Selfish or duty?

According to Kant, a person’s actions may be in accord with the duty and indicative that the person has good will. Kant gives examples of duties and used them to illustrate the distinction between acting from a sense of duty (which has moral worth and is worthy of respect and acting in accord with duty, which is neither moral nor worthy of respect. In cases where the action is in accord with duty and the person has an immediate inclination to do the action, it is difficult to tell whether the action has moral worth. For example is you are honest and don’t lie or cheat because only due to fear of being caught, for Kant this in a example of a person acting in accord with duty but only for selfish reasons. Most people preserve their lives from inclination not from duty; however, according to Kant, such actions have no true moral worth. Those who act from a sense of duty are not only helping themselves but mankind as well. The person who acts out of a sense of duty achieves happiness. To secure one’s own happiness is a duty so that it is usually difficult to tell whether the immediate inclination or the duty determined the action. For me the difference between selfishness and duty become a bit murky when talking about community service. Do people who do community service act out of duty to the person or people they are helping or out of own selfish reasons? Is it still considered a good deed if you’re doing community service for both reasons? My personal opinion on the matter is that most people do community service for personal reasons, whether that be because it makes you feel like a good person, you feel like that good deed cancels out the bad deeds you did that week, or because you want to boost your energy, it has been my experience that very few people do community service out of duty for society. Maybe I have a pessimistic view but from my experience of other people, most if not all-good acts derive from self-interest motives. Thoughts?
-Morgan