers ...............................................................................................15

Figure 6 Average Length of Service with RSVP ...........................................................................................17
Page 5 of 26

List of Tables 

Table 1 Race and Ethnic Composition of RSVP Volunteers .........................................................................12

Table 2 Income of RSVP Volunteers ............................................................................................................13

Table 3 Employment Status of RSVP Volunteers ........................................................................................15

Table 4 RSVP Volunteers with more than One Employment Status ...........................................................16

Table 5 Average Number of Years of Service as a RSVP Volunteer ............................................................16

Table 6 Primary Service Activity of RSVP Volunteers ..................................................................................17

Table 7 Average Number of Hours Engaged in the Primary Service Activity ..............................................18

Table 8 Distribution of Hours in Primary Service Activity ...........................................................................20

Table 9 Average Age and Length of Service with RSVP by Gender .............................................................21

Table 10 Primary Service Activity, by Gender .............................................................................................21

Table 11 Average Length of Service and Primary Service Activity, by Age .................................................22

Table 12 Distribution of Volunteers across Performance Measure Categories, Volunteers Serving 1 to 2 

Years ............................................................................................................................................................23

Table 13 Distribution of Volunteers across Performance Measure Categories, Volunteers Serving 3 to5 

Years ............................................................................................................................................................23

Table 14 Distribution of Volunteers across Performance Measure Categories, Volunteers Serving 6 to9 

Years ............................................................................................................................................................23

Table 15 Distribution of Volunteers across Performance Measure Categories, Volunteers Serving 9 or 

more Years ..................................................................................................................................................23
Page 6 of 26

Executive Summary 

In 2013, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) initiated a national evaluation of the 

Retired and Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP). The national evaluation was intended to collect the 

necessary information to better guide the RSVP program and to address three objectives: 1) describe the 

characteristics of RSVP volunteers, including how volunteers are distributed across CNCS’s performance 

measure categories, and how volunteers allocated their time to different service activities across the 

performance measure categories; 2) measure the relationship between volunteer characteristics, service 

activities, and volunteers’ psychosocial health; and 3) measure the impact of RSVP national service 

participation on volunteers’ psychosocial health compared to similar adult volunteers and non-volunteers in 

the Health and Retirement Study (HRS). 

The 2014 RSVP Volunteer Study consisted of a cross-sectional survey of current volunteers. The survey 

was developed with input from a Field Working Group (FWG) comprised of RSVP project directors, Office 

of Senior Corps, and Research and Evaluation Office staff. The FWG reviewed preliminary drafts of the 

survey instrument and was instrumental in developing survey items to measure service activities as 

classified in CNCS’s performance measure categories. The three categories of performance measure 

classification are: Primary Focus Area, Capacity Building, and Community Priorities. The Primary Focus 

Area consists of six activities that CNCS considers to be of national priority. These six activities are: 

Disaster Services, Education, Environmental Stewardship, Economic Opportunity, Healthy Futures, and 

Veterans and Military Families. 

A sample of 1,499 volunteers was drawn from 33 RSVP grantees that reported Periodic Progress Report 

(PPR) data in April 2013. The sample of volunteers was selected using a two-stage stratified probability 

proportionate to size (PPS) method. The size measure was based on the number of unduplicated RSVP 

volunteers. The first stage sampled the 33 grantees using PPS within three strata, which was based on the 

number of unduplicated volunteers in that stratum. All 33 RSVP grantees participated in the study. The 

second stage sampled the 1,499 volunteers drawn from the lists of volunteers provided by the 33 grantees. 

There were 849 volunteers that completed the survey, yielding an overall response rate of 57 percent. Data 

collection began in December 2014 and ended in July 2015. 

The current report focuses on the first objective, which is to describe the characteristics of RSVP 

volunteers, including how volunteers are distributed across CNCS’s performance measure categories, and 

how volunteers allocated their time to the service activities across the performance measure categories. 

Specifically this report addresses the following questions: 

1) What are the demographic and background characteristics of RSVP volunteers? 

2) What types of service activities do RSVP volunteers engaged in? 

3) How much time do RSVP volunteers dedicate to their primary service activity? 

4) Are there differences in volunteers’ engagement in service activities by gender, age, and length of 

service in the RSVP program? 
Page 7 of 26

The results from the RSVP Volunteer Survey shows: 

 The majority of RSVP volunteers are white, non-veteran, retired, women, with an income between 

$20,000 and $40,000, and have earned a Bachelor’s degree.

 RSVP volunteers served, on average, 8 years. Volunteers who are older than 76 have served with 

the RSVP program, on average, 11 years. 

 Approximately 42 percent of RSVP volunteers engaged in national priority service activities such 

as support older adults maintain independent living in their home or in group care settings, help 

young children in an educational setting, or assist in adult education. Another 13 percent engaged 

in Capacity Building activities (see Table 6). 

 Men volunteers younger than 65 years of age were more likely than women to engage in national 

priority service activities as were volunteers younger than 65 years of age. 

 Approximately 42 percent of the volunteers engaged in service activities that directly support their 

communities such as, for example, neighborhood watch or crocheting and sewing to give to the 

community. 

 RSVP volunteers spent approximately 22 hours in the month prior to the survey engaged in their 

primary service activity. 

In future research, the data can be used to fully examine different types of service activities and their 

relationship to health outcomes. It is well established in the existing literature that volunteering improves

health outcomes; however it is not yet well understood whether certain service activities have a stronger 

relationship with health outcomes. The data collected can begin to shed light on this important question. 
Page 8 of 26

First Report of the National Evaluation of RSVP 

Volunteers

Background of the RSVP Program 

The Retired and Senior Volunteer Program (RSVP) is a national initiative that engages persons 55 and 

older in volunteer service to meet critical community needs and to provide a high quality experience that will 

enrich the lives of the volunteers. RSVP is an outgrowth of efforts by private groups, gerontologists, and 

government agencies to address the needs of retired persons in America.1

 RSVP was authorized in 1969 

under Title VI, Part A, of the Older Americans Act, as amended, and was launched in 1971. RSVP currently 

operates under Title II, Part A, Section 201, of the Domestic Volunteer Service Act of 1973 which was 

enacted on October 1, 1973, as amended. During Fiscal Year 2013, RSVP included 210 grantees with over 

150,000 volunteers. Funds for the program are used to promote the engagement of older persons as 

community resources in planning for community improvement and in delivery of volunteer services.2

 The 

types of services that RSVP volunteers engage in include, for example, organizing neighborhood watch 

programs, tutoring children and teenagers, renovating homes, teaching English to immigrants, providing 

companionship to other seniors, helping veterans, teach computer software applications, helping people 

recover from natural disasters, and serving as museum docents.3 

In its 2011-2015 Strategic Plan, the Corporation for National and Community Service (CNCS) shifted 

toward a system where the RSVP grantees organize volunteer services by work plans that are linked to 

performance measure categories. A work plan is a logically related combination of an activity that leads to 

an output and a desired outcome. An example of a work plan could be to provide companionship (activity) 

to individuals needing independent living services (output) to increase the individuals’ level of social support 

(outcome). RSVP has three categories of work plan or performance measure classification: Primary Focus 

Area, Capacity Building, and Community Priorities. The Primary Focus Area consists of six activities that 

CNCS considers to be of national priority. These six activities are: Disaster Services, Education, 

Environmental Stewardship, Economic Opportunity, Healthy Futures, and Veterans and Military Families.

CNCS performance measurement requirements set targets for volunteer effort that call for at least 25 

percent of volunteers to be working in a Primary Focus Area, and no more than 30 percent working in 

Community Priorities, and the remainder may be involved in other (non-primary) Capacity Building. CNCS 

requires grantees to have ten percent of volunteers engage in a work plan that results in outcomes. 

Through its Strategic Plan, CNCS identified and developed a set of performance measures for each service 

activity under the Primary Focus Area as well as for Capacity Building. CNCS has agency-wide priority 

output and outcome measures for the Primary Focus Area, though other measures are permitted for 

several objectives. Grantees selecting work plans in Community Priorities (not in the six activities within 

 

1 http://www.nationalservice.gov/sites/default/files/documents/rsvp_handbook.pdf

2

 Ibid. 

3

 Ibid.
Page 9 of 26

Primary Focus Area or Capacity Building) are asked to report on their success or failure to achieve selfdetermined targets. 

Objective of the RSVP Volunteer Study 

In order to better guide the RSVP program, CNCS needed information on the volunteers’ service activities 

and outcomes. In 2013, CNCS initiated a national evaluation to address three objectives: 1) describe the 

characteristics of RSVP volunteers, including how volunteers are distributed across the three performance 

measure categories, and how volunteers allocated their time to their primary service activity across the 

three performance measure categories; 2) measure the relationship between volunteer characteristics, 

service activities, and volunteers’ psychosocial health; and 3) measure the impact of RSVP national service 

participation on volunteers’ psychosocial health compared to similar adult volunteers and non-volunteers in 

the Health and Retirement Study (HRS). 

This exploratory evaluation, the RSVP Volunteer Study, supports Goals 1 and 2 of CNCS’ 2011-2015 

Strategic Plan. Goal 1 of the Strategic Plan calls for CNCS to increase the impact of national service in 

communities served by CNCS-supported programs. Goal 2 calls for CNCS to “strengthen national service 

so that participants engaged in CNCS-supported programs consistently find satisfaction, meaning, and 

opportunity.” 

Evaluation Questions 

This report, funded by CNCS, describes the volunteers’ characteristics, types of service activities, and 

hours volunteers engaged in various service activities across the three performance measure categories. 

The report addresses three primary evaluation questions and one supplementary question: 

1) What are the demographic and background characteristics of RSVP volunteers? 

2) What types of service activities do RSVP volunteers engaged in? 

3) How much do RSVP volunteers allocate to their primary service activity? 

4) Are there differences in volunteers’ engagement in service activities by gender, age, and length of 

service in the RSVP program? 

Methods 

The RSVP Volunteer Survey instrument was developed with input from a Field Working Group (FWG) 

comprised of RSVP project directors, Office of Senior Corps, and Research and Evaluation Office staff. 

The FWG reviewed preliminary drafts of the survey and was instrumental in developing survey items to 

measure service activities in the RSVP program. 

The respondent universe consisted of volunteers from 33 RSVP grantees that reported Periodic Progress 

Report (PPR) data in April 2013. A sample of volunteers was selected using a stratified probability 

proportionate to size (PPS) method. The size measure was based on the number of unduplicated RSVP 

volunteers. Grantees were stratified into three groups based on their estimated number of unduplicated 
Page 10 of 26

volunteers. Large Grantees consisted of those with more than 900 unduplicated volunteers, Medium 

Grantees consisted of 501-900 volunteers, and Small Grantees consisted of fewer than 500 volunteers. At 

the first stage of sampling, 33 grantees were selected using PPS within each of the three strata, which was 

based on the number of unduplicated volunteers in that stratum. All 33 RSVP grantees participated in the 

study. At the second stage, a random sample of 1,499 volunteers was drawn from the lists of volunteers 

provided by the sampled grantees. Among the sampled volunteers, grantees provided contact information 

for 1,336 volunteers. There were 849 volunteers that completed the survey, yielding an overall response 

rate of 57 percent. Data collection began in December 2014 and ended in July 2015. 
Page 11 of 26

Findings 

Characteristics of Volunteers 

The average age of an RSVP volunteer is 74 years old; the youngest is 55 and the oldest is102. The 

majority of volunteers are white, non-veteran, retired, women, with an income between $20,000 and 

$40,000, and have earned Bachelor’s degrees. 

Figure 1 shows the distribution of RSVP volunteers by age. About 40 percent of the volunteers are 76 years 

or older; 39 percent are between 66 and 75 years old; and 14 percent are between 55 and 65 years old. 

Figure 1 Distribution of RSVP Volunteers by Age 

The majority of volunteers are female. Seventy-two percent of the volunteers are female and 25 percent are 

male (Figure 2). 
Page 12 of 26

Figure 2 Gender Distribution of RSVP Volunteers 

Table 1 shows the race and ethnic composition of RSVP volunteers. About 87 percent of volunteers are 

white, 4 percent are African American, less than 1 percent are Asian, Native American, or self-identify as 

“Other race.” Three percent of volunteers are Pacific Islanders, 2 percent chose more than one race, and 3 

percent are of Hispanic descent. 

Table 1 Race and Ethnic Composition of RSVP Volunteers 

Race Percent (%)

 White 86.7

 African-American 4.1

 Asian 0.3

 Pacific Islander 2.7

 Native American 0.7

 Multi-Race 2.2

 Other Race 0.8

 Race-Missing 2.5

Ethnicity 

 Hispanic 2.9

 Non-Hispanic 92.8

 Ethnicity-Missing 4.2

RSVP volunteers have high levels of educational attainment; more than two-thirds (67%) have completed 

some college. As shown in Figure 3, three percent of volunteers have less than a high school education, 26 

percent graduated from high school, 31 percent have some college or an Associate’s degree but no 

Bachelor’s degree, and about 36 percent of volunteers graduated from college or earned an advanced 

degree. 
Page 13 of 26

Figure 3 . Educational Attainment of RSVP Volunteers 

The majority of RSVP volunteers reported their current income to be less than $60,000. As shown in Table 

2, 14 percent of volunteers earned less than $20,000 in the year prior to the survey. Almost one-third 

earned more than $20,000 but less than $60,000 in the year prior to the survey. Approximately 10 percent 

earned more than $60,000 but less than $100,000, and 6 percent earned more than $100,000 in the year 

prior to the survey. Sixteen percent earned more than $20,000 but did not specify an amount. About 23 

percent of the volunteers did not report their income. 

Table 2 Income of RSVP Volunteers 

Income Range Percent (%)

Less than $20,000 14.44

More than $20,000

 Above $20,000 (Not Specified) 15.89

 Between $20,000 but less than $40,000 18.50

 Between $40,000 but less than $60,000 13.42

 Between $60,000 but less than $80,000 6.06

 Between $80,000 but less than $100,000 3.46

 Above $100,000 5.50

Income-Missing 22.72

As shown in Figure 4, slightly more than half (51%) of the volunteers are married; 29 percent are widowed; 

11 percent are separated or divorced; 5 percent of volunteers are single; and 4 percent either did not 

respond or did not classify themselves in any of the marital status categories. 
Page 14 of 26

Figure 4 Marital Status of RSVP Volunteers 

Figure 5 shows the veteran status of volunteers. More than 60 percent of RSVP volunteers have either a 

family member who is a veteran or are veterans themselves. Thirty-five percent reported they are not 

veterans, 29 percent are family members of a veteran, 13 percent are veterans or on active duty, 8 percent 

reported they are a military family, and 11 percent chose more than one veteran status. 
Page 15 of 26

Figure 5 Veteran Status of RSVP Volunteers 

The RSVP Volunteer Survey collected information on employment status (see Tables 3 and 4). As shown 

in Table 3, 31 percent are retired, 3 percent are currently employed, and another 3 percent reported they 

are homemakers. Approximately 60 percent of the volunteers reported more than one employment status. 

Table 3 Employment Status of RSVP Volunteers 

Employment Status Percent (%)

Currently Employed 3.3

Retired 30.8

Homemaker 2.8

Employment Status- Missing 3.4

More than one Employment Status 59.7
Page 16 of 26

As shown in Table 4, among the volunteers that chose more than one employment status, many are retired 

and combined their retirement with work or being a homemaker. Seventy-three percent of volunteers who 

reported more than one employment status reported being both retired and a homemaker. Approximately 4 

percent of volunteers reported being disabled and retired. 

Table 4 RSVP Volunteers with more than One Employment Status 

Employment Status Percent (%)

Working

 Working and Retired and Homemaker 3.8

 Working and Retired 3.9

 Working and Homemaker 2.7

Disabled

 Disabled and Retired and Homemaker 12.2

 Disabled and Retired 4.4

Retired

 Retired and Homemaker 72.9

Length of Service and Types of Service Activities 

This section discusses findings on the volunteers’ length of service with RSVP, the volunteers’ primary 

service activity with RSVP, as well as the amount of time they spent engaged in their primary service 

activity. 

Length of Service with RSVP 

The average length of service for an RSVP volunteer is 8 years (see Table 5). The longest year of service 

is 29 years. 

Table 5 Average Number of Years of Service as a RSVP Volunteer 

Average

Average Number of Years of Service 8.2

Range of Years 0-29

Number of Years of Service – Missing 4.2

Note: 0 years of RSVP volunteer experience indicates less than 1 year of service.

As shown in Figure 6, about 5 percent have been serving for less than one year. Eight percent have been 

serving for at least one year, but less than two years; and about 41 percent have served for more than 9 

years. 
Page 17 of 26

Figure 6 Average Length of Service with RSVP 

The RSVP Volunteer Survey collected information on all service activities in each of the three performance 

measure categories. The Primary Focus Area consists of six focus areas: Healthy Futures, Education, 

Environmental Stewardship, Economic Opportunity, Veterans and Military Families, and Disaster Services. 

The other two performance measure categories and remaining two focus areas are Capacity Building and 

Community Priorities. 

The RSVP Volunteer Survey asked volunteers about the service activity in which they spent the most 

amount of time in the month prior to the survey. This activity is considered as the volunteers’ primary 

service activity. Table 6 shows the volunteers’ primary service activity. 

Table 6 Primary Service Activity of RSVP Volunteers 

Percent (%)

National Priority Service Activities (Primary Focus 

Area)

Healthy Futures: Access to Care 7.9

Healthy Futures: Aging in Place 18.4

Education: School Readiness 1.2

Education: K-12 Success 7.2

Economic Opportunity 4.4

Veterans and Military Families 1.7

Disaster Services Assistance 1.5

Capacity Building 13.2

Community Priorities 41.9

Primary Service Activity-Missing 2.6
Page 18 of 26

Approximately 42 percent of RSVP volunteers engaged in national priority service activities such as support 

older adults to maintain independent living in their own home or in group care settings, help young children 

in an educational setting, and support other volunteers at social service and volunteer agencies. 

As shown in Table 6, within the Primary Focus Area, 18 percent of volunteers spent the most amount of 

time in Healthy Futures: Aging in Place, and another 8 percent spent the most amount of time in Healthy 

Futures: Access to Care. Seven percent reported Education: K-12 Success activities; and about one 

percent of volunteers reported School Readiness. Another eight percent reported Disaster Service 

Assistance, Economic Opportunity, or Veterans and Military Families Served as their primary volunteer 

activity. Thirteen percent reported spending the most amount of time in Capacity Building activities. About 

42 percent spent the most amount of time in Community Priorities service activities. Approximately 35 

percent of the volunteers engaged solely in activities classified as Community Priorities; 7 percent of the 

volunteers engaged in Community Priorities also engaged in a national priority activity or Capacity Building 

as a secondary activity. 

Hours Engaged in Primary Service Activity 

Volunteers reported the number of hours they spent in the month prior to the survey engaged in their 

primary service activity. 

A shown in Table 7, RSVP volunteers that identified Healthy Futures: Access to Care spent about 21 hours, 

on average, volunteering with people living in group care situations. Similarly, volunteers that identified 

Healthy Futures: Aging in Place as their primary service activity spent, on average, 21 hours in the month 

prior to the survey engaged in that service activity. Volunteers in the Education: K-12 Success focus area 

spent about 17 hours helping children or youths with their academic skills. The volunteers that identified 

their primary service activity as Capacity Building spent, on average, 16 hours in that activity. Volunteers 

that primarily served under Community Priorities spent about 21 hours engaged in those activities. 

Table 7 Average Number of Hours Engaged in the Primary Service Activity 

Range Average

Primary Focus Area

Healthy Futures: Access to Care 2-62 20.7

Healthy Futures: Aging in Place 1-111 21.4

Education K-12 Success 0-100 16.8

Capacity Building 0-80 16.3a

Community Priorities 0-200 21.1

Note: Not all activities are shown due to a high percentage of non-response for the questions on hours engaged in the primary 

service activity. A useful measure of an estimate's reliability is the relative standard error (RSE). RSE is calculated by dividing the 

standard error by the estimate; then multiplied by 100 to be expressed as a percentage. Some of the estimates should be 

interpreted with caution because they have RSE between 31 and 50 percent. Values to be interpreted with caution are identified 

with a superscript ‘a’.

While some respondents could recall the number of hours that they served with RSVP in the month prior to 

the survey, others could not remember exact hours and reported a range of hours (i.e., 1 hour, between 2 
Page 19 of 26

and 3 hours, between 4 and 5 hours, and more than 5 hours). Some categories of hours were subsequently 

collapsed due to a small number of responses for that category. 
Page 20 of 26

On average, irrespective of the primary service activity, RSVP volunteers engaged in national priority 

service activities spent at least 5 hours in that activity (Table 8). For example, more than half of volunteers 

in Aging in Place, Access to Care, and Education spent 5 hours or more in service. 

Table 8 Distribution of Hours in Primary Service Activity 

Percent

Aging in Place

 Between 1 but less than 5 Hours 11.9

 More than 5 Hours 70.9

 Number of Hours-Missing 17.23

Access to Care

 Between 1 but less than 5 Hours 8.4

 More than 5 Hours 51.1

 Number of Hours-Missing 40.5

Education: K-12 Success

 Between 1 but less than 3 Hours 14.1

 Between 3 but less than 5 Hours 8.4

 More than 5 Hours 54.3

 Number of Hours-Missing 24.2

Capacity Building

 Between 1 but less than 3 Hours 4.4

 Between 3 but less than 5 Hours 9.7

 More than 5 Hours 25.9

 Number of Hours-Missing 59.9

Community Priorities

 Between 1 but less than 3 Hours 2.9

 Between 3 but less than 5 Hours 4.1

 More than 5 Hours 43.5

 Number of Hours-Missing 49.5

Note: Not all activities are shown due to a high percentage of item non-response. 
Page 21 of 26

The supplementary question for this report is to describe the differences in volunteers’ engagement in 

service activities by gender, age, and length of service with the RSVP program.

Differences by Gender 

As shown in Table 9, women and men did not differ significantly by age or length of service with RSVP. The 

average age is 74 years for women, and 73 years for men. On average, women have volunteered with 

RSVP for about 9 years compared to 7 years for men. 

Table 9 Average Age and Length of Service with RSVP by Gender 

Male Female Significance

Average Age 73.3 73.8 0.3

Average Length

Service (Years)

of 7.3 8.5 0.3

Given the small number of men volunteers, comparison of engagement in specific service activity (e.g., 

Healthy Futures, Education) between women and men is limited. In order to have a large enough sample 

for comparison, the six national priority service activities were combined under one group as Primary Focus 

Area; the other two groups of service activities are Capacity Building and Community Priorities. Table 10 

shows a significantly higher percentage of men engaged in national priority service activities compared to 

women (50% versus 41%). A significantly lower percentage of men compared to women engaged in 

Community Priorities as their primary service activity this activity. 

Table 10 Primary Service Activity, by Gender 

Male (%) Female (%) Significance

National Priority Service Activities 

(Primary Focus Area)

50.2 41.5 0.02

Capacity Building 14.0 13.3 0.80

Community Priorities 35.8 45.2 0.02

Differences by Age 

Table 11 compares length of service with RSVP and engagement in service activities by volunteers’ age. 

The youngest cohort (55-65 year olds) has, on average, the fewest number of years with RSVP, about 4 

years. This is not unexpected given that the RSVP program requires volunteers to be at least 55 years old. 

Volunteers who are older than 76 years have been in service with RSVP, on average, 11 years; volunteers 

between 66 and 75 have remained in service for almost 7 years. Those estimates suggest that, on 

average, individuals begin service around age 65. 

The distribution of volunteers across the three performance measure categories does differ by age. A 

significantly higher proportion of the youngest volunteer cohort (55-65 year olds) served in national priority 

such as education and support older adults maintain independent living in their own home; and a 

significantly lower proportion of the youngest cohort engaged in Community Priorities activities compared to 
Page 22 of 26

older volunteers. Conversely, a significantly lower proportion of the older volunteer cohort (76 years of age 

and older) engaged in national priority service activities, and a significantly higher proportion of the older 

cohort engaged in Community Priorities. Further examination of the youngest cohort showed that while they 

were not significantly different in their background characteristics (e.g., race, gender, education, marital 

status) they did, on average, report significantly higher incomes relative to RSVP volunteers older than age 

65 (results not shown). 

Table 11 Average Length of Service and Primary Service Activity, by Age 

Age 55-

65

Age 66-

75

Age 76 and 

Older

Mean Significance Mean Significance Mean Significance

Average Length 

(Years)

of Service 4.4 <0.001 6.6 <0.001 10.9 <0.001

Primary Service Activity

 National Priority Service 

 Activities (Primary Focus

 Area)

0.57 0.01 0.46 0.49 0.39 0.01

 Capacity Building 0.14 0.81 0.12 0.48 0.14 0.61

 Community Priorities 0.29 0.002 0.42 0.84 0.47 0.02
Page 23 of 26

Differences by Length of Service 

Tables 12 to 14 compares service activities by length of service with RSVP. Volunteers who have served 

between 1 and 2 years are significantly more likely to engage in national priority service activities (see 

Table 12). The volunteers that have served less than 2 years are also the youngest cohort between age 55 

and 65. On the other hand, those in service for 9 years or more were significantly less likely to engage in 

national priority service activities and more likely to engage in Community Priorities, as shown in Table 14. 

Table 12 Distribution of Volunteers across Performance Measure Categories, Volunteers Serving 1 to 2 Years 

Mean Significance

National Priority Service (Primary 

Focus Area)

0.55 0.002

Capacity Building 0.09a 0.08

Community Priorities 0.36 0.03

Table 13 Distribution of Volunteers across Performance Measure Categories, Volunteers Serving 3 to5 Years 

Mean Significance

National Priority Service (Primary 

Focus Area)

0.45 0.69

Capacity Building 0.1a 0.35

Community Priorities 0.45 0.84

Table 14 Distribution of Volunteers across Performance Measure Categories, Volunteers Serving 6 to9 Years 

No. of Years in RSVP Mean Significance

National Priority Service (Primary 

Focus Area)

0.41 0.57

Capacity Building 0.13a 0.97

Community Priorities 0.46 0.59

Table 15 Distribution of Volunteers across Performance Measure Categories, Volunteers Serving 9 or more Years 

Mean Significance

National Priority Service (Primary 

Focus Area)

0.34 <0.0001

Capacity Building 0.16 0.03

Community Priorities 0.5 0.02

Note: A useful measure of an estimate's reliability is the relative standard error (RSE). RSE is calculated by dividing the standard 

error by the estimate; then multiplied by 100 to be expressed as a percentage. Some of the estimates should be interpreted with 

caution because they have RSE between 31 and 50 percent. Values to be interpreted with caution are identified with a 

superscript ‘a’.
Page 24 of 26

Summary and Discussion 

CNCS’s goal is to increase the impact of national service in communities served by CNCS-supported 

programs. The RSVP Volunteer Study contributes to CNCS’s efforts to assess the effectiveness of Senior 

Corps Programs and to build grantee capacity to contribute to the evidence base for informed decisionmaking and allocation of resources. The RSVP Volunteer Study will assist CNCS to assess the 

performance of RSVP at the national level. 

This report was guided by three primary evaluation questions. The first question examined the 

demographic and background characteristics of RSVP volunteers. The results showed that the majority of 

RSVP volunteers are white, non-veteran, retired, women, with an income between $20,000 and $40,000, 

and have earned a bachelor’s degree.

The second question examined RSVP volunteers’ length of service with RSVP, the type of service activities 

volunteers engaged in, and the amount of time volunteers spent in their primary service activity. The results 

showed that RSVP volunteers tended to remain in service for a long time, serving on average 8 years. In 

particular, volunteers who are older than 76 have been serving with the RSVP program an average of 11 

years. These estimates suggest that on average volunteers begin national service with RSVP around age 

65, or perhaps once they retire. 

The analysis showed that more than two-fifth (42%) of RSVP volunteers engaged in national priority service 

activities (Healthy Futures where volunteers support older adults maintain independent living in their home 

or in group care settings, Education where volunteers help young children in an educational setting or 

assist adult education such teach English). Men were more likely than women to engage in national priority 

service activities those types of service activities, as were volunteers younger than 65 years of age. An 

additional 13 percent of RSVP volunteers served in activities classified as Capacity Building. 

An additional 42 percent of the volunteers engaged in service activities that directly support their 

communities but do not necessarily lead to other national performance measures as defined by CNCS. 

These activities classified as Community Priorities activities may include, for example, neighborhood watch 

program or crocheting and sewing to give to the community. 

The last question examined the amount of time volunteers engaged in their primary service activity. On 

average, RSVP volunteers spent approximately 22 hours in the month prior to the survey engaged in their 

service activity. 

Future Research 

The strength of the data used for this analysis is that it allows for future research to measure the 

association between types of service activities and their relationship to the volunteers’ health outcomes. It 

is well established in the existing literature that volunteering improves health outcomes; however, it is not 
Page 25 of 26

yet well understood whether certain volunteer activities have a stronger relationship with health outcomes. 

The RSVP Volunteer Study can begin to shed light on this important question.
Page 26 of 26