What is the quality index?

How long do projects last in which volunteers work with people (children, teaching, care, sport)?

Why this criterion: With short projects, children and participants keep seeing new faces. That harms attachment and continuity; the longer someone stays, the more the local partner gains.

• 0 points Projects with people can be booked for less than 4 weeks.
• 1 point At least 4 weeks for projects with people.
• 2 points At least 8 weeks for projects with people. Shorter projects only without direct care or teaching (construction, nature), with an explanation of why that works.

Do projects start at the request of the local partner or community?

Why this criterion: Good volunteering starts with a local need, not with what volunteers would like to do.

• 0 points Nothing about how projects come about.
• 1 point A general claim that projects respond to local demand.
• 2 points Explained per project that it started at the request of the local partner or community and which need it meets.

Does the volunteer support local staff, or take over their work?

Why this criterion: Volunteers should not replace paid local jobs or run a class or group on their own. Local staff should stay in the lead.

• 0 points Volunteers do the work of a paid local worker, or teach or coach on their own.
• 1 point A general statement that volunteers replace no one, or a mixed picture.
• 2 points Explained concretely that local staff stay in the lead and the volunteer supports, with examples per project.

Are there multi-year partnerships, and is work handed over between successive volunteers?

Why this criterion: Impact only happens when the work continues after a volunteer leaves.

• 0 points Separate placements without coherence.
• 1 point Long-term cooperation with partners is mentioned.
• 2 points Multi-year partnerships and a fixed way of handing over work between successive volunteers.

Does the organisation offer volunteering in orphanages, children's homes or other care where children live?

Why this criterion: Volunteering in children's homes can harm children and sometimes keeps institutions going that separate children from their families. See Better Care Network and ReThink Orphanages.

• 0 points Volunteering in an orphanage, children's home or other residential care is offered (knock-out).
• 1 point Not offered, but there is no stated position.
• 2 points An explicit position against volunteering in children's homes, with an explanation and a reference to an external source.

How are children protected in practice?

Why this criterion: A policy on paper is not enough. Volunteers must know and sign the rules and know where to report concerns. See Keeping Children Safe.

• 0 points Projects with children without visible rules.
• 1 point Some rules, such as never being alone with a child, or just a code of conduct.
• 2 points A code of conduct volunteers sign, a reporting procedure, a safeguarding contact person and training on it. Also 2 if there are no projects with children.

How does the organisation deal with wild animals?

Why this criterion: Cuddling, riding, walking with or bathing wild animals causes stress and sustains breeding and trade. See World Animal Protection.

• 0 points Contact with wild animals as an activity: cuddling, riding, walking, bathing, breeding or photos with animals (knock-out).
• 1 point Animal projects without an explicit hands off policy or guidelines.
• 2 points A hands off policy, recognised sanctuary or conservation, with a reference to guidelines of an animal welfare organisation. Also 2 if there are no animal projects.

Are there rules for photos and social media, and is poverty not used as an attraction?

Why this criterion: Local people and children are entitled to privacy and dignity. Poverty is not a sight to see.

• 0 points No rules and poverty as an attraction, such as slum visits or promotional images of poverty.
• 1 point No explicit rules, or only a general call to photograph respectfully.
• 2 points Clear rules for photos and social media of local people and children, and no poverty as an attraction.

Do volunteers only do tasks they are trained for?

Why this criterion: What you may not do at home without a qualification, you should not do abroad either. Medical work without training is especially dangerous.

• 0 points Volunteers without medical training perform medical procedures, such as vaccinations, wound care or consultations (knock-out).
• 1 point Tasks seem suitable, but no limits are described.
• 2 points Requirements per task, and the site states explicitly what a volunteer may not do.

From what age can you take part?

Why this criterion: Working with vulnerable children or in care requires maturity. Minors do not belong there without their own supervision.

• 0 points Under 18 allowed for work with children or care without extra supervision, or nothing stated.
• 1 point From 18, without further requirements.
• 2 points From 18, with higher requirements for demanding tasks (care, teaching, youth work).

Can the volunteer communicate with the people they work with?

Why this criterion: Without a shared language, working together and teaching is hardly possible.

• 0 points Language is not mentioned.
• 1 point Language advice without requirements, or only for some projects.
• 2 points Required language level per project, or a language course before or on arrival where needed.

How many volunteers work on a project at the same time?

Why this criterion: Too many volunteers at once puts pressure on local staff and turns the project into a goal in itself.

• 0 points Large groups on one project without a limit, or nothing stated.
• 1 point Numbers are mentioned, but not in relation to local staff.
• 2 points A maximum number of volunteers per project in relation to local staff, with an explanation.

What share of the participant fee goes to the country and the local partner?

Why this criterion: Volunteers often pay a lot. It is fair to show how much of that reaches the project.

• 0 points Cannot be determined.
• 1 point Less than half, or only a rough indication.
• 2 points Demonstrably more than half goes to the country and the partner, in amounts or percentages.

Does the organisation prevent partners from becoming dependent on volunteer money?

Why this criterion: When a project runs on volunteer money, the number of volunteers matters more than the people it serves.

• 0 points Partners are visibly dependent on volunteer money, or volunteers are asked to give money to children or projects on site.
• 1 point No signs, but no policy either.
• 2 points A policy that partners do not become dependent on volunteers, and donations go through a fixed, accountable route.

Is the participant's money protected and is cancellation clearly arranged?

Why this criterion: Participants often pay months in advance. A guarantee scheme protects them if something goes wrong.

• 0 points No terms on cancellation or refunds can be found.
• 1 point General terms with a cancellation policy.
• 2 points A clear cancellation policy and protection of the money, such as a guarantee fund or client account.

Is the organisation reviewed by an independent party?

Why this criterion: An external review shows that an organisation does not only assess itself.

• 0 points No external review.
• 1 point A general label or registration, such as charity status, or membership of a trade association.
• 2 points A review aimed at volunteering or charities, such as an accredited charity seal, B Corp, an EU Quality Label or an external audit of projects.

How is the volunteer's safety arranged?

Why this criterion: Volunteers are far from home. In an accident or crisis it must be clear what happens.

• 0 points Nothing stated.
• 1 point An emergency number or compulsory insurance, without a further protocol.
• 2 points A risk assessment per location or emergency protocol, compulsory insurance and 24 hour availability.

Where can you go with a complaint or report?

Why this criterion: Anyone who sees or experiences something must be able to report it safely, also outside the organisation.

• 0 points No complaints procedure.
• 1 point Complaints can be reported to the organisation, or there is only a confidential adviser.
• 2 points A described complaints procedure with a confidential adviser or an independent complaints body.

Is there a permanent coordinator in the country?

Why this criterion: Problems are best solved by someone nearby who knows the project and the volunteer.

• 0 points No own staff or permanent contact person in the country.
• 1 point A contact person in the country, at a distance.
• 2 points A permanent local coordinator who visits the project and has at least weekly contact with the volunteer.

Does the local partner have a say about the volunteers?

Why this criterion: The partner knows best what helps. They must be able to assess and to say no.

• 0 points The partner is not heard.
• 1 point Partners are quoted or heard in another way, for example in an evaluation.
• 2 points The partner also assesses the volunteer and the cooperation, and can refuse volunteers.