Food Bank Campaign: Scope, Stakeholders, and Metrics
A Marketing II class of 22 students partners with a local food bank on a three-week volunteer-recruitment campaign. The food bank has $500 for the campaign and wants more volunteers ages 18-24. Students surveyed 120 people at two school events and found that 68% recognize the food bank logo, only 12% understand how to sign up to volunteer, and 71% of respondents name Instagram as their main social channel. The food bank's Instagram account has 340 followers and no regular posting schedule. The class has nine 50-minute periods before the campaign ends. Five students miss every Friday because of a work-based internship. The food bank director insists on a television PSA and expects a large jump in volunteers. The teacher knows the budget is tight and wants students to practice scoping, metrics, and ethical communication with a community partner.
1. Analyze whether the class should include the television PSA in the three-week, $500 plan. Propose a revised campaign scope with budget lines that addresses the director's goal without overpromising.
Read the worked answer
A broadcast television PSA is a poor fit for the stated audience and budget. Production alone can consume the $500, and distribution to a meaningful 18-24 audience is unlikely to be free within three weeks. The survey points to Instagram and to a specific information gap: only 12% know how to volunteer. That suggests conversion content, not broad awareness advertising.
I would not simply reject the director. I would explain the trade-off and offer a substitute: a short vertical video produced with the school's media program at no cash cost, used on Instagram and the food bank's website rather than purchased broadcast time. The director keeps a video asset; the class keeps its budget focused on measurable conversion.
Sample $500 plan:
- $200 for geo-targeted Instagram boosts around the food bank's service area.
- $100 for printed QR cards and a counter sign for the food bank.
- $75 for volunteer onboarding materials and thank-you postcards.
- $75 for a small contingency for boosted posts that perform well.
- $50 for basic analytics or scheduling tools if needed.
Scope: two objectives, not a vague promise. Increase completed volunteer applications from a baseline the food bank provides, and increase saves or shares of the how-to-volunteer post. The class should state that a 120-person convenience sample cannot predict a large volunteer jump.
2. Identify three metrics for this campaign and explain how each distinguishes reach from conversion. What can the class legitimately claim from a 120-person convenience sample?
Read the worked answer
Three metrics at different stages:
- Reach: Instagram impressions and profile visits. These show whether the campaign got in front of people, but they do not show understanding or intent.
- Engagement quality: saves, shares, and clicks on the volunteer link. Saves and shares are stronger signals than likes because they suggest someone wants to return to the information or send it to others.
- Conversion: volunteer application starts and completed applications, or scheduled orientation slots. This is the outcome the food bank actually cares about.
The class should report reach and conversion separately so a high impression count does not get mistaken for success. The 120-person survey is a convenience sample from two school events, not a probability sample of the food bank's service area. It can justify a hypothesis, such as 'the sign-up process is unclear,' and it can provide directional language for posts. It cannot support a claim that 71% of 18-24 year-olds in the community use Instagram, and it cannot prove the campaign caused a volunteer increase without a baseline and comparison. The ethical communication point is to label the data accurately and avoid promising outcomes the class cannot control.
3. Five students miss every Friday. How would you structure roles and assessment so the campaign does not stall and every student still demonstrates learning?
Read the worked answer
I would design the campaign as a project with a shared tracker and individual evidence, not as a daily attendance-dependent group task. Friday work would be asynchronous and documented: scheduled posts, comment-response drafts, and a short status update in the shared tracker. The five interns would have roles that fit their available days, such as research lead, partner liaison, content scheduler, or metrics analyst, with a named backup for Friday handoffs.
Assessment would combine team deliverables with individual artifacts. Each student would submit a campaign contribution log, one piece of individual work (a post draft with rationale, a metric memo, or a partner email), and a short reflection on a decision. The team rubric would cover audience alignment, accuracy, and ethical claims; the individual rubric would cover the student's own reasoning. This prevents the Friday group from being penalized for absences and prevents absent students from getting credit without evidence.
Instructionally, I would use Monday check-ins to hand off Friday tasks explicitly and require a brief written handoff from the Friday team. If a deadline is at risk, the class would choose a lower-cost tactic rather than let the campaign stall. The five interns would still be accountable for their share through the tracker and individual artifact.