Looking back, my first progress report was much more optimistic than this. After observing different aspects of my organization, I have seen how the organization itself works and how informally it handles problems and treats its volunteers. There are more rules and restrictions placed upon the clients as opposed to the volunteers, many of whom are clients themselves. The volunteers who are also clients do not have to wait in my organization’s line nor do they have to immediately accept whatever is given to them in their box. Grace*, the coordinator of the food bank area, does her best to ensure that the volunteers who receive food boxes receive the items they want. While my organization does do its best to cater to the needs of the clients, there still is a disconnect between those who are volunteers and those who are clients. I interacted more with fellow volunteers than the clients themselves. There is a stronger sense of community amongst the volunteers than with the people we are trying to help.

This organization does not address structural problems at all, structural problems that could help the organization itself work better. There are no volunteers who teach the clients about the economy or how to lobby Congress for economic change. There are no volunteers who are informed about policy making decisions or are willing to spend Friday nights protesting on a street corner for positive changes to be toward EBT cards and Food Stamps.  Instead, my organization’s aim is for clients to have a series of food boxes that add up to roughly $300 a month, and the pastor encourages clients to spend the money they are supposedly saving on their bills as opposed to anything else. My organization maintains the status quo. While this is not necessarily a bad thing, it does not help its clients in the long run. Instead, it perpetuates the problem like someone trying to scoop out water from a sinking ship. The organization will change if there is a sudden increase in the amount of clients but it will not change in order to actually work at solving, at the very least, local structural problems.

When the food the clients receive is either expired, junk, or not what they particularly enjoy, it does not ameliorate the situation, but instead creates a relationship between my organization and its clients that basically says “Well I’m sorry you’re in this situation, but here’s this food box that has some items that add up qualitatively to roughly seventy-five dollars.” My organization sometimes sacrifices quality in order to achieve efficiency and to always have a surplus of items. These are pragmatic reasons, but they only help the organization, not the clients. Clients cannot go to the store to pick out their own eggs. They have to rely on the judgment and the cleanliness of the person who is putting together egg cartons or egg bags. These iffy, at times problematic standards create a discourse which forces a client to accept these sacrifices and compromises because the alternative is having nothing or at least not enough.

I believe that clients should not have to accept lower standards in order to survive, and I think there is more that could be done in order to ensure that dignity and quality is always at the forefront of the organization’s goals. I think my organization is open minded about it, but I think there should be more organization amongst the volunteers.