- A. Purpose and Methodology
- B. Institutional Information
- C. Institutional Culture
- D. Curriculum and Pedagogy
- E. Faculty Roles and Rewards
- F. Mechanisms and Resources
- G. Community-Campus Exchange
F. Mechanisms and Resources
Respondents were asked to provide information about the structure and administration of offices on campus dedicated to service-related activities. Of the 477 institutions that responded, 86% reported having an office/center dedicated to coordinating service, service-learning, and/or civic engagement activities and programs. This rate is similar to what was reported in 2003-04 and slightly higher than the 83% reported in 2002-03. As shown in Figure 16, the total annual budget ranged from less than $20,000 to more than $250,000. The majority of institutions reported an annual budget of less than $20,000 (38%), followed by a budget of $20,000 to less than $50,000 (20%). Only 11% of service offices reported having an annual budget of more than $250,000.
Figure 16. Service office total annual budget
The vast majority of institutions (79%) had at least one staff member who was specifically dedicated to coordinating service, service-learning, and/or civic engagement activities and programs (see Figure 17). This is slightly lower than the 83% reported in 2003-04.
Figure 17. Service office staff member dedicated to coordinating service-related activities
As shown in Figure 18, 14% of service offices had received an endowment and 83% applied for outside funds dedicated to service-related activities. In comparison with 2003-04 rates, more institutions report that they are receiving endowments (83% in 2003-04 versus 86% in 2004-05) while fewer institutions report that they are applying for outside funds (87% in 2003-04 versus 83% in 2004-05).
Figure 18. Service office funding sources
Half (50%) of institutions reported having more than one office coordinating service, service-learning, and/or civic engagement activities and programs. Of those institutions that reported having more than one office, the number of offices involved with service-related activities ranged from 1 to 20 additional offices, with an average of 3 offices. The majority of institutions (52%) indicated reporting to two offices that coordinated service-related activities.
Service Office Activities
As shown in Figure 19, the most common types of activities that the center/office was responsible for included coordinating service activities for students (90%), working with faculty to incorporate service into their curriculum (85%) and developing student leadership opportunities (78%). These rates are similar to the types of service office activities reported in 2003-04.
Figure 19. Service office activities
For the 21% of institutions that indicated that the office/center participated in other types of activities, the most frequently occurring included (a) internships, work-study, and immersion trips; (b) working with community organizations (advocacy, organizing, development, and research); and (c) working with faculty (scholar programs).
Service Office Reporting Lines
As shown in Figure 20, the majority of service offices reported to either Student Affairs (40%) or Academic Affairs (34%). For those 16% of institutions that replied “Other”, the majority indicated that their office either reported to more than one office, or to a specific center, office, department, or person.
Figure 20. Service office reporting lines
Comprehensive Inventory of Service
To examine the extent to which institutions were aware of all the service-related activities happening on their campuses, respondents were asked if a comprehensive inventory of all service activities on the campus had been developed. 28% of institutions reported having developed this type of inventory (see Figure 21), similar to 27% of institutions in 2003-04.
Figure 21. Development of comprehensive service inventory for 2004-05
Student Involvement in Service
To assess student involvement in community service, respondents were asked to state the percent of students who were involved in any type of services (shown below).
Percent of Students Involved in Any Type of Service Projects (Average)
| 2001 | 30% |
|---|---|
| 2002 | 33% |
| 2003 | 36% |
| 2004 | 31% |
| 2005 | 29% |
In addition to the percent of students who participated in any service-related activities, institutions were also asked to estimate the hours per week that each student participated in service-related activities during 2004-05. Results indicate that an average of 5 hours per week for each student was spent participating in service-related activities. Results indicate that the majority of students (46%) participate in less than 2% hours per week. As shown in Figure 22, institutions were most likely to support student service/civic engagement opportunities by service awards (70%), allotting physical space for political organizations on campus (61%), having the student’s history of service being considered when awarding scholarships (63%) and/or hosting/funding public dialogues on current issues (59%). Institutions were less likely to support students through loan forgiveness programs (5%), offering community service as a major and/or minor (5%), having students co-teach service-learning courses (10%), or having service as a requirement for graduation (11%).
Figure 22. Institutional support for student involvement in service-related activities
For those 11% of respondents that indicated institutions supported student involvement in other ways, the most frequently occurring responses included (a) offering specific programs and services (e.g. grant writing, leadership); (b) grants or other monetary incentives; and (c) making service learning part of the overall curriculum.
Types of Service Programs and Projects
As shown in Figure 23, the majority of institutions offered a variety of service-related programs. The most frequent types of programs involved one-day service projects (87%), discipline-based service-learning courses (70%), followed by non-profit internships (67%), and alternative breaks (64%). Institutions were less likely to offer graduate school service (18%), alumni projects (25%), and/or inter-campus service programs (31%). When comparing results from 2003-04 and 2004-05, a similar pattern of results was found with regards to the most and least frequent types of programs offered. However, respondents reported a decrease in service related programs being offered in non-profit internships (72% in 2003-04 versus 67% in 2004-05), residence-halls (58% in 2003-04 versus 56% in 2004-05), freshman orientation (54% in 2003-04 versus 51% in 2004-05), and summer programs (33% in 2003-04 versus 31% in 2004-05). However, respondents reported increased service opportunities in the areas of government internships (41% in 2003-04 versus 44% in 2004-05) and learning communities (32% in 2003-04 versus 35% in 2004-05).
Figure 23. Institutional service programs or projects
For the 8% of respondents that indicated that other service-related activities and/or programs were offered by the institution, the most frequently occurring was course and/or specific projects.
