政府單位認為評鑑對於志願服務工作績效具有正面意義，且有助於提升服務品質。志願服務法規定，非營利組織之志工團隊若加入祥和計畫案中，得定期接受志願服務評鑑，此為政府的「行政目的」之「法律合法性」評估。 有鑑於實務經驗中發現，志工團隊對於評鑑可能有不同看法，本研究遂以99年祥和計畫志願服務單位評鑑為例，整理相關文獻及評鑑標準，希望探討志工管理者對於績效評鑑，以及對於評鑑指標中志工考核之看法。針對政府績效評鑑，研究問題如下：1.志工團隊贊成／不贊成績效評鑑? 2.接受績效評鑑之志工團隊的想法? 3.志工團隊是否適用績效評鑑? 針對志工考核，研究問題如下：1.是否對志工進行績效考核? 2.為何支持/不支持志工考核? 3.志工受到考核之狀況? 本研究使用半結構性訪談，選擇嘉義縣加入祥和計畫之三個組織，共六位受訪者。分析結果顯示，志工管理者認同志工團隊評鑑制度，除具有效益外也可以使團隊制度化。而對於方法與指標則有一些不同之看法，並提出一些改善之道。本研究建議應考慮團隊之類型來規劃不同的指標，並修正注重面向之配分，以及增加「組織目的」之「社會合法性」評估指標。志工考核部份，組織均有對志工進行考核，但多以時數為基準之簡單考核方式，較無完整與制度化的考核。志工管理者認為志工考核是必要進行，但不需要制度化之考核。本研究建議志工考核應一辭應修改為志工評量，依此制定評估面向與指標，強調評估所帶來的溝通與激勵的目的。並建議組織評量指標應更多元化，除組織可對志工進行評估，志工也可對組織進行評估，同時可視情況加入志工自評的部份。 As stipulated in the Volunteer Service Act, NPOs that utilize volunteering efforts are subject to regular volunteer program appraisal. This type of appraisal is designed to meet government’s administrative purpose to establish legal legitimacy of the volunteer program. However, in practice, volunteers as a group might perceive such assessment differently, questioning whether the bureaucratic assessment is applicable to their mere act of volunteering services. This study takes the annual volunteers assessment conducted in year 2010 as the research context. With a review of performance evaluation literature, the researcher intends to identify, from volunteer manager’s perspective, how the required volunteer program appraisal is being perceived, and particularly, among the many types of appraisal indicators, how the individual volunteer evaluation is being carried out. This study selects three NPOs who are participants of the Shiang-Her(祥和) Volunteer Network Program in Chia-Yi County, and conducts semi-structured interview with a total of six respondents. The results show while volunteer managers agree in general the concept of having the appraisal system on the volunteer teams, they suggest alternative methods and indicators to be used to better match to the different natures of the volunteer teams. Different sizes of the NPOs and social legitimacy of the evaluation indicators are named as some of the concerns. Regarding evaluating individual volunteers, most volunteer teams use only simple quantitative measure, such as hour of service. This study suggests more diverse types of volunteer evaluation indicator should be adopted.
