When Associations Fade: Navigating Changes for Leaders of Volunteers

In September 2024, TAVA’s Leadership Committee, which at that time consisted of the Treasurer, Membership Chair and Administrative Chair, made the difficult decision to shut down the unincorporated Toronto Association for Volunteer Administration (TAVA).

The committee members quickly discovered that this wasn’t an isolated incident but one in a series of closures that affected volunteer leadership professional associations across Canada, in the U.S. and in other parts of the globe. Even prior to the pandemic, TAVA’s leadership noticed a gradual decline in leadership participation and membership engagement.

It is difficult to determine what exactly led to the demise of the Association that had served leaders of volunteers in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) and beyond for more than 40 years.

To understand the ending, it perhaps helps to look back at what once made TAVA strong.

The Three Peak Decades of TAVA

Membership of TAVA was at its peak in the 1990s, 2000s and 2010s. During this time, leadership (“TAVA Executive”) was well structured, organized and proactive. Membership seemed more engaged and more likely to step into TAVA Executive roles which might have resulted in better succession planning. They arranged for in-person workshops and offered an annual or bi-annual conference, including a Hybrid Conference with Better Impact and, later on, joint conferences with Volunteer Toronto that were well attended. In addition, the monthly meetings included networking opportunities, giving members a platform to exchange ideas and explore best practices in Volunteer Engagement. These events attracted a committed group of volunteer leaders in the GTA and elsewhere.

At the height of TAVA’s success, the Association had as many as 168 members. Anywhere from 60 (35 percent) to 80 (48 percent) members regularly attended in-person meetings and workshops; when we partnered with Volunteer Toronto, a total of 68 people attended the first joint, in-person conference in early 2020.

Participants consisted of TAVA members as well as non-members (guests). In addition, the Annual General Meeting (AGM) brought the majority of members together, reviewing leadership’s presentation that included a summary of the budget, programming highlights and award announcements. All stakeholders had an opportunity to vote on key decisions (such as approving new members for leadership), the projected budget and plans for the coming year.

This structure provided stability and a sense of collective identity that kept TAVA vibrant for decades.

Technology, Pandemic Take a Toll

With the arrival of innovative technologies and the pandemic, TAVA’s structure started to show signs of erosion in the early 2020s which might have affected the involvement of members. For instance, instead of using multiple platforms to collaborate and access files, leadership opted to consolidate into using one system (Google Suite); while this made sense, it resulted in losing critical information and disrupting processes that had previously been in place. 

Any written bylaws – such as succession planning documents or standard operating processes (SOPs) that might have been in place prior to the pandemic – were either lost, non-existent or not transferred into the consolidated, shared Google drive. However, on a more positive note, the new status quo during the pandemic also presented an opportunity for change. The diminished leadership that consisted of one to three members at various times decided to review and update role descriptions. In addition, it attempted to reframe the committee’s structure. It introduced a sub-committee consisting of four members that worked closely with leadership on diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) issues in response to the general awakening of leaders to critically examine, self-reflect and distance themselves from harmful colonial structures.

When the pandemic arrived, fewer people participated in a leadership capacity for various reasons, including jobs having been furloughed, shifting priorities, adjusting to a different life, mental well-being and other factors. At the same time, an increase in online workshops ballooned. Members of local, national and international associations could access webinars from around the globe, opening up a wealth of knowledge and expertise beyond the local market.

Although this competition presented exciting new opportunities and might have strengthened the Volunteer Engagement sector, it resulted in depleting local organizations' staying power.

Online workshop attendance dropped from 30 to 40, down to 15 to 25 members; the repeated call for support at a leadership level was unsuccessful. It increasingly became clear that the existing structure no longer worked and something had to change. TAVA was not alone in facing these pressures; in fact, similar associations around the world were reaching the same breaking point.

TAVA’s Demise Is Not An Isolated Incident

The dissolution of the TAVA is not an isolated incident. Having interviewed leaders of professional associations for Volunteer Managers in Canada, the USA and Australia, it is evident that common issues include a struggle to sustain membership, leadership and relevance in a shifting nonprofit landscape. Examining TAVA alongside peer organizations reveals common patterns, as well as distinct dynamics that underscore broader trends in the field of Volunteer Engagement.

While few associations attribute their collapse solely to COVID-19, the pandemic accelerated existing weaknesses. For Scarborough Association for Volunteer Administration (SAVA) in Ontario, already operating with fewer than 10 members, the pandemic brought final closure. Directors of Volunteer Services of Broward County (DOVS of Broward County) in Florida shifted to Zoom meetings but struggled to keep furloughed or redeployed members engaged. Dallas Association of Directors of Volunteers (DADV) in Texas saw membership peak during COVID, possibly due to reduced membership fees, only to collapse post-pandemic when employer support for professional development declined.

The pandemic, in other words, functioned less as the cause and more as the accelerant of structural decline.

Professional Flux, Weakened Identity

Even though the world is several years past the height of the pandemic, the profession itself is in flux. TAVA’s membership base eroded as dedicated volunteer manager roles were eliminated or absorbed into broader positions. This mirrors Administrators of Volunteer Resources Saskatchewan (AVR-SK), where half the membership, healthcare volunteer coordinators, were redeployed during COVID, and many remaining professionals were juggling multiple responsibilities.

Former Australasian Association for Managers of Volunteers (AAMoV) Board Member Marg Joiner described members as “passionate but time-poor,” with high turnover as people moved up or out of Volunteer Engagement roles. The result is a weakened professional identity: fewer people saw themselves as belonging to a distinct field that merits association membership. Without a strong professional identity, associations struggled to demonstrate their relevance to both members and employers.

A consistent theme is the inability to recruit and retain new leaders. TAVA, like Administrators of Volunteer Resources BC (AVRBC), relied heavily on a small circle of long-serving leaders who shouldered leadership responsibilities for years due to a lack of successors. DOVS of Broward County formally dissolved when no one was willing to step into vacant board seats. DADV saw its active board shrink to just three members before ceasing operations. Across these associations, dedicated leaders carried the work until burnout set in, at which point the organizational structure could no longer hold. This “succession gap” proved fatal time and again.

As with TAVA’s experience, association membership numbers around the world often looked healthier on paper than in practice. AAMoV discovered that while they had over 100 “members,” only a fraction paid dues or participated. DADV maintained 58 registered members in its final year, but only five to eight consistently attended events.

It is striking that both large, established associations (TAVA, DADV, AAMoV) and small, localized groups (SAVA, DOVS Broward County) dissolved for similar reasons. This suggests that geography, size or even longevity are not protective factors. Rather, sustainability depends on ongoing member engagement, clear-value propositions and leadership renewal. Without these, even well-established organizations in major urban centers like Toronto and Dallas cannot endure.

Surprises and Questions from TAVA’s Fate

What makes TAVA’s case distinct is its location within a major urban hub, with a large and diverse nonprofit sector to draw from. Unlike AVR-SK (which faced geographic barriers) or SAVA (which never had more than a handful of members), TAVA had access to a significant potential membership base. Its dissolution therefore reflects not just local challenges but a deeper professional identity crisis: Volunteer Engagement is still not consistently recognized, resourced or valued as a field in its own right. This deeper identity crisis came to a head in TAVA’s final days.

After a failed attempt to host a town hall for membership to give everyone a chance to determine TAVA’s fate, leadership decided to close doors and host a final farewell brunch, presentation and networking opportunity. Because there were no written bylaws available that clearly outlined how to end TAVA’s existence, the Administrative Chair and Treasurer guided leadership through this process, creating a systematic dissolution plan, consulting non-profit laws in Ontario and applying the “clubman’s veto." In addition, the Professional Association of Volunteer Leaders Ontario (PAVRO) kindly agreed to store any files on their portal for safe keeping. Files included the above-mentioned systematic dissolution plan and starter kit, including $500 that could be accessed by an individual or group who wished to resurrect the association. In this way, TAVA closed with intention, leaving behind a framework should future leaders wish to rebuild.

However, TAVA’s closure might have been indicative of a more significant shift in the Volunteer Engagement landscape.

During and after the pandemic, urban centres turned inward, increasingly focusing on community based initiatives, such as Volunteer Toronto’s Power of Us Microgrants or Volunteer Lethbridge’s partnership in Alberta with Better Impact, centralizing community engagement. These shifts suggest that while associations may fade, other forms of infrastructure are emerging to support the sector.

Earlier in 2025, we surveyed 39 Volunteer Engagement professionals who identified as members of Volunteer Engagement professional associations and have never served in a leadership volunteer role (e.g., Executive Committee Member, Conference Chair, Board Member) with those associations. These Volunteer Engagement professionals are primarily members of local associations in Canada.

We wanted to test the hypotheses that job demands, personal capacity, caregiving responsibilities and other volunteer commitments are primary barriers; that some professionals are not interested in leadership duties; and that some may not feel welcome to serve. The data largely confirmed these ideas. Nearly half (47 percent) of respondents cited job demands as a barrier, while 51 percent pointed to personal capacity and 41 percent to family and caregiving. Others noted barriers like expectations to contribute financially, lack of structure or long service terms. The survey provided evidence to back up what many association leaders had long suspected.

While 41 percent said they weren’t interested in leadership responsibilities, just 13 percent reported feeling unwelcome. Still, some respondents described leadership circles as “cliquish” or “a group of friends.”

We did not analyze identity-based factors in this survey, but the predominance of white women in this field raises important questions about whether those outside that demographic feel equally welcome to lead.

Despite these barriers, interest and awareness are present: 74 percent had been interested in a leadership role and 59 percent had been directly asked to serve. Too, 79 percent or respondents were aware of open roles and 62 percent said they understood the expectations. However, 44 percent said the time commitment made leadership feel “not for them,” and another 44 percent didn’t know what supports were available.

Ultimately, the findings suggest that it’s not a lack of leadership potential holding our associations back, but a lack of structural support. When employers don’t recognize association membership, let alone leadership, as valuable, it reinforces a cycle of disengagement and prevents future leaders from gaining advocacy and communication skills that support their conversations with employers. Long-term success of our associations will require rethinking how we invite, equip and sustain future leaders.

One promising example is the approach taken by Volunteer Management Professionals of Canada (VMPC). Erin McLean, Chair of Regional Engagement and Engage Co-Editor for Ethics, supports local gatherings and partnerships organized by VMPC Regional Committee volunteers. These volunteers contribute without holding governance roles, allowing for flexible, project-based involvement that can be aligned with their capacity. If no Regional Committee volunteers are active in a given area, VMPC members still receive national benefits while local activity is paused. This flexibility marks a sharp contrast to the rigid structures that hampered associations like TAVA.

VMPC Regional Committees were created upon the dissolution of AVRBC in 2018. Former AVRBC President Lindsay Baker shared that the AVRBC Board approached VMPC about transitioning to a Regional Committee. From there, they co-created a framework focused on local connections and networking.

Charisse Dimacali and Tracy Laluk shared their experience as Co-Chairs of VMPC’s Manitoba Regional Committee, which hosts virtual and in-person informal events for leaders of volunteers across the province. The Manitoba Regional Committee is an accessible space for connections, mentorship and information sharing about grants and opportunities. Leaders of volunteers from newer or less resourced organizations are welcome to join in for one meeting free of charge, offering an initial chance to explore the community before committing to VMPC membership. Thanks to collaborations across the sector and a strong support from Volunteer Manitoba, the committee is able to extend its reach to all of Manitoba volunteer engagers. Examples like this demonstrate that associations can evolve without disappearing entirely.

Kristine Flynn, former AVR-SK President, shared how members were presented with three options when there was a lack of leadership sustainability in 2024: complete dissolution, transition to VMPC Regional Committee or continuation with new leadership. Voting on these options was required as AVR-SK was a registered nonprofit, but it was challenging to meet quorum.

Ultimately, AVR-SK members voted by email that an official transition to a VMPC Regional Committee could proceed. AVR-SK funds were transferred to VMPC and a memorandum of understanding was signed to restrict those funds to Saskatchewan-specific activities. All AVR-SK members received a free year of VMPC membership. This transition reflects one pathway forward for associations that might otherwise collapse.

Takeaways and Lessons Learned from TAVA’s Closure

We observe that Volunteer Engagement professionals often take the initiative to connect through informal means: rekindling relationships from now-defunct associations, connecting through sector-specific interests, or being introduced through supportive managers, technology vendors or training programs. And the decline of professional associations for Volunteer Managers – whether urban or rural, geographically wide or narrow, in North America or Australia – reveals converging forces like leadership burnout, professional role erosion, pandemic disruption and a waning sense of collective value.

But TAVA’s closure is emblematic of a wider trend: the infrastructure that once supported Volunteer Engagement professionals is fragmenting, leaving open questions about how the field will sustain professional development, peer networks and advocacy in the future. Yet even in this fragmentation, there are signals of renewal and reinvention.

Our vision for the future is clear: Leaders of Volunteers must continue to have spaces to connect, learn and grow together. After all, we are in the business of helping people thrive on human connection, discussion, mentorship and exploration of new and existing ideas. If you lead an association that’s struggling, consider modernizing your structure or winding down intentionally. If you're a member of an active association, ask what leadership could look like if you stepped forward. If your local group has closed, reconnect with peers, welcome new professionals or explore VMPC’s Regional Committee model.

We hope that by sharing our experience around TAVA’s dissolution, and providing this new research and analysis, we spark new ideas about what those spaces look like and what it means to lead inside them.