According to the Corporation for National and Community Service (2007), 33% of workers who volunteer in one year do not volunteer the next year. Retention of disaster and emergency services volunteers is a problem because permanent disaster volunteers save governments and society millions of dollars each year. The purpose of this quantitative, cross-sectional study was to address the problem of retention of American Red Cross disaster and emergency services volunteers. The primary research question for this study examined the predictive strength of positive emotions, resiliency, coping, and post-traumatic growth, in the retention of disaster and emergency services volunteers. The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions combined with the organismic valuing theory of growth through adversity created the optimal research foundation for driving the hypotheses for the research question. This study used a self-report survey to collect data from a nonprobability convenience sample of 120 American Red Cross Disaster and Emergency Services volunteers. Standard multiple linear regression analyses revealed that none of the independent variables statistically predicted retention. Independent-groups t-tests revealed that, a debriefing at the disaster location showed significant mean differences when examining retention. The American Red Cross and other disaster relief organizations can use the results of this study to develop strategies to address organizational factors that enhance the experiences of their disaster and emergency services volunteers and thus strive to improve retention.

This thesis focuses on the Blood Drive which takes place during the spring Greek Week event at Western Kentucky University. I primarily investigate the varying methods of negotiating issues of altruism and egoism in terms of the Blood Drive as well as way that the Blood Drive fits into the WKU Greek yearly cycle. I focus on issues of the process of identity in social Greek-letter organizations and how the process of this identity is renegotiated during the Blood Drive and other Greek events. I interviewed people from several groups for this paper. Initially, I interviewed Blood Donor Recruitment Representatives from the American Red Cross, WKU students associated with the social Greek-letter system and the Blood Drive of Greek Week, and employees of WKU associated with the social Greek-letter system and the Blood Drive of Greek Week. At the event itself I widened my scope to include information provided by Mobile Unit Assistants (MUAs) and other employees of the American Red Cross. Key conclusions of this paper include that while people may all participate or be involved in the same event, their methods of understanding concepts of altruism and egoism vary with their kinds of association. In turn, their conceptualizations mirror those developed by social scientists in the last two hundred years. Also, the issues of separation and integration, processes to do with identity, are central to the events of the Greek calendar year and the Blood Drive event in particular.

This dissertation is about American Red Cross and YMCA work in revolutionary and civil war Russia. It focuses on the most significant phases of these organizations’ efforts in terms of the numbers of personnel involved and the funds expended: Moscow and Petrograd, 1917–18; northern Russia during the Allied military intervention, 1918–19; and Siberia and the Russian Far East, from 1918 through the early 1920s. By drawing on dozens of often underused archival collections this study is able to discuss these “constructive efforts” in much fuller detail than have existing works. The activities of the Americans who worked in Russia, rather than those who made policy from afar, are of primary interest. The concern here, beyond the what, where, and who, is why: Why did American relief or social service work occur? The answers, of which there are several, include a desire to provide assistance to suffering populations. But the humanitarian impulse was often not the one that carried the day when decisions about policy and practice were taken. Military concerns were important, especially while the Great War still raged on the western front, and while Allied and American soldiers fought Russian Bolsheviks. American relief workers also saw themselves as contributing directly to relations between Russia and Russians on the one hand, and the United States, the Allies, and the American people on the other. They were moved to carry out their work because they saw the importance of it for the present and future of relations between the two countries. Americans in Russia also took advantage of the presence of soldiers, civilian refugees, and former prisoners of war from a variety of European countries to spread the good word about all things American. Ultimately, Americans viewed revolutionary Russia through the lens of modernization. With American help, the future could be bright. With the right leadership in place to oversee their education, honest, hardworking, and intellectually curious peasants (as they were described by contemporary observers) could be turned into modern citizens. The Russian project failed to achieve its promise, but for a time Americans retained their optimism about Russia’s future.

This dissertation is about American Red Cross and YMCA work in revolutionary and civil war Russia. It focuses on the most significant phases of these organizations’ efforts in terms of the numbers of personnel involved and the funds expended: Moscow and Petrograd, 1917–18; northern Russia during the Allied military intervention, 1918–19; and Siberia and the Russian Far East, from 1918 through the early 1920s. By drawing on dozens of often underused archival collections this study is able to discuss these “constructive efforts” in much fuller detail than have existing works. The activities of the Americans who worked in Russia, rather than those who made policy from afar, are of primary interest. The concern here, beyond the what, where, and who, is why: Why did American relief or social service work occur? The answers, of which there are several, include a desire to provide assistance to suffering populations. But the humanitarian impulse was often not the one that carried the day when decisions about policy and practice were taken. Military concerns were important, especially while the Great War still raged on the western front, and while Allied and American soldiers fought Russian Bolsheviks. American relief workers also saw themselves as contributing directly to relations between Russia and Russians on the one hand, and the United States, the Allies, and the American people on the other. They were moved to carry out their work because they saw the importance of it for the present and future of relations between the two countries. Americans in Russia also took advantage of the presence of soldiers, civilian refugees, and former prisoners of war from a variety of European countries to spread the good word about all things American. Ultimately, Americans viewed revolutionary Russia through the lens of modernization. With American help, the future could be bright. With the right leadership in place to oversee their education, honest, hardworking, and intellectually curious peasants (as they were described by contemporary observers) could be turned into modern citizens. The Russian project failed to achieve its promise, but for a time Americans retained their optimism about Russia’s future.

The outbreak of the Spanish Civil War in 1936 and the Second Sino-Japanese War in 1937 triggered many responses amongst the American public, including a number of private initiatives in medical aid that occupied a borderland between traditional humanitarian relief and political activism. This study is interested in the stories of three organisations arising in this tradition: the American Medical Bureau to Aid Spanish Democracy (AMBASD), the American Bureau for Medical Aid to China (ABMAC), and the China Aid Council (CAC). While three separate initiatives in terms of who was responsible for their creation in the United States, and the communities they sought to help abroad, all three demonstrate parallels in their foundation and development that merit a joint historical consideration. Emerging from the backdrop of isolationism in U.S. foreign policy, the AMBASD, ABMAC, and CAC became a means of voicing both political and humanitarian ideals through the medium of medicine. In many ways, this thesis becomes a study of lost causes. As political campaigns, none of the organisations in this study succeeded in changing U.S. policy, although the ABMAC and CAC benefitted from interests that overlapped with larger changes in U.S. military alliances. As humanitarian organisations, only one (the ABMAC) lived past the conflict to which it owed its foundation. Their story, however, retains its historical interest in challenging both the way in which we examine the mythology of humanitarian idealism, and our understanding of the balance between internationalism and isolationism in the 1930’s United States. For the medical activists of these organizations, medical aid offered both a tangible outlet for personal ethical and political beliefs, but also promised an alternative means of diplomacy that brought greater agency to more popular levels.