peace corps 2006 volunteer survey - global report€¦ · the peace corps 2006 volunteer survey...

Peace Corps 2006 Volunteer Survey Global Report

Office of Planning, Policy and Analysis

Peace Corps 2006 Volunteer Survey Global Report

March 2007

Office of Planning, Policy and Analysis

MEMORANDUM

DATE: March 23, 2007 TO: Regional Directors, Chiefs of Operations, and Senior Staff FROM: Ronald Tschetter, Director SUBJECT: 2006 Peace Corps Volunteer Survey Global Report I am pleased to provide you with copies of the global report from the 2006 Peace Corps Volunteer (PCV) survey. This report is also available on the agency’s Intranet. These results provide a comprehensive picture of the activities, experiences, and views of Peace Corps Volunteers in service in 2006. These results may be used to identify strengths and areas for improvement within the Peace Corps. Please review the survey results and consider how they can be applied to your programming, training, and policy-making decisions. The PCV survey is conducted every two years and is one of a few standardized survey instruments used to collect information directly from Volunteers. Through these surveys, Volunteers have a voice to inform headquarters of the Peace Corps’ strengths and areas that require improvement or attention. The PCV survey asks Volunteers about training, program effectiveness, various types of Volunteer support, health and safety issues, the perceived impact of Volunteers’ work, and overall assessments of their Peace Corps experience. The PCV survey also includes topics that are not covered in other surveys or assessments, such as preparation for Peace Corps and Volunteers’ on-site “amenities” such as electricity, running water and telecommunications access, as well as resources that help Volunteers in their HIV/AIDS-related activities. I would like to thank the country directors (CDs) for providing the opportunity and encouragement for the Volunteers to complete the survey by distributing and collecting the paper surveys and for providing computer access for Volunteers who opted to complete the survey online. Surveys from 4,482 Volunteers (75 percent) were collected worldwide. More than half (59 percent) of respondents completed the survey online. Without the support and follow-through of the regional directors, CDs and other overseas and headquarters staff, this critical survey would not have had such a high response rate. If you have any questions or would like to make suggestions for the next survey, please contact Dr. Paul Jhin, Director of the Office of Planning, Policy and Analysis, at 202.692.2134.

3 The Peace Corps 2006 Volunteer Survey Global Report

For internal use only; do not distribute without Peace Corps authorization.

Table of Contents

I. Introduction ................................................................................................................................................5 II. Report Highlights.......................................................................................................................................9 III. Profile of Respondents...........................................................................................................................13 IV. Preparation for Peace Corps Service ....................................................................................................17 V. Training for Peace Corps Assignment....................................................................................................19 VI. Volunteers’ Peace Corps Assignment ...................................................................................................24

Primary Assignment and Related Activities............................................................................................24 Secondary Activities ...............................................................................................................................26 Hours Worked Per Week........................................................................................................................26 Assignment Match with Volunteers’ Skills ..............................................................................................28 Overall Assessments of Primary Assignment ........................................................................................29 Technical Skills Needed for Primary Assignments.................................................................................30 Volunteer Capacity Building ...................................................................................................................31 Project Resources ..................................................................................................................................33 Third-Goal Activities................................................................................................................................35

VII. Life in the Peace Corps ........................................................................................................................36 Preparation of Host Country Colleagues and Work Site ........................................................................37 Amenities at Residence and Work Site ..................................................................................................38 Communications .....................................................................................................................................39 Correspondence Match/Coverdell World Wise Schools.........................................................................40 Master’s International Program ..............................................................................................................41

VIII. Volunteer Safety and Security .............................................................................................................42 Threats to Volunteer Safety....................................................................................................................42 Crimes Against Volunteers .....................................................................................................................45

IX. Peace Corps Staff Support ....................................................................................................................51 Family or Personal Emergency ..............................................................................................................51 Proximity of Volunteers to Peace Corps Support ...................................................................................52 Support Received from Peace Corps Staff.............................................................................................54 Emotional Stressors................................................................................................................................55 Visits from In-Country Peace Corps Staff...............................................................................................57

X. Volunteers Working in HIV/AIDS ............................................................................................................60 XI. Overall Satisfaction................................................................................................................................66 XII. Volunteer Recommendations and Comments......................................................................................70 Appendix: 2006 Peace Corps Volunteer Survey Instrument ......................................................................71



Peace Corps Volunteer Survey Results: Global Report

I. Introduction The Peace Corps Volunteer (PCV) survey is administered as a confidential questionnaire, which can also be completed online through the Internet. The survey covers Volunteers’ attitudes and experiences with such topics as Peace Corps training, programming, staff and host country support, health, and safety. The PCV survey is a biennial census of all currently serving Volunteers, instead of a small sample of Volunteers. The benefit of this approach is that Volunteers have the opportunity at least once during their two-year service to share their observations, experiences, and recommendations through this comprehensive and confidential questionnaire. The 2006 PCV survey (see Appendix) is almost entirely composed of questions with a fixed set of choices from which respondents choose. The survey questions are organized into general topic areas, beginning with a few questions on the Volunteer’s background, preparation for the Peace Corps, and training. In all, the survey has 84 numbered items and three final open-ended questions. More than 500 data elements are generated from this 16-page survey. The 2006 PCV survey was distributed to all Peace Corps posts for Volunteers to complete between March 31, 2006, and June 26, 2006. More than 75 percent of all eligible participants—4,482 Volunteers serving in 65 posts throughout the world—completed the survey. Changes from the 2004 PCV Survey In January and February 2006, an advisory panel representing 12 Peace Corps headquarters (HQ) offices reviewed the 2004 PCV questionnaire and recommended several changes that were incorporated into the 2006 PCV survey. In general, changes were minimal in order to maintain continuity with prior biennial surveys. The changes included the following:

• The 2006 survey included a set of questions for all Volunteers involved in HIV/AIDS activities. Many of the 2004 questions about specific types of HIV/AIDS activities were eliminated in 2006 because that information is now collected by the Peace Corps Office of AIDS Relief.

• Based on recommendations from the Office of Safety and Security (OSS), the PCV survey’s

definitions of some types of crime were changed to fit crime-reporting definitions recently adopted by OSS. With these changes, the PCV survey’s reported numbers and types of crimes may be compared to OSS crime data. Another addition to the 2006 survey was to ask about the number of times that Volunteers’ experiences with crime/s were reported, which provides useful information about reported versus unreported crimes.

• New items addressing the agency’s second and third goals (respectively, to help promote a better

understanding of Americans on the part of the peoples served and to help promote a better understanding of other peoples on the part of Americans) were also added to the 2006 survey.

• Other new questions asked about Volunteers’ personal commitment and willingness to take

responsibility, which may determine their success in the Peace Corps.

Methodology

Every Volunteer who had been in-country for at least three months and sworn-in as a Volunteer by March 31, 2006, was eligible to participate in the survey. For only the second time in the PCV survey’s history,



Volunteers had the option of completing either a paper survey or an online survey. In March 2006, all posts received instructions about how Volunteers could access and complete the online survey through a secure Internet site. Most posts also received instructions with the paper surveys, already placed in sealable envelopes addressed to Peace Corps headquarters. The survey was fielded from March 31 through June 26, 2006 (12 weeks), after a two-week extension was allowed. The official cut-off for the paper surveys was July 21, 2006, although surveys mailed by the June 26 deadline but received after July 21 were accepted. At the time of administration, 5,983 Volunteers were eligible to take the survey, according to the agency’s Volunteer database and verified by staff at each post. Surveys from 4,557 Volunteers were collected worldwide. Surveys from 13 Volunteers were deleted because they did not meet the criteria of having been in-country for at least three months. Sixty-two surveys (1 percent) were dropped from the analysis because less than half of the survey was completed. The remaining 4,482 surveys represent an overall response rate of 75 percent, an increase of 7 percent from the response rate for the 2004 PCV survey (68 percent). Additionally, more than half (59 percent) of the 2006 PCV survey respondents completed the survey online compared to 38 percent of the 2004 PCV survey respondents.

Posts/Countries

The PCV survey was mailed to 67 posts, representing 73 countries. After the survey period started, two posts suspended operations: Chad in April 2006 and East Timor in May 2006. No surveys were received from East Timor before Peace Corps activities were suspended. One completed survey was received from a Volunteer in Chad, which was not included in the final survey dataset. Completed surveys were received from Volunteers in all 65 posts that remained operational through the entire survey period.

Data Analysis

This report primarily presents descriptive statistics, such as frequency of responses, averages, and cross-tabulations. Many of the PCV survey questions asked respondents to select one of five possible options, described by a set of appropriate words and translated into numeric values on a five-point scale. For example, when Volunteers rated various aspects of their pre-service training (PST), their responses are coded from one (“not at all effective”) to five (“very effective”). The responses are standardized on a five-point scale and numerically averaged to create an average rating across all respondents. This method facilitates an easier comparison of how Volunteers rated each of the items.

Presentation of data

Each table and figure includes the number of Volunteers who responded to that particular survey question (denoted as n=####) and the survey question number. The number of respondents varies by question. Please note that the specific percentages in the figures and tables may not add to 100 because of rounding to the nearest whole number.

For multiple-response questions (i.e., “mark as many as apply”), each reported percentage was calculated from the number of individuals who selected that particular response divided by the total number of individuals who answered the question by selecting one or more responses. Since respondents may select more than one response to answer multiple response questions, the sum of the percents for all responses to any multiple response question will almost certainly total more than 100. For example, question A2 asked Volunteers to identify all activities (“mark all that apply”) that are part of their primary assignment work. The 4,430 Volunteers who answered question A2 provided a total of 20,075 responses, almost five times the number of respondents. One of the 19 possible responses was “English teaching,” which was selected by 2,014 Volunteers. This means that of all the Volunteers who answered question A2, 46 percent said that their primary assignment activities include “English teaching.”



This percentage was calculated by dividing the 2,014 respondents who chose “English teaching” by all 4,430 Volunteers who answered question A2. Most Volunteers selected more than one primary assignment activity, so the sum of the percents for each response in question A2 is 453 percent. This indicates that question A2 respondents identified, on average, four to five activities that are part of their primary assignment work.

A copy of the 2006 Peace Corps Volunteer Survey is in the Appendix. An electronic version of the questionnaire is posted on the Peace Corps Intranet.



II. Report Highlights The following information highlights strengths and areas for improvement based on the data contained within the report. The findings are incorporated into suggestions for training, programming, and general Volunteer support. Preparation and Training of Volunteers More than half of all respondents (51 percent) confirmed that the Peace Corps had prepared them, both physically and mentally, to meet the challenges of Peace Corps service either “exceptionally” or “considerably well.” Volunteers rated pre-service training (PST) and in-service training (IST) topics as “adequate” to “effective.” The training topics with the highest effectiveness ratings were:

• Maintain your personal safety and security (PST and IST) • Maintain your physical health (PST and IST) • Manage cultural differences (PST) • Use language needed in work (IST)

Most respondents also confirmed that the time spent on the training in these areas was “about the right length” rather than too short or too long. The three PST and IST topics that received the lowest effectiveness ratings and were reported to have been “too short” in terms of training length were:

• Improve working relationships with counterparts • Monitor project goals and outcomes • Use Participatory Analysis for Community Action (PACA) training.

Volunteer Assignments Most Volunteers have primary assignments within the education, health, or business sectors. When asked to identify all activities they do as part of their primary assignment, Volunteers most frequently said they were involved in:

• Working with youth (64 percent) • English teaching (45 percent) • Working with nongovernmental organization(s) (40 percent) • HIV/AIDS-related work (35 percent)

More than half (60 percent) of the Volunteers spend more than 20 hours per week on their primary assignment activities. Almost all Volunteers (88 percent) were also involved in secondary activities. Of those involved in secondary activities, 40 percent reported that they spend more than 10 hours per week on secondary activities. Almost half of the Volunteers (48 percent) said their skills, interests, and experiences were utilized “well” or “very well” by their primary assignment, while 21 percent said their skills were “not at all” or “poorly” used by their primary assignment. A majority of Volunteers are “very” to “mostly” clear about their project goals and objectives, responsibilities, project/sector activities, and the associate Peace Corps director (APCD)/program



manager’s responsibilities. More than one-third (35 percent) of Volunteers reported that they are “not at all” or only “somewhat clear” about their sponsoring agency’s responsibilities. A majority of survey respondents said that their assignment goals and activities meet the objectives of their project “considerably” or “exceptionally well.” Volunteers reported being less sure about how well their assignment goals and activities were building local capacity for sustainability. Project Resources Most Volunteers (between 75 to 88 percent) who have used small project assistance (SPA) grants, the Peace Corps Partnership Program (PCPP), Peace Corps Resource Center materials, or HIV/AIDS funding evaluated these resources as “moderately” to “very” effective. Almost half of the respondents are aware of SPA grants and the PCPP as potential resources for their work, but have not used either. Over one-third (37 percent) of the survey respondents said they were unaware of any HIV/AIDS funding that could potentially support their activities. Volunteer Safety and Security Most Volunteers (87 percent) feel “adequately” to “very well” informed about events in their host country that might affect their safety. Almost all Volunteers feel safe where they live and work; less than 3 percent feel unsafe. Most Volunteers (54 percent to 96 percent) have not experienced incidents such as petty theft or harassment; likewise, most (75 percent to 99 percent) have not been victims of serious crimes in their host country. Slightly more Volunteers reported feeling unsafe when they traveled in-country (10 percent feel “often unsafe” or “not at all safe”) and in the city where the main Peace Corps office was located (12 percent feel “often unsafe” or “not at all safe”). When traveling, more Volunteers felt that their safety had been threatened by “transportation conditions” posed by vehicles, drivers, or roads than by harassment by strangers, police stops, or theft. When asked about their experiences with different types of harassment, more than half of the Volunteers reported that they had never experienced anti-American, racial, religious, or sexual harassment during the past 12 months. The most typical type of harassment reported was sexual harassment, almost all (94 percent) of which was verbal rather than physical. Female Volunteers experience sexual harassment at a much higher rate than men, and men experience anti-American harassment at a slightly higher rate than women. The most prevalent serious crime experienced by 25 percent of the survey respondents was “serious theft” (defined as no contact with the thief who has taken money or item(s) valued at $25 or more). Most victims of serious theft experienced only one theft during the past 12 months. Most reported the crime to their safety and security coordinator. Other less prevalent crimes reported by Volunteers were simple assault involving no weapon or injury (8 percent); sexual assault other than rape (7 percent); and robbery involving contact with the perpetrator. All other types of serious crimes were experienced by 1 percent or less of the respondents. Peace Corps Support Almost three-quarters of the Volunteers were either “considerably” or “exceptionally” satisfied with the in-country healthcare they receive from the Peace Corps medical officer (PCMO). On average, Volunteers rated the medical support higher (an average score of four on a five-point scale) than other types of support. The other highly rated type of in-country Peace Corps support, with an average score of 3.8, was safety and security.



The top three topics mentioned as “considerably” to “exceptionally” problematic in creating stress/emotional health issues were:

• Primary assignment (24 percent) • Cultural issues (18 percent) • Relationships with host country nationals (15 percent).

Topics reported to cause the least stress were safety and security, relationships with other Volunteers, and relationships with Peace Corps staff. A majority of Volunteer respondents have been visited at least twice by a program staff Member. About one-third have received at least one visit from both the country director (CD) and the PCMO. Most (80 percent or more) of Volunteers who have been visited by their country director, program staff member, PCMO, or safety and security coordinator evaluated the visit(s) as either “adequate” or “more than adequate” on all four criteria (frequency, informative content, comfort level discussing issues, and responsiveness to issues). Volunteers Working in HIV/AIDS Fifty-five percent of all respondents said they are involved in HIV/AIDS-related activities as part of their Peace Corps service. When asked to describe their level of involvement in this area, 12 percent said that the work is part of their primary assignment, 22 percent said that the work is part of their secondary activities, and the other 21 percent are involved in HIV/AIDS-related efforts, but not as part of their primary or secondary work. About two-thirds of the Volunteers involved in HIV/AIDS-related activities reported that the Peace Corps “moderately” to “substantially” prepared them to work in this area. More than three-quarters (78 percent) of the respondents said that they go to fellow Volunteers for more information or advice to do a better job in their HIV/AIDS community work. More than half said that they closely collaborate with Volunteers from other sectors in this work. Volunteers favored obtaining additional types of assistance to help them in their HIV/AIDS work; the most frequently mentioned items were:

• Training tools to use in the community (64 percent) • References with HIV/AIDS information (53 percent) • Visits from technical experts (52 percent) • Workshops on training skills (51 percent).

The least mentioned (20 percent) type of assistance that Volunteers said would be helpful in their HIV/AIDS work was “emotional support/listening to my feelings.” Finally, more than one-third of all Volunteers with any level of involvement in HIV/AIDS-related activities rated their effectiveness in working with host country individuals or groups as “often” or “almost always” effective. Looking only at the responses of Volunteers involved in HIV/AIDS work as part of their primary assignment, more than half rated their effectiveness as “often” or “almost always” effective. Overall Satisfaction with Peace Corps Service The majority of Volunteers feel that their Peace Corps service is personally rewarding, either “considerably” (40 percent) or “exceptionally” (34 percent). Most Volunteers (78 percent) intend to complete their service, and 14 percent indicated that they might extend.



In response to other overall satisfaction questions, a majority of survey respondents answered that they:

• would definitely make the same decision to join Peace Corps again today, • would definitely recommend Peace Corps service to others who are qualified, and • have “considerably” or “exceptionally” helped host country nationals to gain a better

understanding of the United States and its people.

Almost half (47 percent) of respondents felt that their host country would benefit if the Peace Corps were maintained at the current level. Another one-third felt that the host country would benefit if the program were expanded.



III. Profile of Respondents The following information summarizes the characteristics of the Volunteers who responded to the 2006 Peace Corps Volunteer (PCV) survey. Comparable Characteristics from the Peace Corps Volunteer Database The characteristics of PCVs who responded to this survey are almost identical to the population of Volunteers serving at the start of the survey. With a survey response rate of 75 percent, the survey respondents are representative of all Volunteers sworn-in and serving abroad at the time of the survey. This is evident from the almost identical demographic profile of Peace Corps Volunteers according to the agency’s database below, compared to the survey respondent demographics in the following section. The agency’s database indicates that, as of March 31, 2006, there were 5,898 Volunteers who were eligible to participate in the survey (i.e., in-country at least three months or more as of March 31). According to the agency’s database, 58 percent of Volunteers were female and 42 percent male. Ninety percent of all Volunteers were under the age of 35. Volunteer ages ranged from 20 years old to 80 years old, with an average age of 28 and a median age of 25. Volunteers were predominantly Caucasian (82 percent), 5 percent were Asian American, and 5 percent were more than one race. Most Volunteers (86 percent) were single/never married. Almost all Volunteers (97 percent) held at least a bachelor’s degree or higher degree. Based on this profile of all Volunteers, the survey respondents are representative of all Volunteers in service on March 31, 2006, with only minor differences (1 percent plus or minus). Demographic Data of Survey Respondents Note that the details within the figures and tables may not add to 100 percent due to rounding. Figure 1. Sex of Respondents (question J2)

Male41%

Female59%

Sex (n=4349). The majority of respondents (59 percent) are female. Men represent 41 percent of the respondents.



Figure 2. Age Groups of Respondents (question J1)

25-34 years:49%

20-24 years:40%

4%: 35-44 years

6%: 45-64 years

1%: 65+ years

Age (n=4215). The average age of the respondents is 28 years old. The median age (i.e., half are older and half are younger) is 25 years old. Most (89 percent) are under 35 years of age. The youngest respondents are 20 years old and the oldest 80 years of age. Figure labels are percentages rounded to the nearest whole number.

Figure 3. Race/Ethnicity of Respondents (question J3)

Caucasian (not Hispanic)

83%

5%: Asian American

5%: Two or more races

3%: African American

3%: Hispanic/Latino

<1%: Hawaiian/Pacific Island

<1%: Native American

Race/Ethnicity (n=4331). Most survey respondents (83 percent) are Caucasian (not Hispanic/Latino). The next largest groups are Asian Americans (5 percent) and those of two or more races (5 percent). Three percent are African American and another 3 percent are Hispanic/Latino. Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders are less than 1 percent of all respondents, as are Native Americans. Figure labels are percentages rounded to the nearest whole number.

Figure 4. Marital Status of Respondents (question J4)

<1%: Widowed

1%: Married serving without spouse

4%: Divorced

10%: Married serving with spouse

Single, never married:

85%

Marital Status (n=4370). Most respondents (85 percent) are single/never married. Another 10 percent are married serving with their spouses. Four percent are divorced, 1 percent serving without their spouse, and less than 1 percent are widowed. Figure labels are percentages rounded to the nearest whole number.



Figure 5. Education Level of Respondents (question J5)

<1%: High school degree or equivalent

Bachelor's degree83%

14%: Master's degree1%: Doctorate degree1%: Technical school/

Other1%: Associate's

degree

Education (n=4369). Almost all respondents (98.5 percent) hold at least a bachelor’s degree or a higher degree. One percent have a technical school degree/other. One percent hold an associate’s degree, and less than 1 percent have a high school degree or equivalent. Figure labels are percentages rounded to the nearest whole number.

Figure 6. Foreign Language Experience (question A4)

1-2 years21%

3-4 years26%

None14%

5-6 years17%7+ years

14%

Under 1 yr8%

Foreign Language (n=4470). More than half of the respondents (57 percent) had more than two years of foreign language education or professional experience requiring foreign language fluency in the 10 years prior to their Peace Corps training. At the extremes of language experience, 14 percent had no foreign language experience and 14 percent had more than six years of foreign language experience. Figure labels are percentages rounded to the nearest whole number.

Figure 7. Months In-Country (question A3)

7%: 3-6 months

4%: 28+ months7-12 months39%

13-18 months16% 19-27 months

34%

Months In-Country (n=4472). Almost half (46 percent) have been in-country one year or less, including pre-service training. Exactly half (50 percent) have been in-country more than one year, but not longer than 27 months. Only 4 percent have already completed their first tour (in-country 28 months or more). Figure labels are percentages rounded to the nearest whole number.



Table 1 below provides more detail on the characteristics of the 2006 PCV survey respondents for key racial and ethnic groups. There are some demographic differences across the groups. For example, respondents in the “all other” group (consisting of multi-race, Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, and Native Americans) come closest to an equal distribution between females (58 percent) and males (42 percent). African-American respondents have the largest gender distribution difference, with 66 percent female. Slightly more (over 7 percent) Caucasian Volunteers are 50 years or older compared to all other race/ethnicity groups with 5 percent or less of Volunteers age 50 or older. Almost one-quarter (24 percent) of the African-American respondents hold graduate degrees compared to all other groups in which 16 percent or less hold graduate degrees.

African

American

Asian American/

Pacific Islander

Caucasian (not of

Hispanic origin) Hispanic All Other

Sex (n=122) (n=249) (n=3580) (n=119) (n=234)

Female 66% 65% 59% 65% 58%

Male 33% 35% 41% 35% 42%

Age (in years) (n=115) (n=245) (n=3484) (n=109) (n=218)

20–29 75% 86% 81% 85% 88%

30–39 16% 9% 10% 13% 8%

40–49 4% 1% 2% 1% 1%

50–59 2% 2% 4% 1% 2%

60–69 3% 2% 3% 1%

70 + <1%

Marital status (n=123) (n=249) (n=3596) (n=119) (n=236)

Single, never married 87% 92% 84% 86% 88%

Married/serving with spouse 3% 5% 10% 10% 8%

Married/serving without spouse 3% <1% 1% 2% 1%

Divorced 6% 2% 4% 3% 3%

Widowed 1% 1%

Table 1. Demographics by Race/Ethnicity Some percentages do not total 100 due to rounding. Missing data are not used in the calculation of percentages.

Education (n=123) (n=248) (n=3597) (n=119) (n=235)

High school or equivalent <1% <1%

Technical school/Other <1% 1% 2% 1%

Associate’s degree <1% 1% 1% 1%

Bachelor’s degree 75% 87% 82% 83% 88%

Graduate degree 24% 13% 16% 14% 10%

In summary, similar to all Volunteers, the 2006 Peace Corps survey respondents are predominantly young, well-educated, and single/never married across all race/ethnicity groups, with more female than male Volunteers.



IV. Preparation for Peace Corps Service Volunteers were asked about the Peace Corps materials provided on the website and during the application process. As shown in Figure 8, almost three-quarters of all respondents answered that the Peace Corps website was “moderately” to “extremely” useful. Figure 8 also shows that only 4 percent replied that they didn’t know or hadn’t accessed the Peace Corps website. As shown in Figure 9, a majority of Volunteers found both country and primary assignment materials to be “moderately” to “extremely” useful. More respondents found the country materials useful in preparing for Peace Corps service than the primary assignment materials.

4

2

21

47

22

4

0 10 20 30 40 50

Don't know

Not at all useful

Minimally useful

Moderately useful

Very useful

Extremely useful

Percent

Figure 8. How useful was the information on the Peace Corps website in preparing you for the realities of living and working as a Volunteer? (n=4469)

(question B1)

45

27

4

10

34

21

2

2

15

39

0 10 20 30 40 50

Not at all useful

Minimally useful

Moderately useful

Very useful

Extremely useful

Percent

Assignment Materials

Country Materials

Figure 9. During the application process, how useful were the materials about your country (e.g., country Welcome Book) in helping you prepare for your experience? (n=4442)

(question B2) During the application process, how useful were the Peace Corps materials about your primary assignment (e.g., Volunteer Assignment Description) in helping you prepare for your experience? (n=4450)

(question B3) Figure 10 summarizes Volunteers’ responses to a more all-inclusive question about preparation for Peace Corps service. The figure shows that most (86 percent) feel the Peace Corps “moderately” to “extremely” prepared them both physically and mentally to meet the challenges of service. Respondents’ evaluations of many specific types of training are reported in the next section.



1

13

48

32

6

0 10 20 30 40 50

Not at all prepared

Minimally prepared

Adequately prepared

Considerably prepared

Exceptionally prepared

Percent

Figure 10. Overall, how well did the Peace Corps prepare you, both physically and mentally, to meet the challenges of Peace Corps service? (n=4424)

(question C4)



V. Training for Peace Corps Assignment Peace Corps Volunteers (PCVs) were asked to assess the effectiveness of the training they received. The 2006 survey provided the following definitions of the three types of training:

• Community-based training: decentralized within multiple communities; trainees living with host families during training; incorporates trainee-directed learning activities.

• Center-based training: centralized around a training facility; trainees live in or near training

center; incorporates instructor-directed activities.

• Mixed training: essentially center-based training, but incorporates field-based or self-directed learning activities; trainees stay with a host family and return to training center at end of field component.

Based on these definitions, over half of the Volunteers (56 percent) received community-based training, one-third (33 percent) received mixed training, and the remaining 11 percent received center-based training.

Community-based

Training:56% Center-

based Training:

11%

Mixed Training:

33%

Figure 11. Which of the following best describes your pre-service training? (n=4452)

(question C1)

Volunteers rated the effectiveness of both pre-service training (PST) and in-service training (IST) components on a one-to-five scale (one equals “not at all effective”; five equals “very effective”). They also provided feedback on the length of each training component. Tables 2 and 3 present the PST and IST average scores for each component and the responses on training length. Figures 12 and 13 provide a rank-order listing the PST and IST training components in order of their effectiveness ratings; topics with the highest effectiveness ratings (largest percentages of “effective” and “very effective”) appear at the top. Table 2 shows that Volunteers felt most prepared by PST to maintain their personal safety and security (average = 3.7), as well as their physical health (average = 3.6). In terms of the training length, some Volunteers (22 percent) said that the PST personal safety and security training was too long, although most (73 percent) felt that it was the right length. The lowest PST effectiveness ratings were in the areas of “improve working relationships with counterparts” (average = 2.6) and “monitor project goals and outcomes” (average = 2.7). Fifty-six percent of the respondents said that training to “improve working relationships with counterparts” was too short; and 42 percent felt that training to “monitor project goals and outcomes” was too short.



Not only did Participatory Analysis for Community Action (PACA) training receive low effectiveness ratings, almost one-third (30 percent) of the respondents answered that this training was “not applicable/no training.” Length of Training Table 2.

Pre-Service Training Topics Average Rating

Too Short

Right Length

Too Long

a. Manage cultural differences (n=4454) 3.5 15% 73% 13%

b. Deal with adjustment issues (n=4426) 3.2 24% 69% 7%

c. Improve working relationships with counterparts (n=4134) 2.6 56% 41% 3%

d. Use language needed in work and social interactions (n=4381) 3.4 36% 60% 4%

e. Perform technical aspects of your work (n=4342) 2.9 39% 52% 8%

f. Work with project goals and objectives (n=4257) 2.9 31% 62% 6%

g. Use Participatory Analysis for Community Action (PACA) training

(n=3006) 2.8 39% 45% 16%

h. Monitor project goals and outcomes (n=3959) 2.7 42% 53% 4%

i. Maintain your physical health (n=4396) 3.6 10% 82% 8%

j. Maintain your mental/emotional health (n=4399) 3.3 20% 74% 6%

k. Maintain your personal safety and security (n=4454) 3.7 4% 73% 22%

Evaluation of pre-service training (PST) topics.

(question C2) (Rating scale: 1=Not at all effective 2=Poor 3=Adequate 4=Effective 5=Very effective) Lowest rated areas are highlighted in yellow.

Figure 12 lists the PST components in order of their reported effectiveness from the highest percentage of “more effective” (combining “effective” and “very effective” responses) to the lowest. With the variation across these training components, it is important to note that most respondents rated every PST training component at least adequate or better.



Figure 12. Evaluation of Pre-Service Training (PST) Topics. (question C2) (More Effective = Effective + Very Effective; Less Effective = Poor + Not at all Effective)

57

53

49

46

38

32

25

21

18

14

11

37

38

42

36

46

50

41

50

49

48

44

6

9

9

19

15

18

34

29

34

37

45

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Maintain personal safety & security

Maintain physical health

Manage cultural differences

Use language needed in work

Maintain mental/emotional health

Deal with adjustment issues

Perform technical aspects

Work w/project goals & objectives

Use PACA training*

Monitor project goals & outcomes

Improve working relationships

More Effective Adequate Less effective

*30 percent did not rate this training, answering “NA/No Training.” Table 3 and Figure 13 provide information on training effectiveness and length for the IST components. Similar to the PST ratings, Volunteers felt most prepared by IST to maintain their personal safety and security (average = 3.5), as well as their physical health (average = 3.4). Half of all respondents (50 percent) answered “not applicable/no training” to the IST question about PACA training. Volunteers who did rate the effectiveness of PACA training reported low effectiveness (average = 2.8).



Length of Training Table 3.

In-Service Training Topics Average Rating

Too Short

Right Length

Too Long

Evaluation of In-service Training (IST) topics

a. Manage cultural differences (n=3374) 3.3 18% 77% 5%

b. Deal with adjustment issues (n=3332) 3.2 26% 70% 4%

c. Improve working relationships with counterparts (n=3566) 3.0 39% 58% 3%

d. Use language needed in work and social interactions (n=3307) 3.3 36% 61% 3%

e. Perform technical aspects of your work (n=3800) 3.2 31% 65% 5%

f. Work with project goals and objectives (n=3685) 3.2 23% 72% 6%

g. Use Participatory Analysis for Community Action (PACA) training (n=1931) 2.8 30% 59% 11%

h. Monitor project goals and outcomes (n=3402) 3.1 27% 68% 4%

i. Maintain your physical health (n=3254) 3.4 13% 82% 5%

j. Maintain your mental/emotional health (n=3272) 3.3 21% 74% 5%

k. Maintain your personal safety and security (n=3541) 3.5 6% 78% 16%

(question C3)

(Rating scale: 1=Not at all effective 2=Poor 3=Adequate 4=Effective 5=Very effective) Lowest rated areas are highlighted in yellow.

Figure 13. Evaluation of In-Service Training (IST) Topics (question C3) (More Effective = Effective + Very Effective; Less Effective = Poor + Not at all Effective)

47

43

41

41

37

36

36

32

29

27

21

46

47

39

45

47

39

46

48

49

42

48

7

10

20

14

15

24

18

20

23

31

31

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Maintain personal safety & security

Maintain physical health

Use language needed in work

Manage cultural differences

Maintain mental/emotional health

Perform technical aspects

Work w/ project goals & objectives

Deal with adjustment issues

Monitor project goals & outcomes

Improve working relationships

Use PACA training*

More Effective Adequate Less Effective

*52 percent did not rate this training and answered “NA/No Training.”



As shown in the above tables and figures, PST and IST training to “maintain your personal safety and security” and to “maintain your physical health” were the most effective of the 11 components. Training components to “manage cultural differences” and to “use language needed in work” were also highly rated. In fact, most components were rated as “adequate” or “effective.” More training time may be needed for the area, “monitor project goals and outcomes,” a topic added to the 2006 survey. Another low-rated topic, “use of Participatory Analysis for Community Action (PACA) training,” may be less of a training priority at posts, with so many respondents answering “not applicable/no training.” Based on the low PST and IST ratings, one area that may need additional or enhanced training is the component to “improve the working relationship with counterparts.” Based on Volunteers’ observations, this area may require more training time.



VI. Volunteers’ Peace Corps Assignment

Primary Assignment and Related Activities The following tables provide information on the primary assignments and type of activities performed by the Volunteers in their assignments. Table 4 shows that 21 percent of Volunteer respondents work in the primary assignment of English teaching. One-third of the Volunteers have primary assignments within the education sector. Health is the second most prevalent (16 percent) primary assignment. This includes Volunteers who identify their primary assignment specifically as HIV/AIDS-related (4 percent of the 16 percent). Almost one-quarter of all Volunteers (24 percent) have business-sector primary assignments of community development, business education/advising, and nongovernmental organization (NGO) development. Sector Primary Assignment Percentage

Education Sector (33%) English teaching 21

Math/science teaching 4

Teacher training 5

Other teaching 3

Business Sector (24%) Business education/advising 10

Community development 9

NGO development 5

Health Sector (19%) Health (including HIV/AIDS) 16

Water sanitation 3

Agriculture Sector (8%) Agriculture/fish/livestock 5

Agroforestry 3

Youth Development Sector (7%) Youth development 7

Environment Sector (7%) Environment education 6

Forestry 1

Other (3%) 3

Table 4. Which of the following best describes your primary assignment? (n=4465)

(question A1)

Percentages do not total 100 due to rounding to the nearest whole number. Missing data are not used in the calculation of percentages.

Volunteers were also asked which of 18 work activities they do as part of their primary assignment work. More than half (64 percent) reported that they work with youth, and 45 percent are involved in teaching English as part of their primary assignments. The percentages in Table 5 reflect that Volunteers were allowed to identify all relevant activities that were part of their primary assignment work. Most Volunteers identified more than one activity; indeed, more than half (61 percent) are involved in four or more primary work activities.



Work Activities Percentage Work Activities Percentage

Working with youth 64% Nutrition education 23%

English teaching 45% Other 19%

Working with NGO(s) 40% Women in development

(WID)/Gender and development (GAD)

17%

HIV/AIDS 35% Micro-enterprise 17%

Girls’ education 35% Business advising 17%

Income generation 30% Biodiversity conservation 10%

Environment work 28% Household food security 9%

Rural development 25% Child survival 8%

Information technology 25%

Table 5. Which of the following activities does your primary assignment work include? (n=4430)

(question A2) Percentages total more than 100 because Volunteers can choose more than one activity.

Table 6 depicts the work activities most frequently associated with each of the six sectors. Working with youth is a top activity of many Volunteers in five of the six sectors (see blue-shaded boxes). Sectors Work Activities Percentage Table 6. Agriculture Environment work 70%

(n=384) Income generation 62%

Rural development 55%

Environment Environment work 89%

(n=307) Working with youth 68%

Biodiversity conservation 50%

Health HIV/AIDS 72%


Nutrition education 63%

Education English teaching 69%


Girls’ education 42%

Youth Working with youth 95%

(n=315) Girls’ education 66%

English teaching 63%

Business Working with NGO(s) 57%


Income generation 54%

Top three activities most frequently associated with each sector.

(question A2) Percent of cases was used. Percentages total more than 100 because Volunteers could choose more than one work activity. Blue highlighting indicates the percentage of Volunteers in each sector who work with youth.



Secondary Activities The overwhelming majority of Volunteers (88 percent) are reportedly engaged in secondary activities in addition to their primary assignment work. When asked, “Which of the following work do your secondary activities include? (Please mark all that apply)” the largest percentages of Volunteers reported that their work included the following secondary activities:

1. Working with youth (60 percent)

2. English teaching (54 percent)

3. Girls’ education (32 percent)

4. Other (31 percent)

5. HIV/AIDS (28 percent)

Similar to the many activities Volunteers reported in connection with their primary assignment, almost two-thirds of all respondents (n=3907) reported that they are involved in at least three or more secondary activities.

Hours Worked Per Week Most respondents (60 percent) reported that they typically work more than 20 hours per week on their primary assignment, as shown in Figure 14.

The majority of Volunteers (60 percent) engaged in secondary activities spent 10 hours or less during an average work week on these activities (Figure 15). Another 11 percent reported spending more than 20 hours per week on secondary activities.

1

12

28

32

19

9

0 10 20 30 40 50

None

1–10

11–20

21–30

31–40

More than 40

Percent

Figure 14. How many hours do you spend on your primary assignment during an average work week? (n=4459)

(question D1)



60

29

8

2

1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

1–10

11–20

21–30

31–40

More than 40

Percent

Figure 15. How many hours do you spend on your secondary activities during an average work week? (n=3900) (question D3)

Table 7 reports the percentage of time spent by Volunteers on primary assignments and secondary activities within each of the six sectors. Almost all (97 percent) of the education Volunteers spent more than 10 hours per week on primary assignment work. Volunteers in the agriculture sector spent more time on secondary activities compared to other sectors. Sectors Table 7. Agriculture Environment Health Education Youth Business Primary Assignment (hours) (n=381) (n=304) (n=842) (n=1450) (n=315) (n=1036)

Hours Worked per Week by Sector

More than 40 9% 4% 8% 9% 8% 10%

31–40 12% 15% 15% 23% 17% 21%

21–30 32% 24% 25% 40% 32% 29%

11– 21 27% 35% 34% 25% 32% 25%

1–10 19% 21% 18% 3% 10% 13%

None 1% <1% <1% <1% 1% 1%

Secondary Assignment (hours)2 (n=354) (n=278) (n=749) (n=1251) (n=278) (n=914)

More than 40 2% 1% 1% <1% 1% 1%

31–40 6% 4% 2% 1% 3% 2%

21–30 14% 9% 11% 4% 8% 11%

11–21 36% 33% 30% 20% 31% 33%

1–10 42% 52% 56% 74% 58% 53%

None 1% <1% <1% 1% <1% 1% 2Sectors were based on the Volunteers’ primary assignments.



Assignment Match with Volunteers’ Skills About half of the Volunteers (48 percent) felt that their skills, interests, and experiences were “well” or “very well” utilized by their primary assignment (Figure 16). Only 21 percent reported that their skills and interests were not adequately used in their primary assignment work.

2

19

31

33

15

0 10 20 30 40 50

Not at all

Poorly

Adequately

Well

Very well

Percent

Figure 16. To what extent are your skills, interests, and experiences utilized by your primary assignment? (n=4461)

(question D7)

Most Volunteers (90 percent) confirmed that their Peace Corps work is personally rewarding or satisfying (Figure 17); almost one-fifth (17 percent) found their work “exceptionally” rewarding.

1

9

32

41

17

0 10 20 30 40 50

Not at all

Minimally

Moderately

Considerably

Exceptionally

Percent

Figure 17. To what extent is the work you do personally rewarding or satisfying? (n=4433)

(question D5)

Volunteers with more than one year of Peace Corps service reported slightly higher levels of personal satisfaction; 61 percent of these Volunteers reported that their work was “considerably” or “exceptionally” satisfying, compared to 54 percent of the Volunteers with one year or less of service who felt “considerably” or “exceptionally” satisfied with their work.



Overall Assessments of Primary Assignment Volunteers reported how clear they are about various aspects of their primary assignment and the extent to which their work achieves certain goals, such as building local sustainability. The following tables and figures depict this information. As shown in Table 8, two-thirds (66 percent) of responding Volunteers said that their project goals and objectives were mostly or very clear. The one exception is that less than half (42 percent) of respondents agreed that their sponsoring agency’s responsibilities were mostly or very clear, and more than one-third (35 percent) said that their sponsoring agency’s responsibilities were either not at all or only somewhat clear to them. Comparing the responses by Volunteers’ length of service, Volunteers in service one year or less gave slightly higher clarity ratings (overall rating = 3.7) to only one aspect of the assignment—the associate Peace Corps director (APCD)/program manager’s responsibilities—which was rated slightly lower (overall rating = 3.5) by Volunteers who had been in-country more than a year Clarity of Assignment Aspect

Overall Rating

Very/Mostly Clear

Moderately Clear

Not at all/ Somewhat

Clear

Project goals and objectives (n=4419) 3.8 66% 16% 18%

Responsibilities or duties (n=4419) 3.6 60% 19% 21%

Project/sector activities (n=4390) 3.7 61% 21% 18%

Sponsoring agency's responsibilities

(n=4224) 3.1 42% 23% 35%

APCD/program manager's responsibilities

(n=4374) 3.6 61% 18% 21%

Table 8. How clear to you are the following aspects of your primary assignment?

(question D9) (Rating scale: 1=Not at all clear 2=Somewhat clear 3=Moderately clear 4=Mostly clear 5=Very clear) Yellow highlighting indicates the lowest percentage of Volunteers reporting that their assignment goal is mostly to very clear.

Volunteers were also asked if their primary assignment work addressed specific objectives/activities and was supported by in-country staff and resources. As shown in Table 9, about half of the Volunteers responded that their primary assignment work met the objectives of their project “exceptionally” or “considerably” (51 percent); was supported by in-country staff and resources” (49 percent); and included local people in planning and implementing activities” (47 percent). The one assignment goal in which more Volunteers (34 percent) felt that their work did not help to achieve was building local capacity for sustainability.



Assignment Goals/ Activities

Overall Rating

Exceptionally/ Considerably Adequately

Not at all/ Minimally

Meets the objectives of your project

(n=4354) 3.5 51% 31% 17%

Builds local capacity for sustainability

(n=4353) 3.0 33% 33% 34%

Includes local people in planning and implementing activities

(n=4339) 3.4 47% 30% 23%

Complements other local development activities

(n=4231) 3.1 38% 32% 30%

Is supported by in-country staff and resources

(n=4368) 3.4 49% 30% 21%

Table 9. To what extent does your primary assignment work do the following?

(question D10) (Rating scale: 1=Not at all 2=Minimally 3=Adequately 4=Considerably 5=Exceptionally) Yellow highlighting indicates the lowest percentage of Volunteers reporting adequate or better achievement of assignment goals or activities.

Technical Skills Needed for Primary Assignments Volunteers were also asked to provide feedback on specific technical skills needed to complete their work and whether or not the Peace Corps adequately provided them with these skills. As shown in Table 10, most Volunteers agreed that they needed each of these skills for their work in the Peace Corps. More than half of the respondents confirmed that they already had assignment-specific skills (57 percent), as well as the skills to organize community activities (52 percent) and monitor/report project work (64 percent) before joining the Peace Corps. Less than one-third said that they had the skills to assess community needs (31 percent) and to build the capacity of local organizations (26 percent). Most Volunteers felt they received adequate training in these skill areas. The one exception is that less than half of the Volunteers (41 percent) felt they received adequate training to “build the capacity of local organizations.” This is highlighted in yellow in the table below. Only 26 percent of the respondents had this skill before joining the Peace Corps, and most (75 percent) agreed that local capacity building was needed for their Peace Corps work. This finding is similar to the low rating by Volunteers of their work to build “local capacity for sustainability” (question D10 reported in the prior section). More training in this area is recommended.



Is the skill needed for

your work in the Peace

Corps?

Did you have the skill

before joining the Peace

Corps?

Have you had adequate Peace Corps training in this skill?

Percent answering “yes”

a) Assignment-specific skills 88% 57% 57%

b) Assess community needs 91% 31% 72%

c) Organize community activities 89% 52% 62%

d) Build capacity of local organizations 75% 26% 41%

Table 10. Technical Skills Related to Their Work (n=4371)

(question D8) Yellow highlighting indicates the lowest percentage of Volunteers reporting adequate Peace Corps training in this skill.

e) Monitor/report project work 89% 64% 66%

f) Design/implement training sessions 83% 43% 58%

Volunteer Capacity Building Volunteers rated the effectiveness of their primary assignment work in terms of the impact it has had to build or develop the capacities (knowledge, skills, and activities) of the host communities where they live and work. Volunteers were asked to assess the impact of their work on the capacities of:

• Host country counterparts (teachers, health workers, community leaders, NGO personnel, etc.) • Other host country individuals (students, farmers, villagers, etc.) • Organizations (NGO, school, community group, etc.)

Across the three sets of overall ratings presented in Tables 11, 12, and 13, Volunteers responded with slightly more positive ratings for their work with host country individuals than their reported minimal-to-moderate impact on the capacities of host country counterparts (people they work with) and organizations such as schools and community groups. Across the types of capacities listed in each of these three tables, Volunteers indicated that they had a “considerable” impact in only one area: “better understanding of Americans.” This item was added to 2006 PCV survey as an indicator of Volunteers’ perceived success in achieving the Peace Corps’ second goal (to help promote a better understanding of Americans on the part of the peoples served). These second-goal indicators received the most positive overall ratings (3.7 to 4.1). In addition to their positive impact on a “better understanding of Americans,” Table 12 shows that Volunteers believe they have had at least a moderate impact on host country individuals’ self-esteem (average score = 3.4), leadership (average score = 3.1), and problem solving (average score = 3.0). There are slight but consistent differences in the overall ratings for all three groups (host country counterparts, host country individuals, and organizations) when Volunteer responses are compared by length of service in the three tables below. Volunteers with more than one year of service were slightly more positive about the impact of their work on the capacities of the three groups than Volunteers who have been in service one year or less.



Rating by Time in Service

Capacities of Host Country Counterparts

Overall Rating

One year or less

More than one year

Problem solving (n=4249) 2.7 2.6 2.8

Self-esteem (n=4168) 2.9 2.8 3.1

Technical skills (n=4256) 2.9 2.8 3.1

Accessing information (e.g., library, Internet) (n=4171) 2.8 2.6 2.9

Planning and management (n=4234) 2.9 2.8 3.0

Identifying resources (n=4208) 2.9 2.8 3.0

Leadership (n=4198) 2.9 2.8 3.0

Using local resources (n=4195) 2.8 2.7 2.9

Better understanding of Americans (n=4317) 4.0 3.9 4.1

Table 11. How much of an impact have you had on the following capacities of your host country counterparts (e.g., teachers, health workers, community leaders, NGO personnel, etc.)?

(question D11) (Rating scale: 1=Not at all 3=Moderate 5=Exceptionally) Blue highlighting indicates the highest positive overall rating.


Capacities of Host Country Individuals Overall

Rating One year or less

More than one year

Problem solving (n=4287) 3.0 2.9 3.1

Self-esteem (n=4280) 3.4 3.3 3.5

Technical skills (n=4263) 3.0 2.9 3.2

Accessing information (e.g., library, Internet) (n=4206) 2.8 2.7 2.9

Planning and management (n=4231) 2.8 2.7 2.9

Identifying resources (n=4241) 2.9 2.8 3.0

Leadership (n=4068) 3.1 3.0 3.2

Using local resources (n=4222) 2.9 2.7 3.0


Table 12. How much of an impact have you had on the following capacities of your host country individuals (e.g., students, farmers, villagers, etc.)?





Capacities of Organizations Overall Rating

One year or less

More than one year

Identify and prioritize organizational needs (n=4012) 2.7 2.7 2.8

Management and leadership (n=3997) 2.7 2.6 2.8

Teamwork & participatory decision-making (n=4027) 2.8 2.7 2.9

Monitoring/evaluation (n=3996) 2.6 2.5 2.7

Access information & resources (n=4005) 2.8 2.6 2.9

Plan & implement organizational activities (n=4029) 2.9 2.8 3.0


Table 13. How much of an impact have you had on the following capacities of organizations (e.g., NGO, school, community group, etc.)?


Project Resources Most Volunteers who reported using small project assistance (SPA) grants, the Peace Corps Partnership Program (PCPP), Peace Corps Resource Center materials, or HIV/AIDS funding rated the resource as effective (“moderately” to “very” effective), as summarized below: • Of the 1,761 Volunteers with SPA grants, 88 percent felt they were “moderately” to “very” effective. • Of the 1,585 Volunteers with the Partnership Program, 83 percent felt it was similarly effective. • Of the 3,046 Volunteers who used Peace Corps Resource Center materials, 75 percent reported that

the materials were “moderately” to “very” effective. • Of the 1,039 Volunteers with HIV/AIDS funding, 79 percent rated the resource as “moderately” to

“very” effective. As shown in Figure 18, SPA grants and the Partnership Program resources were given the highest possible effectiveness rating by more than half of the Volunteers using those resources. While almost half (45 percent) of Volunteers using HIV/AID funds rated that resource as very effective, less than one-third of Volunteers using the Resource Center materials rated these as very effective in supporting their Volunteer activities.



8

14

34

45

4

22

43

31

5

12

32

51

4

8

27

62

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Not effective

Minimally effective

Moderately effective

Very effective

Percent

SPA Grants

PC Partnership Prog

Resource Center

HIV/AIDS Funds

Figure 18. Evaluation of resources by Volunteers who used the resource to support their Volunteer activities.

(question D15) (SPA Grants n=1761; PC Partnership Program n=1585; Resource Center Materials n=3046; HIV/AIDS Funding n=1039)

Figure 19 compares the responses of all Volunteer responses about these resources, including Volunteers who were either unaware of the resource or had not used the resource and Volunteers who reported that these resources were “not applicable.” Of the four resources, Resource Center materials had the highest percentage (73 percent) of Volunteers evaluating the effectiveness of that resource based on their use of Resource Center materials, with only 27 percent noting that they had not used Resource Center materials.

21

29

25

5

8

11

5

7

15

18

23

8

44

6

12

19

11

6

41

5

11

26

31

10

0 10 20 30 40 50

Not applicable

Unaware ofresources

Aware but notused

Less effective

Moderatelyeffective

Very effective

Percent

SPA Grants

PC Partnership Prog

Resource Center

HIV/AIDS Funds

Figure 19. Feedback about resources that could potentially support your Volunteer activities.

(question D15) (SPA (Small Project Assistance) Grants n=4167; PC Partnership Program n=4163; Resource Center Materials n=4184; HIV/AIDS Funding n=4184 ) (“Less effective” = Minimally Effective + Not Effective)

Three-quarters of the respondents (75 percent) did not evaluate the effectiveness of the HIV/AIDS funds because they had either not used the resource, were not aware of the resource or felt it was not applicable to their situation. A high percentage of Volunteers have not used SPA grants (41 percent) and



the Partnership Program (44 percent), despite being aware of these resources. As shown in Figure 18, however, the Volunteers who have used these two resources rate them as very effective in supporting their work.

Third-Goal Activities A new question in the 2006 PCV survey asked about Volunteers’ efforts to achieve the Peace Corps’ third goal (i.e., to help promote a better understanding of other peoples on the part of Americans). In response to Question D14, Volunteers reported their participation in the following types of third-goal activities:

1. Peace Corps Week activities 2. Sending electronic updates, stories, and/or photos to educate groups of Americans 3. Sending paper (hard copy) updates, stories, and/or photos to educate groups of Americans 4. Speaking at schools or other community groups while on home leave 5. Other (please specify)

Most of the survey respondents (3,759 of 4,482; or 84 percent) answered that they had participated in one or more of the four activities listed above. Of these 3,759 Volunteers involved in third-goal activities, almost all (91 percent) confirmed that they had sent electronic updates, stories, and/or photos to educate groups of Americans (Figure 20).

More than half (56 percent) of the 3,769 third-goal activity participants have also sent paper updates, stories, and/or photos to educate groups of Americans. While most of the third-goal activity participants involved in two or more of activities reported that they sent either electronic or hard copy updates, stories, and/or photos, at least 15 percent have spoken at schools or community groups while on home leave and another 11 percent have been involved in Peace Corps Week activities. Another 7 percent indicated some other type of third-goal activity. Most of these respondents wrote that they were involved either with the Coverdell World Wise Schools program that connects them to classrooms in the United States to share their experiences, or with some type of pen-pal program between host country nationals and Americans. Other Volunteers wrote that they help to better Americans’ understanding of host country people by hosting in-country visits of family, friends, or other visitors from the United States. Other creative third-goal activities include hosting a Peace Corps theme party while on home leave to share host country experiences and information about the Volunteer’s assignment, and sending podcasts back home to teach Americans about daily life in the host country.

7

11

15

56

91

0 20 40 60 80 100

Other

Peace Corps Week activities

Speak at schools/community groups onhome leave

Paper updates, stories, photos

Electronic updates, stories, photos

Percent

Figure 20. Have you participated in any of the following activities to help accomplish the third goal (to help promote a better understanding of other peoples on the part of Americans) during your Peace Corps service? (n=3759)

(question D14)



VII. Life in the Peace Corps Most Volunteers (72 percent) describe their sites as rural villages or towns excluding outer islands (Figure 21). Sixty percent do not live with a host country individual or family. A higher percentage of the business sector Volunteers live in either cities (31 percent) or country capitals (5 percent) than Volunteers working in other sectors.

4%: Country Capital

3%: Outer Island

Rural town (pop. 2,000 + to 25,000)

37%

Village/Rural area (pop. under 2,000)

34%

City (pop. over 25,000)

22%

Figure 21. Description of Assigned Site (n=4408)

(question E1)

Adequate housing was available immediately to 72 percent of Volunteers when they arrived on site, and to another 19 percent of the Volunteers within three months. Figure 23 shows that most Volunteers (81 percent) feel their living allowance meets their basic needs “adequately” to “very well.”

2

17

41

23

17

0 10 20 30 40 50

Not at all

Poorly

Adequately

Well

Very well

Percent

Figure 22. How well does your living allowance meet your basic needs? (n=4414)

(question E8)



Preparation of Host Country Colleagues and Work Site Volunteers were asked how prepared their host country colleagues and their actual work site were when they arrived at site. As shown in Figure 23, almost three-quarters of Volunteers (72 percent) said that the host people with whom the Volunteers work were at least “adequately” or better prepared upon their arrival. Volunteers were even more positive (78 percent) in rating how well-prepared the site was upon their arrival.

Two indicators of Volunteers adapting to life in their host country is their sense of integration into the community and proficiency in the local language, as shown in Figure 24.

4

18

37

25

16

7

22

34

22

16

0 10 20 30 40

Not at all

Poorly

Adequately

Well

Very well

Percent

Host People PreparedSite Prepared

Figure 23. How prepared for your arrival were the host people with whom you work? (n=4413)

(question E4)

How well prepared was your site upon your arrival? (n=4399)

(question E5)

1

16

37

27

18

1

8

29

33

29

0 10 20 30 40

Not at all

Poorly

Adequately

Well

Very well

Percent

E6 IntegrationE7 Local language

Figure 24. How integrated into your community do you feel? (n=4414)

(questions E6) How well can you communicate in the language used by most local people? (n=4408)

(questions E7)



Amenities at Residence and Work Site The 2006 Volunteer survey asked respondents for the first time about a wider range of “amenities” at both their residence and work site. The survey’s expanded list of amenities included access to a mobile/cellphone. Most Volunteers responded that they “always” have access to a mobile/cellphone both at their residence (56 percent) and work site (47 percent). As shown in Tables 14 and 15, more Volunteers “always” have access to a cellphone than those who always have access to electricity (35 percent) at their residences and work sites.

Amenities at Residence Always Usually Sometimes Never

Electricity (n=4414) 35% 40% 6% 18%

Running water (n=4405) 27% 35% 12% 26%

Landline telephone (n=4397) 21% 9% 4% 66%

Short-wave radio (n=4386) 29% 7% 7% 57%

Mobile/cellphone (n=4407) 56% 15% 6% 23%

Computer for personal use (n=4397) 33% 8% 7% 52%

E-mail (n=4404) 11% 9% 7% 74%

Internet access (n=4391) 10% 9% 7% 74%

Table 14. How often do you have the following at your residence?

(question E9)

Highlighting indicates highest percent response in each category – blue for “Always” or “Usually” responses and yellow for “Never” responses.

Amenities at Work Site Always Usually Sometimes Never

Electricity (n=4351) 35% 38% 10% 17%

Running water (n=4340) 29% 29% 14% 28%

Landline telephone (n=4325) 38% 17% 9% 36%

Short-wave radio (n=4298) 13% 7% 7% 74%

Mobile/cellphone (n=4325) 47% 14% 8% 31%

Computer for personal use (n=4341) 29% 17% 20% 34%

E-mail (n=4340) 12% 13% 15% 60%

Internet access (n=4339) 12% 13% 15% 60%

Table 15. How often do you have the following at your work site?

(question E9)

Highlighting indicates highest percent response in each category – blue for “Always” or “Usually” responses and yellow for “Never” responses.

A majority of Volunteers never have access at home and work to either a short-wave radio or the Internet. Almost three-quarters (74 percent) of the respondents never have access to either e-mail or the Internet at their residences, and 60 percent never have access to either e-mail or Internet at their work sites.



More Volunteers have at least some access to a landline telephone at their work sites, with 55 percent “usually” or “always” having access to a landline telephone, compared to the two-thirds (66 percent) who never have access to a landline telephone at their residences. More will be discussed about Volunteers’ preferred methods of communication in the next section.

Communications More than half of the Volunteers (60 percent) rated the effectiveness of their communication resources for contacting in-country staff as “good” to “excellent” (Figure 25).

3

7

29

32

29

0 10 20 30 40

Very poor

Poor

Adequate

Good

Excellent

Percent

Figure 25. In general, how do you rate the effectiveness of your communication resources for contacting your in-country staff? (n=4311)

(question E11)

With most Volunteers “usually” or “always” having access to a mobile/cellphone, it is not surprising that Volunteers rank it as the most effective way to communicate with in-country staff (Figure 26). Of the 4,318 respondents who ranked their top three most effective ways to communicate, e-mail was ranked the second most effective way to communicate with Peace Corps in-country staff (44 percent). The third choice for communicating with in-country staff was “in-person visits.”

15

14

6

6

15

10

7

56

44

16

31

7

22

6

13

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Mobile/cellphone

E-mail

Telephone atresidence or work

In-person visits

Telephone at placeother than site

Percent

Most effectiveSecond most effective

Third most effective

Figure 26: From the list below, choose the three most effective ways that you communicate with Peace Corps in-country staff. Of these three choices, rank which one is the most effective by marking ”1,” which is the second most effective “2,” and which is the third most effective “3.” (n=4318)

(question E12)



Figure 27 shows that of the 3,603 respondents who rated their cellphone service, only 21 percent “usually” or “always” had trouble due to poor reception. Many more (63 percent) “sometimes” had reception trouble.

Always, 6%Never, 16%

Usually, 15%

Sometimes, 63%

Figure 27. If you have a cell or mobile phone, how often do you experience trouble using it due to poor reception? (n=3603)

(question E10)

Correspondence Match/Coverdell World Wise Schools Less than one-third (n=1,288) of 4,415 respondents said that they participate in the Coverdell World Wise Schools program, Correspondence Match. Most (87 percent) participants said that they would recommend the program to other Volunteers. Of the 170 respondents who participated in the program but would not recommend it to others, most (70 percent) said that they never or infrequently heard from the teacher. In response to the reasons listed in Table 16, the Peace Corps may consider ways to promote a timely response from teachers and to shorten the “match” time.

Reasons Percentage Never or infrequently heard from teacher 70%

Took too long to get a match 39%

Other 14%

Cost of mailing was a financial burden 13%

Not a very interesting project 8%

Correspondence took too much time away from other projects 2%

Table 16. Reasons Volunteers would not recommend Correspondence Match (n=170)

(question E14b)



Master’s International Program Less than 3 percent (n=116) of all respondents answered questions about fulfilling the Master’s International (MI) program requirements. As shown in Figure 28, most MI program participants (80 percent) feel that their Peace Corps assignments “adequately” to “exceptionally” fulfill their program requirements. Fewer MI participants (64 percent) rated the Peace Corps’ staff support as adequate or better at helping them fulfill their MI requirements. This suggests that better communication may be needed to ensure that both the MI program participants and post staff share the same expectations about the post support for the MI program participants.

17

19

33

23

820

7

14

30

30

0 10 20 30 40

Not at all

Minimally

Adequately

Considerably

Exceptionally

Percent

G15a Activities

G15b PostFigure 28. Do your Peace Corps primary and secondary assignments fulfill your Master’s International requirements? (n=115)

(question G15a)

Does the Peace Corps staff at post provide support to help you fulfill your Master’s International requirements? (n=116)

(question G15b)



VIII. Volunteer Safety and Security Volunteers were asked about their perceptions of safety in their living, working, and traveling situations. They were also asked about the frequency with which they experienced various types of harassments and possible crimes. The following figures and tables provide the frequency of their responses to each question. Most Volunteer respondents (88 percent) feel that they have been “adequately” to “very well” informed about in-country events that might affect their safety (Figure 29). There was no significant difference between Volunteers who have served for one year or less and those who have served longer than one year regarding their perceptions of how well informed they are about possible safety issues.

1

11

36

34

17

0 10 20 30 40 50

Not at all informed

Poorly informed

Adequately informed

Well informed

Very well informed

Percent

Figure 29. How informed do you feel about events in your host country that might affect your safety? (n=4354)

(question F1)

Threats to Volunteer Safety Most Volunteers feel “usually” to “very” safe where they live and work. Table 17 shows that most Volunteers felt “usually” to “very” safe where they lived (88 percent) and worked (92 percent). As indicated by yellow shading, fewer Volunteers reported feeling “usually” to “very” safe when traveling in their host country (59 percent) and in the city (53 percent) where the main Peace Corps office was located.



How safe do you feel?

Situation Very Safe

Usually Safe

Adequately Safe

Often Unsafe

Not At All Safe

Where you live (n=4401) 59% 29% 10% 2% <1%

Where you work (n=4389) 69% 23% 7% 1% <1%

When you travel in-country (n=4397) 17% 42% 31% 9% 1%

City of main PC office (n=4396) 17% 36% 34% 11% 1%

Table 17. How safe do you feel in the following situations?

(question F2)

Yellow highlighting indicates the highest percentages of Volunteers reporting feeling unsafe.

Table 18 focuses on Volunteers’ experiences with various safety threats while traveling. Volunteers reported that they frequently (combination of “often” and “always”) experienced a threat to their safety in these situations: • Transportation conditions, such as vehicles, drivers, and roads (39 percent) • Harassment by strangers (27 percent) • Police stops (6 percent) Has your safety been threatened when traveling?

Situation

Never Occa-

sionally Often Usually Always Transportation conditions (n=4390) 16% 45% 18% 12% 9%

Police stops (n=4334) 69% 25% 4% 1% 1%

Theft (no contact with thief)

(n=4350) 60% 36% 3% 1% <1%

Robbery (assault or threat of assault)

(n=4331) 90% 9% 1% <1% <1%

Lodging conditions (n=4316) 72% 24% 2% 1% <1%

Harassment by strangers (n=4388) 27% 46% 13% 7% 7%

Harassment by persons you know (n=4363) 89% 9% 1% 1% <1%

Table 18. When traveling in your host country has your safety ever been threatened by any of the following?

(question F3) Yellow highlighting indicates the highest percentages of Volunteers reporting feeling unsafe.



The survey defined “harassment” as any persistent unwelcome behavior from others that may affect the Volunteer’s safety and security as determined by the Volunteer, with no detailed definitions of specific types of harassment. As reported in Table 19, more than half of the respondents had not experienced any type of harassment or other minor incidents during the past year in their host country.

Frequency

Situation

Never Yearly

Every Few

Months Monthly Weekly Daily

Petty theft (under $25, no contact with thief)

(n=4396) 68% 23% 8% 1% <1% <1%

Motorized vehicle injury (n=4392) 96% 3% <1% <1% <1% <1%

Anti-American harassment* (n=4387) 58% 16% 17% 5% 3% 1%

Racial harassment* (n=4387) 68% 5% 8% 5% 7% 7%

Religious harassment* (n=4393) 85% 4% 6% 3% 2% 1%

Sexual harassment* (n=4398) 54% 6% 12% 8% 12% 9%

* Harassment is defined in the survey as “any persistent unwelcome behavior from others that you believe may affect your safety and security” as determined by the targeted person. Specific types of harassment (e.g., anti-American, racial, sexual, etc.) were subject to the respondent’s interpretation.

Table 19. In the last year, how often have you personally experienced any of the following in your host country?

(question F4)

Generally, harassment is something that Volunteers experience infrequently. The exceptions are some Volunteers’ more frequent (daily, weekly or monthly) experiences with racial harassment (19 percent) and sexual harassment (28 percent). Asked whether the sexual harassment was primarily physical or verbal, almost all (94 percent) of the 1,967 respondents reported that the sexual harassment they had experienced at least once during the past 12 months was verbal (question F5):

• Verbal:……………………………………..94 percent • Physical:…………………………………….6 percent

Sexual harassment is experienced at a much higher rate by women, as shown by the yellow shading in Table 20.



Frequency

Gender

Never Yearly Every Few

Months Monthly Weekly Daily

Male (n=1764) 88% 2% 4% 2% 2% 1%

Female (n=2568) 30% 9% 17% 11% 18% 15%

Table 20. Frequency of Sexual Harassment by Gender

(question F4) Yellow highlighting indicates higher percentages of sexual harassment.

Crimes Against Volunteers The 2006 Peace Corps Volunteer survey included additional categories of serious crimes against Volunteers, in order to be consistent with the revised definitions used in the Peace Corps Crime Incident Reporting Form (CIRF). In addition to the previous surveys’ categories of serious theft, simple physical assault, aggravated assault, sexual assault (other than rape) and rape, the 2006 survey differentiated between serious theft that occurs without any contact with the thief and robbery that occurs when a Volunteer is confronted by the robber(s). In keeping with the Peace Corps crime reporting definitions, the survey asked Volunteers about two types of robbery: (1) robbery involving theft with threat of assault but no injury to the Volunteer; and (2) robbery involving theft and assault with injury to the Volunteer/victim. The survey asked each Volunteer if he or she experienced any of these crimes in the Volunteer’s host country in the past year, how many times the Volunteer had been a victim of that crime, whether the Volunteer reported it the first, second, third or more times, the reasons for not reporting the crime, and who the Volunteer believed was responsible for the crime. Almost two-thirds (62 percent) of the 4,403 respondents to question F6 answered that in the past year they had no experience with serious crime in their host country. The figure and tables that follow provide details about the other 38 percent of the Volunteers who experienced some type(s) of crime. Although some Volunteers reported being the victim of more than one type of crime, most (76 percent) experienced only one type of crime. As shown in Figure 30, the most frequent crime against Volunteer respondents was serious theft (defined as the theft of an item(s) valued at $25 or more without any contact with the thief). After the 25 percent who experienced serious theft, 8 percent of the respondents were victims of simple assault, followed by 7 percent who were victims of sexual assault (other than rape). Only 1 percent of respondents reported that they had been the victim of either aggravated assault or robbery (with injury). Less than one-half of one percent reported the crime of rape.



25

8

7

6

1

1

<1

0 10 20 30 40

Serious theft

Simple assault

Sexual assault

Robbery & no injury

Aggravated assault

Robbery & injury

Rape

Percent

Figure 30. Percentage of Volunteers who have personally experienced any of the following crimes in the last year? (n=4405)

(question F6)

Seventy-five percent or more of Volunteer respondents reported that, during the past year in their host country, they did not experience any of the serious crimes listed in Table 21. Of those who experienced serious crime, most were a victim of that crime only once. Serious theft was the one exception in which more than 1 percent of Volunteers experienced multiple thefts: 5 percent of all respondents reported two serious thefts and 2 percent of all respondents reported three serious thefts.

Crime Did Not

Experience 1 time 2 times 3 times 4+ times

Serious theft (no contact with thief) (n=4405) 75% 18% 5% 2% 1%

Robbery (personal contact, no injury) (n=4398) 94% 5% <1% <1% <1%

Robbery (personal contact and injury) (n=4396) 99% 1% <1% --- ---

Simple assault (no weapon/injury) (n=4389) 92% 6% 1% <1% <1%

Aggravated assault (weapon/serious injury)

(n=4393) 99% 1% <1% <1% <1%

Sexual assault (other than rape) (n=4389) 93% 4% 1% <1% 1%

Rape (n=4388) <100% <1% --- <1% <1%

Table 21. In the past 12 months, have you personally experienced any of the following in your host country? If so, how many times?

(question F6)

Percents for each type of crime may not total to 100 due to rounding to the nearest whole number.

Calculation of the Percentages for Figure 31 and Tables 22–25: For the following four tables, the percentages within each column total more than 100 because they represent responses to “mark all that apply” questions. The percentage is calculated from the number of Volunteers who picked that response divided by the number of respondents who answered the question. For example, if four respondents out of 10 Volunteers who answered the question choose one type of response, the percentage for that response will be 40 (4 divided by 10). If the same four respondents also select a second response (following the question’s instructions to “mark as many as apply”) and three more of the 10 Volunteers answering that question also select that response, the percent for this second item will be 70 (7 divided



by 10). In this example, even with only two possible responses, the sum of the two percents (40 + 70 = 110) will be more than 100. As shown in Figure 31, most of the crime-specific responses indicated that first experiences with most crimes were reported, except for victims of simple assault and sexual assault. More than half of the simple assault and sexual assault responses indicated that victims never reported their experience(s) with that crime. Table 22 provides more detailed information on Volunteers’ responses about how often they reported these crimes.

54

51

47

29

31

24

13

39

44

53

65

67

71

79

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Sexual assault

Simple assault

Rape

Serious theft

Robbery & no injury

Robbery & injury

Aggravated assault

PercentReported 1st timeNever reported

Figure 31. Percentage of responses to “Reported First Time” and “Never Reported” items of Volunteers who experienced any of the following crimes in the last year. (See Table 24 for number of responses)

(question F6)

Crime Reported 1st time

Reported 2nd time

Reported 3rd time

Reported 4th + time

Never Reported

Serious theft (no contact with thief) (n=1082) 65% 11% 3% 1% 29%

Robbery (personal contact, no injury) (n=261) 67% 6% 2% <1% 31%

Robbery (personal contact and injury) (n=41) 71% 5% 0% 0% 24%

Simple assault (no weapon/injury) (n=331) 44% 6% 2% 2% 51%

Aggravated assault (weapon/serious injury)

(n=62) 79% 5% 2% 2% 13%

Sexual assault (other than rape) (n=308) 39% 7% 2% 3% 54%

Rape (n=15) 53% --- --- --- 47%

Table 22. If you experienced any of the following, please indicate whether you reported the crime each time.

(question F6) Percentages within each row may not add up to 100 because respondents may select all that apply. Yellow highlighting indicates highest percentage of responses for each type of crime.



When Volunteer respondents were asked to whom they reported the crime, more than half indicated that they reported the crime(s) to the safety and security staff (Table 23). The one exception was rape victims who primarily reported the crime to their Peace Corps medical officer (PCMO) and, to a lesser extent, to their country director and safety and security staff. It is important to note that many Volunteer victims indicated that they reported their crime experience(s) to more than one type of authority.

Crime

PC Medical Officer (PCMO)

Country Director

Safety and

Security Staff

Other PC

Staff Local

Authorities Other

Serious theft (no contact with thief) (n=778) 13% 20% 76% 40% 42% 12%

Robbery (personal contact, no injury) (n=179) 25% 32% 84% 40% 41% 8%

Robbery (personal contact and injury) (n=31) 45% 26% 77% 55% 32% 13%

Simple assault (no weapon/injury) (n=159) 31% 20% 69% 37% 22% 14%

Aggravated assault (weapon/ serious injury)

(n=47) 45% 49% 81% 53% 45% 11%

Sexual assault (other than rape) (n=137) 34% 17% 54% 33% 12% 24%

Rape (n=8) 75% 50% 38% 13% 38% 25%

Table 23. If you reported the crime, please indicate to whom you reported the crime.

(question F7) Percentages within each row may not add up to 100 because respondents may select all that apply (see text for a detailed explanation). Yellow highlighting indicates highest percentage of responses for each type of crime.

Table 24 shows that in most instances crimes against Volunteers were committed by strangers, except in the case of rape. Friends/social acquaintances and strangers were primarily responsible for committing the rapes. More than one-quarter of the sexual assault responses indicated that a friend or social acquaintance was the perpetrator.



Crime Stranger

Friend or Social

Acquain-tance

PC Staff

Other PCVs

Host Country Family

Host Country Counter

-part Other

Serious theft (no contact with thief)

(n=1020) 75% 14% 1% 2% 8% 2% 8%

Robbery (personal contact, no injury)

(n=233) 89% 6% 1% 3% 1% 2% 0%

Robbery (personal contact and injury)

(n=32) 88% 6% --- --- --- --- 6%

Simple assault (no weapon/ injury)

(n=306) 88% 7% <1% 1% 2% 1% 6%


(n=55) 85% 5% 2% --- 2% --- 7%

Sexual assault (other than rape)

(n=288) 67% 26% 1% 1% 4% 6% 9%

Rape (n=15) 40% 53% --- --- 13% --- 13%

Table 24. If you experienced any of these crimes, please indicate who was responsible:


Table 25 presents the reasons Volunteers chose to describe why they did not report one or more experiences with each type of crime. The 2006 PCV survey included two new reasons for not reporting: “concerned reporting would result in disciplinary action against myself” and “concerned it might hurt my relationship with the community” (paraphrased in the table below). As shown by the highest percentages of responses (highlighted in yellow), the reason given most frequently for not reporting serious theft, robbery (no injury), simple assault, and sexual assault (other than rape) was that these crimes were “too minor or common to report.” Although other reasons were most frequently given for the other crimes, it is important to note that very few respondents provided reasons for not reporting the crimes of robbery (with injury) (n=9), aggravated assault (n=11) and rape (n=9).



Crime

Did not think

the PC could help

Might result in

changing sites

Too minor or common to report

Potential for breach

of confiden-

tiality

Possible disciplinary

action against me

Might hurt my

relationship with the

community

Serious theft (no contact with thief)

(n=451) 53% 4% 62% 2% 5% 12%

Robbery (personal contact, no injury)

(n=90) 38% 12% 58% 8% 12% 4%

Robbery (personal contact and injury)

(n=9) 44% --- 11% 22% 56% ---

Simple assault (no weapon/injury)

(n=184) 38% 5% 68% 5% 7% 10%


(n=11) 55% 18% 36% --- 9% 18%

Sexual assault (other than rape)

(n=199) 40% 9% 68% 8% 7% 14%

Rape (n=9) 11% 22% 33% 44% 22% 33%

Table 25. If you did not report the crime, answer why not for each type of crime you experienced.




IX. Peace Corps Staff Support Volunteers were asked about the support they receive from Peace Corps staff and host country staff at post. Support also includes support received from other Volunteers, measured through proximity to other Volunteers and frequency of visits. Volunteers also provided feedback on the visits they received from their country director, program staff members, Peace Corps medical officers (PCMOs), and safety and security staff. Figure 32 shows that most Volunteers are very satisfied with their in-country healthcare, with 72 percent answering that they are “considerably” or “exceptionally” satisfied.

1

6

20

32

40

0 10 20 30 40 50

Not at all

Minimally

Adequately

Considerably

Exceptionally

Percent

Figure 32. How satisfied are you with the healthcare that you receive in-country? (n=4351)

(question G1)

Family or Personal Emergency Figure 33 presents the responses of Volunteers who were asked about the support and assistance they either have received or might expect from the Peace Corps in the event of a personal emergency. More than half (61 percent) of the 791 respondents who had experienced an emergency reported that they had received “considerable” to “exceptional” Peace Corps support. The expectations of Volunteers who had not yet experienced an emergency were even higher—69 percent expected better than “moderate” support).



1

6

25

47

22

8

15

16

30

31

0 10 20 30 40 50

Not at all

Minimal

Moderate

Considerable

Exceptional

Percent

G2a Receivedsupport

G2b Expectedsupport

Figure 33. If you experienced a family or personal emergency since you started as a PCV, how much support and assistance did you receive from the PC? (n=791) (question G2a) If you have not experienced a family or personal emergency, how much support and assistance do you think you would receive from the PC? (n=3461) (question G2b)

Proximity of Volunteers to Peace Corps Support Volunteers were also asked to provide feedback on their proximity to other Peace Corps Volunteers and the Peace Corps offices. Figure 34 shows that a majority of Volunteers (61 percent) prefer to live near other Volunteers. More Volunteers expressed “no preference” than the 12 percent who said they preferred not to live near other PCVs.

Yes: 61% No

Preference: 28%

No: 12%

Figure 34. Do you prefer to have other PCVs living near you? (n=4390)

(question G4)

Figure percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number and do not total 100 due to rounding.

Most Volunteers (75 percent) see other PCVs on a weekly-to-monthly basis (Table 26), and more than half (56 percent) reported that the Volunteer nearest to them was within 20 kilometers (see Figure 35 below).



Responses Percent Table 26.

Daily 5%

Several times a week 9%

Weekly 24%

Every two weeks 27%

Monthly 24%

How often do you see other Volunteers (not including your spouse or site mates)?

(question G3)

Less than once a month 11%

23

15

18

15

29

0 10 20 30 40 50

0–5 km

6–10 km

11–20 km

21–30 km

Over 30 km

Percent

Figure 35. How far is the closest PCV to you, other than your spouse or site mates? (n=4389)

(question G5)

Most respondents (82 percent) can reach the nearest other Peace Corps Volunteer in less than two hours (Table 27). More than half of the respondents can also reach both the main Peace Corps office and a Peace Corps-approved healthcare provider within six hours by their usual means of transportation. Of those PCVs with a secondary Peace Corps office in-country (excluding the 76 percent who reported no secondary PC office in-country), most (70 percent) can reach their secondary Peace Corps office within six hours.



Less than 2

Hrs 2–6 Hrs

7–10 Hrs

11–18 Hrs

19–24 Hrs

25 or More Hours N/A

Nearest Volunteer(s)? (n=4394) 82% 16% 1% <1% <1% <1% <1%

Main PC office in-country? (n=4385) 15% 41% 20% 14% 4% 6% 0%

Secondary PC office in-country?

(n=4273) 7% 10% 4% 2% 1% 1% 76%

PC-approved healthcare provider?

(n=4362) 43% 37% 8% 5% 1% 1% 4%

Table 27. How many hours does it take you, by your usual means of travel, to reach--

(question G6) Blue highlighting indicates the two highest percentages of responses for each destination.

Support Received from Peace Corps Staff Most Volunteers are very satisfied (“considerably” or “completely”) with in-country Peace Corps staff support, especially in terms of medical staff and safety and security staff (Figure 36). Volunteers were less enthusiastic about the in-country technical and project feedback support, with only 35 percent of the Volunteers responding that they were very satisfied with the in-country support in these two areas.

70

63

49

47

45

42

42

35

35

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Medical

Safety & security

Administrative

Site selection

Job assignment

Emotional

Language learning

Technical support

Project feedback

Percent Responding "Considerably" or "Completely"

Figure 36. Since swearing-in, how satisfied are you with the following support provided by the Peace Corps staff in your host country? (n=4202)

(question G7)

A substantial number of respondents (26 percent to 40 percent) reported “considerable” to “tremendous” support from their host country supervisors, sponsors, or counterparts across the six topics listed in Figure 37. Fewer respondents (11 percent to 18 percent) said that they received no support from host country supervisors, sponsors, or counterparts.



40

39

34

29

29

26

0 10 20 30 40 50

Language help

Safety & security

Logistical help

Project feedback

Emotional support

Technical assistance

Percent Responding "Considerable" or "Tremendous"

Figure 37. How much support do you receive from host country supervisors, sponsors, or counterparts in the following areas? (n=4237)

(question G8)

Emotional Stressors Volunteers’ responses to the question: “To what extent are the following problematic to you in creating stress/emotional health issues?” are presented in Figure 38, with the least problematic emotional stressor at the top of figure. As shown in Figure 37, Volunteers reported that issues of safety and security and their relationships with other Peace Corps Volunteers as well as with Peace Corps staff were not problematic/stress-inducing for most respondents. The topic which almost one-quarter of Volunteer respondents (24 percent) rated as “considerably” to “exceptionally” problematic was their “primary assignment.” Other aspects of their service that were noted as more problematic were “cultural issues” (18 percent) and “relationships with host country nationals” (15 percent).



When question G9 responses were further analyzed by length of service (i.e., comparing Volunteers with more than one year of service to those with one year or less), only a few non-statistically significant differences between these two groups emerged. As shown by the stress ratings highlighted in yellow in Table 28, Volunteers in service more than one year rated “relationships with Peace Corps staff” and “safety and security” as slightly more stressful (average rating = 1.9). Volunteers at post one year or less rated “isolation/loneliness” slightly higher (2.4) than Volunteers with longer service (2.3).

Figure 38. To what extent are the following problematic to you in creating stress/emotional health issues? (n=4371)

(question G9)

Less stressful (in green) = Not at all + Minimally (Problematic) More stressful (In yellow) = Considerably + Exceptionally (Problematic)

82

82

80

72

71

61

57

51

46

13

12

12

19

18

23

28

31

30

5

6

8

9

11

16

15

18

24

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Safety and security

Relationships with PCVs

Relationships with PC staff

Health problems

Home (U.S.) issues

Isolation/loneliness

Relationships with HCNs

Cultural issues

Primary assignment

Less Stressful Moderately Stressful More Stressful




Stressors Overall

Rating One year or

less More than one year

Primary assignment (n=4368) 2.7 2.7 2.7

Cultural issues (n=4366) 2.6 2.6 2.6

Relationships with HCNs (n=4375) 2.4 2.4 2.4

Isolation/loneliness (n=4374) 2.4 2.4 2.3

Home (U.S.) issues (n=4372) 2.1 2.1 2.1

Health problems (n=4369) 2.1 2.1 2.1

Relationships with PC staff (n=4370) 1.9 1.8 1.9

Safety and security (n=4372) 1.8 1.8 1.9

Relationships with PCVs (n=4377) 1.8 1.8 1.8

Table 28. To what extent are the following problematic to you in creating stress/ emotional health issues?

(question G9) (Rating scale: 1=Not at all 2= Minimally 3=Moderately 4=Considerably 5=Exceptionally) Note: Higher scores indicate more stressful issues and where there are differences, the higher stress rating is highlighted in yellow.

Visits from In-Country Peace Corps Staff A majority of Volunteers (60 percent) have been visited at least twice by a program staff Member (Figure 39). Forty-three percent reported receiving one or more visits from the safety and security (S&S) coordinator, and about one-third have received at least one visit from both the country director (CD) and the Peace Corps medical officer (PCMO).

58

8

50

32

32

34

29

60

16

14

57

11

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Country director

Program staff

PC medicalofficer

S&S coordinator

Percent

No Visits

1 Visit

2+ Visits

Figure 39. How many times have the following Peace Corps staff visited you since you were sworn in? (n=4388)

(question G10)

Survey respondents indicated that program staff members visited Volunteers most frequently, as shown in Table 29, regardless of the length of service. Of those who have served more than one year, only 4



percent had not been visited by a program staff member. Volunteers in service more than a year were more likely to have been visited by their CD, PCMO, and safety and security coordinator than Volunteers in service one year or less. More than half (55 percent) of these longer-serving Volunteers also received one or more visits from the PCMO.

Number of Visits

Peace Corps Staff Service 0 1 2 3 4 5 5+

(n=1911) < 1 year 67% 27% 4% 1% 0% 0% 1% Country director

(n=2389) > 1 year 51% 35% 10% 3% 1% 0% 1%

(n=1990) < 1 year 12% 48% 27% 8% 2% 1% 2% Program staff member

(n=2389) > 1 year 4% 19% 32% 21% 11% 5% 8%

(n=1989) < 1 year 57% 34% 6% 1% 0% 0% 1% Peace Corps medical officer (PCMO) (n=2387) > 1 year 45% 34% 14% 4% 1% 0% 2%

(n=1990) < 1 year 62% 28% 7% 2% 0% 0% 1% Safety and security coordinator (n=2388) > 1 year 53% 30% 11% 4% 1% 0% 1%

Table 29. How many times have the Peace Corps Staff visited you since you were sworn in?

(question G10) Yellow highlighting indicates the highest two percentages of responses.

The majority of Volunteer respondents rated visits from their country directors, program staff member(s), PCMOs and safety and security coordinators as “adequate” as shown by the yellow highlighting in Table 30. This table lists the percentages of Volunteers who rated Peace Corps visits as “more than adequate,” “adequate” or “less than adequate” in the following four areas:

• Frequency of visits

• Informative content

• Your comfort level discussing issues

• Responsiveness to your issues

Most Volunteers rated the “frequency of visits” as adequate or better, even though they do not receive many visits from the country director, PCMO, or safety and security coordinator as shown in Figure 38. As well, at least one-third or more of the respondents rated both their “comfort level discussing issues” and the Peace Corps staff’s “responsiveness to your (Volunteer’s) issues” as “more than adequate.” Almost half of those visited by their PCMO rated both their “comfort level discussing issues” and the PCMO’s “responsiveness to your issues” as “more than adequate” (47 percent and 45 percent, respectively).



More than adequate Adequate Inadequate

From the Country Director (question G11)

Frequency of visits (n=1880) 15% 73% 12%

Informative content (n=1866) 17% 63% 20%

Your comfort level discussing issues (n=1869) 37% 47% 16%

Responsiveness to your issues (n=1861) 34% 51% 15%

From the Program Staff Member (question G12)





From the Peace Corps Medical Officer (PCMO) (question G13)





From the Safety and Security Coordinator (question G14)





Table 30. How would you rate the visits from the following Peace Corps staff with respect to the following?

(questions G11– G14)

Blue highlighting indicates the rating (Adequate) that most Volunteers selected for each topic.



X. Volunteers Working in HIV/AIDS When asked to select what best describes their involvement in HIV/AIDS activities, more than half (2,104 of 3,850) of all respondents reported that they are involved in HIV/AIDS-related activities as part of their Peace Corps service (Figure 40). This represents a substantial increase of Volunteers involved in HIV/AIDS activities compared to the prior survey responses, reflecting the increased efforts by the Peace Corps to respond to the AIDS pandemic. This section reports on Volunteers’ responses about their preparation for this work, useful resources, their sources for information and advice, collaborative organizations, help needed to further their work, and self-perceived effectiveness of their HIV/AIDS activities.

45

21

22

12

0 10 20 30 40 50

No HIV/AIDS efforts

Other HIV/AIDSefforts

Part of secondaryactivities

Part of primaryassignment

Percent

Figure 40. Which best describes your involvement in HIV/AIDS activities? • HIV/AIDS work is my primary

assignment. • HIV/AIDS work is part of my

secondary activities. • I have been involved in

HIV/AIDS efforts but not as part of my primary or secondary activities.

• I have not been involved in any HIV/AIDS-related activities.

(n=3850) (question I1)

Figure 41 shows the percentages of Volunteers within each sector by their level of involvement in HIV/AIDS activities. The responses of Volunteers for whom HIV/AIDS work was part of either their primary assignment or secondary activities are grouped together. The highest percentages of Volunteers involved in HIV/AIDS activities as part of either primary or secondary work are in the sectors of health (70 percent) and youth (43 percent). There are also substantial numbers of Volunteers in the other sectors of education (25 percent), business (21 percent), agriculture (19 percent), and environment (17 percent) who are involved in HIV/AIDS activities as part of their primary assignment or secondary work. In addition, about one-quarter (22 percent to 29 percent) of Volunteers in all sectors other than health are involved in HIV/AIDS activities, but not as part of their primary assignment or secondary work.



17

19

21

25

43

70

29

23

22

24

23

12

54

58

57

51

34

17

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Environment

Agriculture

Business

Education

Youth

Health

HIV/AIDS part of primary assigment/secondary activitiesInvolved but not primary or secondary activityNot involved in HIV/AIDS activities

Figure 41. Comparison by sector: Which best describes your involvement in HIV/AIDS activities? Choices of “part of my primary assignment,” and “part of my secondary activities,” are grouped together in this figure. (n=3850)

(question I1)

Table 31 shows that one-third or more of the Volunteers in every primary assignment are involved in HIV/AIDS-related work. In addition to HIV/AIDS Volunteers (100 percent) and health Volunteers (85 percent), other primary assignments with high percentages of HIV/AIDS-involved Volunteers include math/science teaching (72 percent), youth development (66 percent), teacher training (62 percent), agroforestry (53 percent), and water sanitation (50 percent).

Primary Assignment Percent of Volunteers Involved in

any HIV/AIDS-related Activities HIV/AIDS 100

Health 85

Math/science teaching 72

Youth development 66

Teacher training 62

Agroforestry 53

Water sanitation 50

Other teaching 47

Environmental education 47

NGO development 46

Community development 44

English teaching 42

Forestry 41

Business education/advising 40

Table 31. Comparison by primary assignment: Percent of Volunteers Involved in any HIV/AIDS efforts (n=3839)

(question I1)

Agriculture/fish/livestock 35

More than two-thirds (69 percent) of the respondents reported that their Peace Corps training had prepared them (“moderately” to “substantially”) for their HIV/AIDS work (Figure 42).



7

24

34

26

10

0 10 20 30 40 50

Not at all

Minimally

Moderately

Considerably

Substantially

Percent

Figure 42. How well has Peace Corps training prepared you to undertake your HIV/AIDS activities? (n=2071)

(question I2)

The next four figures summarize the results of questions in which respondents were encouraged to select all appropriate choices (“mark as many as apply”). The percentage reported for each possible choice is calculated from the number of Volunteers who chose that response divided by the number of respondents who answered the question. For example, if all four Volunteers who answered a “mark as many as apply” question picked the first choice, the percentage reported for that choice would be 100. If the next choice was selected by only two of the four respondents answering the question, that second choice would have a calculated percent of 50. Adding up the percentages for all responses for one of these questions will almost always total more than 100. When asked what resources are useful in HIV/AIDS work (Figure 43), Volunteers most frequently (67 percent) identified the Peace Corps Life Skills Manual. HIV/AIDS funding such as the President’s Emergency Fund for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) was also selected by one-quarter of respondents. This corresponds with survey results reported earlier (Section VI under “Project Resources”), which showed that while most Volunteers had not used HIV/AIDS funding, those who had rated it as a “moderately” to “very” effective resource.

9

10

19

25

37

67

25

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Other int'l organizaton materials

Other (miscellaneous)

United Nations AIDS materials

HIV/AIDS funding (PEPFAR)

PC HIV/AIDS Idea Book

Local ministry or NGO materials

PC Life Skills Manual

Percent

Figure 43. What resources have you found useful in your work on HIV/AIDS? (Please mark all that apply) (n=1767)

(question I3)



Seventy-eight percent of respondents reported that they go to fellow Peace Corps Volunteers for more information or advice to do a better job on HIV/AIDS in their community (Figure 44). Other frequently mentioned resource individuals are local experts of other organizations (35 percent), the associate Peace Corps director (APCD) (32 percent), and local counterparts (26 percent). Only 12 percent of respondents identified the Peace Corps medical officer (PCMO) as someone they went to for more information or advice to help them in their HIV/AIDS work.

2

2

7

12

26

32

35

78

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

CD

No resource person available

Other

PCMO

Local counterpart

APCD

Local expert of other organization

Fellow PCV

Percent

Figure 44. To whom do you go when you need more information or advice in order to do a better job on HIV/AIDS in your community? (Please mark all that apply) (n=2024)

(question I4)

As shown in Figure 45, most respondents confirmed that they closely collaborate with both PCVs from another sector(s) (58 percent) and local non-government or community-based organizations (56 percent). About one-fifth (21 percent) of Volunteer respondents also closely collaborate with government ministries in their HIV/AIDS work.

4

4

7

7

21

56

58

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

UN organization

Other int'l volunteer organization

Faith-based organizations

Int'l organization working locally

Government ministry

Local non-gov/community orgs

PCV(s) from another sector(s)

Percent

Figure 45. With whom do you closely collaborate on your HIV/AIDS work? (Please mark all that apply) (n=1821)

(question I5)

When asked what would be helpful to them in their HIV/AIDS work (Figure 46), respondents were enthusiastic about many of the possible choices. “Training tools for use in the community,” “references with HIV/AIDS information,” and “visits from technical experts” were among the most frequently selected responses. Of the seven possible choices, the least frequently selected choice (20 percent) was “emotional support and listening to my feelings about HIV/AIDS.”



20

37

48

51

52

53

64

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Emotional support/listening to my feelings

Workshops on technical issues

Workshops advising on difficult issues

Workshops on training skills

Visits from technical experts

Reference with HIV/AIDS information

Training tools to use in the community

Percent

Figure 46. What would be helpful to you now in your HIV/AIDS work? (Please mark all that apply) (n=1937)

(question I6)

As reported in Figure 47, Volunteers involved in HIV/AIDS efforts were also asked about the effectiveness of their specific HIV/AIDS activities in working with host country individuals or groups. Although similar to a question in the 2004 Volunteer survey (i.e., “How would you rate your effectiveness in your work on HIV/AIDS?”), the question in the 2006 survey was revised to focus on Volunteers’ perceived effectiveness of their HIV/AIDS efforts in their work with host country individuals/groups. With respondents split between more positive ratings of “almost always effective” and “often effective” (39 percent) and the less positive ratings of “sometimes effective” and “seldom effective” (40 percent), there were still 22 percent who answered that they “don’t know” how to rate the effectiveness of their HIV/AIDS activities with host country individuals/groups.

22

5

35

31

8

0 10 20 30 40 50

Don't know

Seldom effective

Sometimeseffective

Often effective

Almost alwayseffective

Percent

Figure 47. In working with host country individuals or groups, how would you rate the effectiveness of your specific HIV/AIDS activities? (n=1991)

(question I7)



Another way of looking at Volunteer respondents’ perceptions of the effectiveness of their HIV/AIDS work is by comparing the responses of Volunteers at three different levels of HIV/AIDS involvement (Volunteers for whom the work is part of their primary assignment, those involved in HIV/AIDS work as part of secondary activities, and Volunteers who reported HIV/AIDS efforts that are not part of primary or secondary work). The comparison in Figure 48 also reflects simplified effectiveness ratings of “more effective” and “less effective” along with the “don’t know” responses for each of the three levels of HIV/AIDS involvement. As shown below, more than half of Volunteers with a primary assignment involving HIV/AIDS work rated their work as “more effective” and a small minority (10 percent) answered “don’t know.” Less than half (44 percent) of Volunteers with secondary activities involving HIV/AIDS rated their work as “more effective,” and almost 20 percent answered “don’t know.” Of the Volunteers involved in other (non-primary, non-secondary) HIV/AIDS efforts, only 26 percent answered that their activities were “more effective” and 30 percent said didn’t know how to rate the effectiveness of their efforts. From this comparison, it appears that the more directly involved Volunteers are in HIV/AIDS activities, the less uncertain they are about the effectiveness of their efforts and the more certain they are that their work is having a positive impact.

44

26

39

37

44

10

19

30

51

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

HIV primaryassignment

HIV secondaryactivities

Other HIV efforts

Percent

More effective

Less effective

Don't know

Figure 48. Perceived effectiveness of HIV/AIDS work for Volunteers who are involved either as part of their primary assignment, their secondary activities or as other efforts (not primary or secondary work). (n=1991) (More effective= Often +

Almost always; Less effective= Sometimes +

Seldom)

(question I7)



XI. Overall Satisfaction The information reported in this section confirms Volunteers’ high levels of satisfaction and commitment with their Peace Corps service. In summary:

• 92 percent of the 4,386 respondents stated that they intend to complete their service. This includes Volunteers who answered that they intend to complete their Peace Corps service (78 percent) and those who might extend their service (14 percent). (Question H1)

• 80 percent of 4,351 respondents reported that their host country would benefit most if the Peace

Corps program were either maintained at the current level (47 percent) or expanded (33 percent). (Question H5)

• 74 percent of respondents feel their Peace Corps service is “considerably” (40 percent) to

“exceptionally” (34 percent) rewarding personally. (Question H4) • 85 percent would “probably” (25 percent) or “definitely” (60 percent) make the same decision to

join the Peace Corps again today. (Question H2)

• 84 percent responded that they would “probably” (23 percent) or “definitely” (61 percent) recommend Peace Corps service to others they thought were qualified. (Question H3)

• 95 percent of 4,153 respondents reported that they have been personally successful, either

“moderately” (24 percent), “considerably” (47 percent) or “exceptionally” (24 percent), with the Peace Corps’ second goal of helping people from other cultures better understand Americans. (Question H6)

Volunteers’ perceptions of their Peace Corps service and overall experience tend to change the longer they serve; therefore, the following questions are disaggregated by time in service. Each figure below compares the responses of Volunteers who have served more than one year (>1 year) to Volunteers in service one year or less (≤ 1 year). As expected, the longer-serving Volunteers provide more positive endorsements of their Peace Corps service. The most notable differences between the two groups follow.

• More Volunteers (79 percent) in service more than a year said their Peace Corps service was “considerably” or “exceptionally” personally rewarding than Volunteers (69 percent) serving one year or less (Figure 50).

• More Volunteers (76 percent) in service more than a year said they have “considerably” or

“exceptionally” helped host country nationals gain a better understanding of the United States and its people than Volunteers (66 percent) serving one year or less.



2

10

12

77

2

4

16

79

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

No

Not sure

Might extend

Yes

Percent

> 1 year (n=2393)

≤ 1 year (n=1983)

Figure 49. Do you intend to complete your Peace Corps service?

(question H1)

5

14

47

34

5

16

47

32

0 10 20 30 40 50

Discontinued

Reduced

Maintained atcurrent level

Expanded

Percent

> 1 year (n=2372)≤ 1 year (n=1969)

Figure 50. Would your host country benefit the most if the Peace Corps were…?

(question H5)

1

8

23

41

28

4

17

39

40

<1

0 10 20 30 40 50

Not at all

Minimally

Moderately

Considerably

Exceptionally

Percent

> 1 year (n=2389)≤ 1 year (n=1982)

Figure 51. How personally rewarding do you find your overall Peace Corps service?

(question H4)



1

4

11

28

57

1

4

9

22

63

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

No

Not likely

Possibly

Probably

Definitely

Percent

> 1 year (n=2387)≤ 1 year (n=1983)

Figure 52. Today, would you still make the same decision to join the Peace Corps?

(question H2)

1

3

13

25

59

1

3

12

21

63

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

No

Not likely

Possibly

Probably

Definitely

Percent

> 1 year (n=2391)≤ 1 year (n=1982)

Figure 53. Would you recommend Peace Corps service to others you think are qualified?

(question H3)

The sixth and final overall assessment question asked Volunteers about their personal success with the Peace Corps’ second goal (to help promote a better understanding of Americans on the part of the peoples served). Of the 4,153 respondents who rated their second-goal impact, almost all (3,941 or 95 percent) reported that they have either “moderately” (24 percent), “considerably” (47 percent), or “exceptionally” (24 percent) helped host country nationals to better understand Americans. About 5 percent (n=197) reported that they had “minimally” helped facilitate a better understanding of Americans; another 231 Volunteers answered that it was “too soon to tell.” As shown in the figure below and noted earlier, Volunteers in service a year or less are not as positive about the extent to which they have helped host country nationals better understand the United States and its people than the longer-serving Volunteers. More than three-fourths (76 percent) of Volunteer respondents who have been in-country more than a year have “considerably” or “exceptionally” helped host country nationals better understand the United States and its people.



6

28

47

19

4

20

47

29

<1<1

0 10 20 30 40 50

Not at all

Minimally

Moderately

Considerably

Exceptionally

Percent

> 1 year (n=2353)≤ 1 year (n=1790)

Figure 54. To what extent do you think you have helped host-country nationals gain a better understanding of the United States and its people?

(question H6)



XII. Volunteer Recommendations and Comments The 2006 Peace Corps Volunteer survey concluded with three optional, open-ended questions to elicit respondents’ opinions and feedback. There was also an optional open-ended question at the end of the section on HIV/AIDS activities. More than three-quarters of respondents answered one or more of these four questions. All of the Volunteers’ comments were entered into a database, and country-specific reports of all comments were prepared for the regional directors. Two post-specific reports were generated for each country post—one with comments that could be shared with the post and another with comments from Volunteers who asked that their comments not be given to Peace Corps staff in their host country. The first open-ended question was posed to Volunteers who completed the HIV/AIDS section:

If you have any comments on Peace Corps HIV/AIDS work at your post that you would like to share with headquarters, please do so below. (n=375)

At the top of the survey’s last page, Volunteers were asked: ”May your comments below be given to the Peace Corps staff in your host country?” before the final three questions:

1. How can the Peace Corps better address the needs of your host country? Please indicate information on additional needs here. (n=2783)

2. What have you done to demonstrate that you have taken responsibility for the success of your

Peace Corps service? (n=2665)

3. If you have additional comments or concerns you would like to share, please do so on the lines provided below. Please take this opportunity to compliment or recommend improvements for staff and management at your post. (n=2005)

An analysis of these open-ended questions is presented in a separate report.



Appendix: 2006 Peace Corps Volunteer Survey Instrument

This page intentionally left blank.

Dear Peace Corps Volunteer:

We are continually working to improve our efforts to better meet the needs and expectations of both Volunteers and their host countries, but we need your help. This is your chance to tell us what you really think about your training, work, and overseas living experiences so far, and to influence operations at post and headquarters in the future.

In the past, the anonymous responses from Volunteers such as yourself have been extremely useful. Country Directors report that suggestions made by Volunteers are helpful in planning for the future and often lead to specific changes in policies and procedures. In country, the survey responses provide support for revising training, justifying budget needs, and adjusting living allowances. Your feedback is used at headquarters to inform all aspects of the Peace Corps experience, from policy changes to informing Congress.

Your thoughts and opinions are invaluable for the successful operation of the Peace Corps. We conduct this survey every two years to:

1) Ensure that we stay informed about trends in Volunteer safety, support, training, and living conditions so that we may respond to these trends appropriately;

2) Focus on special areas of interest — this year we are again asking a special set of questions of Volunteers about their HIV/AIDS work.

Please take approximately 45 minutes to complete the anonymous questionnaire that follows, including the open-ended questions on the last page. It is important that you complete the entire survey so that we can get as accurate a picture as possible of your opinions in all areas of your service. When you are done:

• To protect your anonymity, seal your completed survey in the envelope you received with your survey.• Return it immediately to your Peace Corps office at post.

Please turn in your completed questionnaire to your Peace Corps office at post before Monday, June 12, 2006.

Once we complete our analysis of the survey data, a summary of the worldwide responses will be sent to the Director, Regional Directors and Country Directors. The 2006 PCV Survey Global Report will also be posted on the Peace Corps Intranet. The collection of this information is authorized by the provisions of the Peace Corps Act (22 USC 2501 et seq.). Providing this information is voluntary.

Thank you for your continuing service as a Volunteer.

Sincerely,

Gaddi VasquezDirector, Peace Corps

DO NOT WRITE IN THIS AREA

March 31, 2006

1) Please fill out this survey only if you are a Volunteer. If you are a Trainee, and will not be sworn in by March 31, 2006, DO NOT fill out this survey and return the blank survey to your post.2) This survey is also available in a web-based format. If you prefer to complete this survey online, please contact your Country Director or [email protected] for instructions. If you already completed the web-based version, please do not complete this paper version.3) Please answer the open-ended questions in Section K. Your comments will be reviewed by staff at headquarters, but will not be shown to Peace Corps staff at your post unless you mark “Yes” on the last page. All comments marked "Yes," will be photocopied and shared with regional staff at headquarters, who may then share them with staff at your post.4) Return your completed survey sealed in the envelope you received with your survey to your host country Peace Corps main office as soon as possible and before June 12, 2006.

Marking Instructions: • Use only the No. 2 pencil provided (DO NOT use pen). • Make solid marks that fill the response oval completely. • Mark only one response oval for each question unless directions say, “Please mark all that apply.” • Make NO stray marks on this form. • Please write any comments on the last page or on a separate page using a pen.

Marking example:

Which of the following best describes your current primary assignment? (Please mark only one.)

- 2 -

2006 Peace Corps Volunteer Survey

Please read through the directions before beginning.

CORRECT MARKINCORRECT MARKS

A. Your background

1.

Agriculture/Fish/LivestockAgroforestryForestryEnvironmental educationWater-sanitationHIV/AIDS (if marked, please be sureto complete the HIV/AIDS questions on Page 14.)

HealthCommunity developmentNGO developmentYouth developmentBusiness education/advising

English teachingMath/Science teachingTeacher trainingOther teachingOther

Your responses to these questions will help us analyze other survey questions. The term “primary assignment” throughout the survey refers to the program, project, or assignment area on which you spend most of your time.

2. As part of your project/sector assignment, which of the following initiatives does your work also include?(Please mark all that apply.)

3. How many months have you been in your current host country, including PST (Pre-Service Training)?

Fewer than 3 3 to 6 7 to 12 13 to 18 19 to 27 More than 27

4. How many years* of foreign language education or professional experience requiring foreign language(s) fluency did you have in the ten years prior to your Peace Corps training? *(Count an academic year as 1 year.)

None Fewer than 1 1 to 2 2+ to 4 4+ to 6 More than 6

Continue

Girls’ educationInformation technology“Child survival”“Household food security”WID/GADHIV/AIDS (if marked, please be sureto complete the HIV/AIDS questions on Page 14.)

Micro-enterpriseRural developmentWorking with NGO(s)Working with youthIncome generation

Environment workBio-diversity conservationUrban developmentBusiness advisingEnglish teachingNutrition educationOther

- 3 -

B. Preparation for the Peace Corps

1. How useful was the information on the Peace Corps website in preparing you as an applicant for the realities of living and working as a Peace Corps Volunteer?

Not atall useful

Your responses will help us better prepare Volunteers for their service.

2. During the application process, how useful were the materials about your country (e.g., country welcome book) in helping you prepare for your experience?

1. Which of the following best describes your Pre-Service Training (PST)? (Please mark only one.)

Community-based Training: decentralized within multiple communities; trainees live with families during training; incorporates trainee-directed learning activitiesCenter-based Training: centralized around a training facility; trainees live in or near training center; incorporates instructor-directed activitiesMixed Training: essentially center-based training but incorporates field-based or self-directed learning activities; trainees stay with a family and return to training center at end of field component

C. Training for your Peace Corps assignment

You may have been asked similar questions by in-country staff. Your responses here will help staff at headquarters assess and enhance the effectiveness of your training and monitor change.

2. Please evaluate your Pre-Service Training (PST) in preparing you to–

3. During the application process, how useful were the materials you received from the Peace Corps about your primary assignment (e.g., Volunteer Assignment Description) in helping you prepare for your experience?

Minimallyuseful

Moderatelyuseful

Veryuseful

Extremelyuseful

Don’t know (did notaccess information)

Not atall useful

Minimallyuseful

Moderatelyuseful

Veryuseful

Extremelyuseful

Don’t know (did notget information)

Not atall useful

Minimallyuseful

Moderatelyuseful

Veryuseful

Extremelyuseful

Don’t know (did notaccess information)

Continue

Was training on this topic:

a) manage cultural differences in working and living with a diversity of people.

Not at allEffective

PoorAdequate

Effective VeryEffective

The RightLength?

Too Long?

b) deal with adjustment issues(e.g., loneliness, frustration, eating concerns, etc.).

c) improve working relationships with couterparts.

d)

e)

use language needed in work and social interactions.

f) work with project goals and objectives.g)

monitor project goals and outcomes.h)i) maintain your physical health.

k) maintain your personal safety and security.

j) maintain your mental/emotional health.

TooShort?

NA/NoTraining

use PACA training.

perform technical aspects of your work.

How many hours do you spend on secondary activities during an average work week?

Which of the following work do your secondary activities include? (Please mark all that apply.)

How many hours do you spend on your primary assignment during an average work week? If your work is not continuous throughout the year, estimate based on your busiest times of the year.

- 4 -

2. In addition to your primary assignment, are you engaged in “secondary” activities (other initiatives in your community)?

Yes No (Please skip to Question 5.)

4.

3.

None 1 to 10 11 to 20 21 to 30 31 to 40 More than 40

Continue

3. Please evaluate your In-Service Training (IST) in helping you to–

4. Overall, how well did the Peace Corps prepare you, both physically and mentally, to meet the challenges of Peace Corps service?

Not at all Minimally Adequately Considerably Exceptionally

1 to 10 11 to 20 21 to 30 31 to 40 More than 40

D. Your Peace Corps assignment

Your answers will tell us about your Peace Corps work.

1.

None

Girls’ educationInformation technology“Child survival”“Household food security”WID/GADHIV/AIDS (if marked, please be sureto complete the HIV/AIDS questions on Page 14.)

Micro-enterpriseRural developmentWorking with NGO(s)Working with youthIncome generation

Environment workBio-diversity conservationUrban developmentBusiness advisingEnglish teachingNutrition educationOther

Was training on this topic:

a) manage cultural differences in working and living with a diversity of people.

Not at allEffective

PoorAdequate

Effective VeryEffective

The RightLength?

Too Long?

b) deal with adjustment issues(e.g., loneliness, frustration, eating concerns, etc.).

c) improve working relationships with couterparts.

d)

e)

use language needed in work and social interactions.

f) work with project goals and objectives.g)

monitor project goals and outcomes.h)i) maintain your physical health.

k) maintain your personal safety and security.

j) maintain your mental/emotional health.

TooShort?

NA/NoTraining

use PACA training.

perform technical aspects of your work.

5. To what extent is the work you do personally rewarding or satisfying?

Not at all Minimally Moderately Considerably Exceptionally

Your primary assignment to a project/sector (e.g., education, health, and environment) is part of an overall plan designed by your host country partners and in-country Peace Corps staff. How clear to you are the following aspects of your primary assignment to a project/sector (e.g., education, health, environment)?

- 5 -

Continue

8. Please give us your feedback about the following technical skills in relation to your work.

a) Assignment-specific skills (e.g., classroom management, animal husbandry)

b) Assessing community needsc) Organizing/implementing community

activitiesd) Building capacity of local organizationse) Monitoring and reporting project workf) Designing and implementing training

sessions

7. To what extent are your skills, interests, and experiences utilized by your primary assignment?

Not at all

No

Poorly Adequately Well Very well

Yes

Is the skill neededfor your work in

the Peace Corps?

NoYes

Did you have theskill before joiningthe Peace Corps?

NoYes

Have you hadadequate PeaceCorps training toacquire the skill?

9.

a) Your project/sector goals and objectivesb) Your responsibilities or dutiesc) Your project/sector activitiesd) Your sponsoring agency’s responsibilitiese) Your APCD/Program Manager’s

responsibilities

SomewhatClear

Not atAll Clear

MostlyClear

ModeratelyClear

NAVeryClear

10. To what extent do you think your work in your primary assignment to a project/sector (e.g., education, health, environment) does the following?

a) Meets the objectives of your project/sectorb) Builds local capacity for sustainabilityc) Includes local people in planning and

implementing activitiesd) Complements other local development

activitiese) Is supported by in-country staff

and resources

MinimallyNot atAll

ConsiderablyAdequately NAExceptionally

6. How much does the success of the Peace Corps experience depend on a Volunteer’s personal commitment and initiative?


- 6 -

Continue

11. In your opinion, how much of an impact have you had on the following capacities of your host-country counterparts (e.g., teachers, health workers, community leaders, NGO personnel, etc.) through your primary assignment?

a)b)c)d)e)f)

g)h)i)

Problem solvingSelf-esteemTechnical skillsAccessing information (e.g., library, Internet)Planning and managementIdentifying resourcesLeadershipUsing local resourcesBetter understanding of Americans

MinimalNot atAll

ConsiderableModerate NAExceptionalYour Impact on Capacities of Counterparts

12. In your opinion, how much of an impact have you had on the following capacities of host-country individuals, other than your counterparts, (e.g., students, farmers, villagers, etc.) through your primary assignment?

Your Impact on Capacities of Host-country Individuals You Work With (other than counterparts)

a)b)c)d)e)f)

g)h)i)

Problem solvingSelf-esteemTechnical skillsAccessing information (e.g., library, Internet)Planning and ManagementIdentifying resourcesLeadershipUse of local resourcesBetter understanding of Americans

MinimalNot atAll

ConsiderableModerate NAExceptional

13. In your opinion, how much of an impact have you had on the following capacities of organizations(e.g., NGO, school, community group) you work with through your primary assignment?

Your Impact on Capacities of Organizations You Work With

a)b)c)d)e)f)

g)

Identifying and prioritizing organizational needsManagement and leadershipTeamwork and participatory decision-makingMonitoring/evaluationAccessing information and resourcesPlanning and implementing organizational activitiesBetter understanding of Americans

MinimalNot atAll

ConsiderableModerate

NAExceptional

Another way to look at the effectiveness of your primary assignment is to consider the capacities (knowledge, skills, and activities) that you have helped to build or develop at each of these three levels:

a)

b)

c)

host-country counterparts

other individuals such as students, farmers, villagers, and entrepreneurs

organizations

- 7 -

Continue

2. Do you live with a host-country individual or family (this includes living in a family’s compound)? Yes No

3. How soon after you arrived at your site as a Volunteer was adequate housing available?

Not yetavailable

Immediately Within 3months

Within 6months

Within 1year

Over a year

4. When you arrived at your site, how prepared for your arrival were the host people with whom you work?

Not at all Poorly Adequately Well Very well

6. How integrated into your community do you feel?


7. How well can you communicate in the language used by most local people?


8. How well does your living allowance meet your basic needs?


15. Please give us feedback about the following resources that could potentially support your volunteer activities. (Please mark only one response for each resource.)

a)b)

c)d)e)

Small Project Assistance (SPA) moneyPeace Corps Partnership Program (includes money from family and friends)Resource Center materialsHIV/AIDS Funding (e.g., PEPFAR, VAST)Other (Please specify below.)

Aware ButNot Used

Unawareof Resource

MinimallyEffective

NotEffective

VeryEffective

ModeratelyEffective

NA

E. Your life in the Peace Corps

These questions help us monitor and compare Volunteer living conditions.

1. Please choose the best description of your assigned site. (If you live in the capital, mark only that choice.)

Capital of the countryCity (pop. over 25,000)

Rural town (pop. 2,000 + to 25,000)Village/rural area (pop. under 2,000)

Outer island (regardless of size)

5. How well prepared was your site upon your arrival?


14. Have you participated in any of the following activities to help accomplish the Third Goal (helping Americans gain a better understanding of other people) during your Peace Corps service? (Please mark all that apply.)

Peace Corps Week activitiesSending electronic updates, stories and/or photos to educate groups of AmericansSending paper (hard copy) updates, stories and/or photos to educate groups of AmericansSpeaking at schools or other community groups while on home leaveOther (Please specify below.)

- 8 -

Continue

10. If you have a cell or mobile phone, how often do you experience trouble using it due to poor reception?

NA, no cell/mobile phone Never Sometimes Usually Always

12. From the list below, choose the THREE most effective ways that you use to communicate with Peace Corps in-country staff. Of these three choices, rank which one is most effective by marking ‘1’, which is second most effective by marking ‘2’, and which is the third most effective by marking ‘3.’

Telephone at residence or workTelephone at place other than siteMobile/cell phoneFaxCable/Telegram

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

EmailCB radioLettersIn-person visitsOther (please specify):

1

1

1

1

1

2

2

2

2

2

3

3

3

3

3

13. Do you participate in a Correspondence Match (a World Wise Schools program)?

Yes (Please answer Question 14.) No (Please skip to Section F.)

Yes (Please skip to Section F.)

If “No,” why not? (Please mark all that apply.)

Never or infrequently hear from teacherCorrespondence took too much time awayfrom other projectsTook too long to get a match

Not a very interesting projectCost of mailing was a financial burdenOther

11. In general, how do you rate the effectiveness of your communication resources (for examples, see list in Question 12 below) for contacting your in-country staff?

Very poor Poor Adequate Good Excellent

F. Your safety and security

These questions will help us track and improve your safety.

2. How safe do you feel– (Please mark one responsefor each location.)

a)b)c)d)

where you live?where you work?when you travel in country?in the city where the main Peace Corps office is located?

Not AtAll Safe

AdequatelySafe

Often Unsafe

VerySafe

UsuallySafe

1. How informed do you feel about events in your host country that might affect your safety?

Not at all informed Poorly informed Adequately informed Well informed Very well informed

14. Would you recommend a Correspondence Match to other Peace Corps Volunteers?

No (Please answer below.)

9. How often do you have the following . . .

a)b)c)d)e)f)

g)h)

ElectricityRunning waterA landline telephoneA short-wave radioMobile/cell phoneA computer for project useEmailThe Internet

UsuallySometimes AlwaysNever UsuallySometimes AlwaysNever

. . . at your residence? . . . at your work site?

- 9 -

Continue

4. In the last 12 months, how often have you personally experienced any of the following in your host country?(Please mark one response for each item.)

a)b)c)d)e)f)

Petty theft (under $25, no contact with thief)Motorized vehicle injuryAnti-American harassmentRacial harassmentReligious harassmentSexual harassment

Yearly MonthlyEvery FewMonths

DailyWeeklyNever

For the remaining questions in this section, please remember that these surveys are sealed and anonymous.Your answers will greatly help the Peace Corps improve the training, support, and services it provides as they affect your safety and security.

5. If you experienced sexual harassment in the last 12 months (as noted in item 4f above), what type of harassment was it most often?

Physical Verbal

In the last 12 months, have you personally experienced any of the following in your host country? If you have, please mark both the number of times this occurred to you and whether you reported the crime(s) each time. If you have never experienced any of the crimes below, mark “DID NOT EXPERIENCE” for each and skip to Section G.

6.

Serious theft ($25 or more, no contact with thief)Robbery (theft and threat of assault, no injury)Robbery (theft and assault, with injury)Simple physical assault (assault without a weapon or serious injury)Aggravated assault (assault with a weapon or serious injury)Sexual assault other than rapeRape

1 32 4th +time

4+DID NOTEXPERIENCE

Never

NUMBER OF TIMESEXPERIENCED:

I REPORTED THIS TO SOMEONE:(Please mark all that apply.)

3rdtime

2ndtime

1sttime

For the following questions, harassment is defined as any persistent unwelcome behavior from others that you believe may affect your safety and security. The targeted person determines whether or not she/he is being harassed.

3. When traveling in your host country, how often has your safety been threatened by any of the following? (Please mark one response for each item.)

a)b)c)d)e)f)

g)

Transportation conditions (vehicles/drivers/roads)Police stopsPetty or serious theft (no contact with thief)Robbery (with assault or threat of assault)Lodging conditions when travelingHarassment by strangers when travelingHarassment by persons you know when traveling

Occasionally UsuallyOften NAAlwaysNever

- 10 -

Continue

If you did not report the crime(s), answer why not for each type of crime you experienced. Please answer only for the crime(s) you experienced in your host country in the last 12 months. If you did not experience ANY of these crimes, skip to Section G.

8.

Concerned abouta breach in

confidentiality.

Too minoror commonto report.

Believed it couldresult in

changing sites.

Did not thinkthe Peace Corps

could help.

If you DID NOT report the crime(s), please mark why not. (Please mark all that apply.)

Concerned reportingwould result in

disciplinary actionagainst myself.

Concerned itmight hurt my

relationship withthe community.

a)

b)

c)

d)

e)

f)

g)

Serious theft ($25 or more, no contact with thief)Robbery (theft and threat of assault, no injury)Robbery (theft and assault, with injury)Simple physical assault (assault without a weapon or serious injury)Aggravated assault (assault with a weapon or serious injury)Sexual assault other than rapeRape

If you reported the crime(s), please mark to whom you reported the crime(s). Please answer only for the crime(s) you experienced in your host country in the last 12 months. If you did not report the crime, skip to Question 8. If you did not experience ANY of the crimes, skip to Section G.

7.

a)

b)

c)d)

e)

f)g)

Serious theft ($25 or more, no contact with thief)Robbery (theft and threat of assault, no injury)Robbery (theft and assault, with injury)Simple physical assault (assault without a weapon or serious injury)Aggravated assault (assault with a weapon or serious injury)Sexual assault other than rapeRape*

OtherLocalAuthorities

OtherPeace Corps

Staff

Safetyand SecurityCoordinator

Country Director

PCMO

If you DID report the crime(s), to whom did you report? (Please mark all that apply.)

*If you answered “Other” in 7g, please specify here:

- 11 -

Continue

Please mark who was responsible for the crime(s) you experienced (as noted in Question 6 on Page 9). Answer only for the crime(s) you experienced in your host country in the last 12 months. Please mark “Not Applicable” (NA) for particular crime(s) you did not experience. (Please mark all that apply.) If you did not experience ANY of the crimes, please skip to Section G.

9.

a)

b)

c)

d)

e)

f)g)

Serious theft ($25 or more,no contact with thief)Robbery (theft and threat of assault, no injury)Robbery (theft and assault,with injury)Simple physical assault (assault without a weapon or serious injury)Aggravated assault (assault with a weapon or serious injury)Sexual assault other than rapeRape

NAFriend/Social

Aquaintance

Peace CorpsStaff

Stranger OtherPCV

Host CountryFamily

Host Country

Counterpart

Other

1. How satisfied are you with the health care you receive from your Peace Corps Medical Officers (PCMOs)in-country?

Not at all

Your responses will help us determine the support you need and how we can improve our efforts.

Minimally Adequately Considerably Exceptionally Not used Not available

2. Have you experienced a family or personal emergency since you started as a PCV?

Yes No

a. If “Yes”, how much support and assistance did you recieve from Peace Corps?

None at all Minimal Moderate Considerable Exceptional

b. If “No”, how much support and assistance do you think you would receive from Peace Corps if you were to have a family or personal emergency?

None at all Minimal Moderate Considerable Exceptional

G. Peace Corps support

4. Do you prefer to have other PCVs living near you? Yes No No preference

5. How far is the closest PCV to you, other than your spouse or site mates? (Please estimate.)

0-5 km 6-10 km 11-20 km 21-30 km Over 30 km

3. How often do you see other PCVs (not including spouse or site mates, if applicable)?

Daily Several times a week Weekly Every 2 weeks Monthly Less than once a month

6. How many hours does it take you,by your usual means of travel, to reach —

a)b)c)d)

the nearest PCV(s)?the main Peace Corps office in country?a secondary Peace Corps office in country (if any)?a Peace Corps-approved health care provider?

7 to 10 Hours

19 to 24Hours

11 to 18Hours

NA25 orMoreHours

2 to 6 Hours

Less Than2 Hours

- 12 -

Continue

7. Since swearing in, how satisfied are you with the following support provided by Peace Corps staff in your host country? (Please mark one response for each item.)

a)b)c)d)e)f)

g)h)i)

Language learningAdministrativeMedicalEmotionalSafety and securityFeedback on projectsTechnical supportSite selectionJob assignment

Minimally ConsiderablyAdequately NACompletelyNot at All

8. How much support do you receive from host country supervisors, sponsors, or counterparts in the following areas? (Please mark one response for each item.)

a)b)c)d)e)f)

Technical assistanceLogistical helpSafety and security adviceLanguage helpEmotional supportFeedback on projects

Minimal ConsiderableSome NATremendousNone

9. To what extent are the following problematic to you in creating stress/emotional health issues? (Please mark one response for each item.)

a)b)c)d)e)f)

g)h)

i)

Primary assignmentHealth/medical problemsIsolation/lonelinessRelationships with Peace Corps staffRelationships with host country nationalsRelationships with other VolunteersSafety and securityHome (U.S.) issue (e.g., significant others, family problems, etc.)Cultural issues

Minimally ConsiderablyModerately ExceptionallyNot at all

11. How would you rate the visits from the CD with respect to the following? (If you answered “0” in 10a, please skip to the next question.)

a)b)c)d)

FrequencyInformative contentYour comfort level discussing issuesCD’s responsiveness to your issues

Adequate More than AdequateInadequate

How many times have the following Peace Corps Staff visited you since you were sworn in?10.

a)b)c)d)

Country Director (CD)Program Staff MemberPeace Corps Medical Officer (PCMO)Safety and Security Coordinator

1 32 540 5+

- 13 -

Continue

12. How would you rate the visits from the Program Staff Member with respect to the following? (If you answered “0” in 10b, please skip to the next question.)

a)b)c)d)

FrequencyInformative contentYour comfort level discussing issuesProgram Staff Member’s responsiveness to your issues


13. How would you rate the visits from the PCMO with respect to the following? (If you answered “0” in 10c, please skip to the next question.)

a)b)c)d)

FrequencyInformative contentYour comfort level discussing issuesPCMO’s responsiveness to your issues


14. How would you rate the visits from the Safety and Security Coordinator with respect to the following? (If you answered “0” in 10d, please skip to the next section.)

a)b)c)d)

FrequencyInformative contentYour comfort level discussing issuesSafety and Security Coordinator’s responsiveness to your issues


1. Do you intend to complete your Peace Corps service?

H. Your overall assessment

2. Today, would you still make the same decision to join the Peace Corps?

No Not likely Possibly Probably Definitely

3. Would you recommend Peace Corps service to others you think are qualified?

No Not likely Possibly Probably Definitely

4. How personally rewarding do you find your overall Peace Corps service?


5. Would your host country benefit the most if the Peace Corps program were —?

Discontinued Reduced Maintained at current level Expanded

6. To what extent do you think you have helped host-country nationals gain a better understanding of the United States and its people?

Not at all Minimally Moderately Considerably Exceptionally Too early to tell

15. Answer the following only if you are a Masters International (MI) program student. If you are not one, skip to the next section.

a)

b)

Do your Peace Corps primary and secondary assignments fulfill your MI requirements?

Not At All Minimally Adequately Considerably Exceptionally

No Not sure Yes Might extend

Does the Peace Corps staff at post provide support to help you fulfill your MI requirements?

- 14 -

Training tools to use in the communityWorkshops on training skillsWorkshops on specfic skills such as advisingcommunity members on difficult issuesWorkshops on technical issues such astreatment, home care, orphan care

Continue

I. Peace Corps Volunteers working in HIV/AIDS

It is important for Peace Corps to better understand the work of Volunteers in HIV/AIDS.

1. Which of the following best describes your involvement in HIV/AIDS activities?HIV/AIDS work is my primary assignment.HIV/AIDS work is part of secondary activities.I have been involved in HIV/AIDS efforts but not as part of my primary assignment or secondary activities.I have not been involved in any HIV/AIDS related activities (Please skip to Section J).

2. How well has Peace Corps training (PST, IST, host-country sponsored) prepared you to undertake your HIV/AIDS activities?

Not at all Minimally Moderately Considerably Substantially NA

3. What resources have you found useful in your work on HIV/AIDS? (Please mark all that apply.)Peace Corps Life Skills ManualPeace Corps HIV/AIDS Idea BookHIV/AIDS Funding (e.g., PEPFAR, VAST)Local Ministry or NGO materialsUNAIDS materials

Other International organization’s materials. Name oforganization(s) (please specify below)

Other

4. To whom do you go when you need more information or advice in order to do a better job on HIV/AIDS in your community? (Please mark all that apply.)

APCDPCMOCD

Fellow PCVNo resourceperson available

5. With whom do you closely collaborate on your HIV/AIDS work? (Please mark all that apply.)Government ministryLocal non-government or community-basedorganizationsInternational organization working locally (e.g., Save theChildren, CARE)Name the group(s):

UN organizationOther International Volunteer organizationPCV(s) from another sector(s) (e.g., Environment, Education, Business)Faith-based organizations

6. What would be helpful to you now in your HIV/AIDS work? (Please mark all that apply.)Emotional support and listening to my feelings about HIV/AIDS and people coping with HIV/AIDS in my communityReferences with HIV/AIDS informationVisits from persons with technical knowledge

Other

Seldom effective

7. In working with host country individuals or groups, how would you rate the effectiveness of your specific HIV/AIDS activities?

Sometimes effective Often effective Almost always effective Don’t know

8. If you have any comments on Peace Corps HIV/AIDS work at your post that you would like to share with headquarters, please do so below.

Local expert from anotherorganizationLocal counterpart

OtherNo one

Please explain if needed:

This information tells us how different groups answer survey questions and shows us if any group is not well represented. Your answers are confidential and will not be cross-referenced with your responses to other questions when reported to your post.

- 15 -

Continue

3. Race or Ethnicity: (Please mark only one.)

African AmericanAsian AmericanNative Hawaiian/Pacific IslanderCaucasian (not of Hispanic origin)Hispanic or LatinoNative AmericanTwo or more races/more than one of the above

4. Marital status at time of joining the Peace Corps:

Single, never marriedMarried/serving with spouseMarried/serving without spouseDivorcedWidowed

5. Highest educational level completed to date:(Please mark only one.)

High school diploma or equivalentTechnical school graduateCommunity College/Associate’s degreeBachelor’s degreeMaster’s degreeDoctoral degreeOther

6. Since this survey was available in both paper and a web-based format, please choose the best answer regarding your situation from the choices below.

A paper version was the only realistic way for me to complete this survey.I could have also completed this survey online, but the paper version was more accessible.I would have preferred completing this survey online if it had been offered.

“Given Internet access in my host country . . . ”(Please mark only one.)

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

J. Other information about you

1. Age:

2. Sex: Female Male

DO NOT WRITE IN THIS AREA

R23001-PFI-54321- 16 -

K. Your recommendations

Please use a DARK INK PEN for this section.

1. How can the Peace Corps better address the needs of your host country? Please include information on additional needs here, such as support, resources, training, etc., if applicable.

Host country:

May your comments below be given to the Peace Corps staff in your host country? Yes No

Thank you for completing this survey! Please seal it in the envelope and return it immediately to your Peace Corps office at post.

2. What have you done to demonstrate that you have taken responsibility for the success of your Peace Corps service?

3. If you have additional comments or concerns you would like to share, please do so on the lines provided below. Please take this opportunity to compliment or recommend improvements for staff and management at your post.

Peace CorpsPaul D. Coverdell Peace Corps Headquarters1111 20th Street NW | Washington DC 20526800.424.8580 www.peacecorps.gov

peace corps 2006 volunteer survey - global report€¦ · the peace corps 2006 volunteer survey...

Documents