Report to: Development Services Committee Report Date: April 10, 2007
SUBJECT: Recreation Department
Organizational Review
PREPARED BY: Barbara M. Roth, ext. 7515
RECOMMENDATION:
That the report titled Recreation Department Organizational
Review be received;
And that the Organizational Model for Recreation
Services, contained in the presentation of Wood-Sloan Inc. dated April 10, 2007 (Appendix A)
be endorsed in principle, and the organizational and complement adjustments for
2007 be referred to the 2007 budget deliberations for consideration;
And that the organizational and complement adjustments
timed for 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011 be reviewed and reassessed in conjunction
with each year’s annual budget process;
And that John Ryerson be appointed as Acting Director of
the Culture portfolio;
And that the Culture portfolio report directly to the
Commissioner of Community & Fire Services;
And that Staff be
authorized and directed to take the actions set out in this report;
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The Recreation
and Culture Services Department has undergone an Organizational Review within
its Recreation Division, the results of which were presented to Members of
Council in a series of two information workshops, followed by a report and
presentation to General Committee on April 2, 2007.
At the February
20th Workshop, the Director, Recreation and Culture Services
provided an overview of the Department’s services and current challenges. At the March 6th Workshop and
during the presentation to General Committee on April 2, 2007, the consultant, Ainslie Wood, Wood-Sloan Inc. provided an overview
of the proposed organizational model for Recreation including its benefits and
costs.
General
Committee requested further discussion at its April 10, 2007 Development Committee
meeting. Appendix A contains
supplementary information, and will be presented by the consultant at that
time.
The proposed
organizational model has been revised to be phased-in over five years,
2007-2011 at a total annualized salary cost of $934,059 and one time costs of
$136,000. It is the goal of the
department to work toward sustaining the current recovery rate of 70%. There is also anticipated net cost avoidance
of three positions for the pending East Markham Community Centre. The department projects the net annual
salaries impact resulting from this reorganization to be $197,881.
A summary of the
Organizational Review findings and recommendations is contained within the
background section of this report, below.
FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS:
The proposed organizational model is phased over five years at a
total annualized operating budget salary cost of $934,059 and one time capital
cost of $136,000. For 2007, the
annualized operating amount is $224,277, comprised of two items.
1. Cost
associated with realigning existing positions is estimated at $102,707.
2. Costs
for one new position – Manager, Policy and Program Development, estimated at
$121,570.
For 2007, a one-time capital cost of $8,500 is required for a
workstation and computer.
The cost for 2008 is to add four new positions at an annualized
salary cost of $314,903 and one-time capital costs of $32,000.
In 2009, it is proposed to add two new positions at an annualized
salary cost of $145,938 and one time capital costs of $43,500.
In 2010, it is proposed to add two new positions at an annualized
salary cost of $145,938 and one-time capital cost of $43,500.
In 2011, it is proposed to add one new position at an annualized
salary cost of 103,003 and one-time capital cost of 8,500.
It is proposed that in each budget year, the positions would be
brought forward for deliberation and consideration.
|
RECREATION DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATIONAL
REVIEW
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
|
|
New FT Positions
|
|
FT
Conversions
|
|
* Annualized
Personnel Cost
|
|
One-time
Capital Cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
1
|
|
8
|
|
$224,276
|
|
$8,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
$314,903
|
|
$32,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
$145,938
|
|
$43,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
$145,938
|
|
$43,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
$103,003
|
|
$8,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
|
10
|
|
8
|
|
$934,059
|
|
$136,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Annualized
Personnel costs are at April
1, 2006 rates, and include Benefits @ 24%.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Community and Fire Services
Commission have been systematically reviewing its departments over the past 4
to 5 years. The review that is subject
of this report is the Recreation Division within the Recreation and Culture
Department - more specifically the Programs Branch and the Community Centre
Operations Branch. While the majority of
the Review focuses on these two functions, it also references the Culture
portfolio.
Ainslie Wood of Wood-Sloan Inc. was retained to develop a new organizational
model for Recreation Services. She
consulted extensively with Recreation staff and key internal partners during
the project, as well as researched three external municipal comparators.
Reasons
for the Review
The Review of Recreation Services was precipitated by:
- Changing demographics,
participation patterns and diversity within the general population and the
community
- An org model that could no
longer easily accommodate/integrate growth or new opportunities
- Some program gaps
- No defined on-site leadership
at large Community Centres
- A long-service and lean
management team (3) – accelerating the need to succession plan
- Increased
financial/administrative/HR requirements
- Minimal resources for
strategic operational planning, community consultation and business
support
Overall Goal
The main goal of the Review was to develop a new organizational model that would:
- Better accommodate growth
- Allow for strategic planning within the Department
- Address program gaps
- Target resources to meet the community’s needs
- Succession plan for the future.
Scope/Context
The scope of Recreation Services is large
and diverse and is detailed in the Director’s report (Appendix B). A sample is as follows:
- Maintain 17
facilities totaling 846,455 square feet of space and serving over 5M
visitors annually
- Issue over 6,200
rental contracts annually
- Operate 4 large
multi-use facilities year round, 15-20 hours per day, 7 days/week
- 80,000 direct program
registrations annually
- 440,000 swimmers
enjoyed recreational swims at 4 indoor and 2 outdoor pools
Programs are offered for pre-school,
children, youth, teens, adults, seniors and special needs in areas such as
general programs, aquatics, seniors programs, fitness programs, summer camps
and school break activities. Services are delivered through management of
2,200 people resources annually – the majority of which (2,100) are part-time
staff and volunteers. The Department’s
2006 operating budget was $20.5M in expenses and $14.6M in revenues. About 70% of expenses are recovered through
program and rental fees, making the cost on the tax base approximately $6m
annually.
Key
Pressures/Challenges
One of the key pressures facing the
Department is growth. With growth comes a need for more programs and facilities
in general, and for more drop-in programs, more consideration of cultural
diversity, health and therapeutic programs, and programming for special
needs. Recreation also needs to promote
wellness and active living and that relationship to health, within the community. Aging facility infrastructure requires more
repair. In 2006, 46 capital projects
were completed. There is increased
demand for dedicated facility space, extended hours, and broader access
(Fitness Centres.) There are part-time
staff recruitment and retention challenges, and with a 1,300+ part-time staff
workforce and over 800 volunteers assisting, training, orientation and due
diligence are paramount to ensure staff and public safety and an enjoyable
experience for patrons.
The Department also needs to plan for
operational effectiveness, efficiency, economy and stability. There is limited strategic planning to survey
community needs, research best practices, recommend policies and service
levels, and track performance with meaningful measures that demonstrate sound
policies and defensible practices and pricing.
Business support is also limited.
With increasing administrative/financial requirements and significant HR
and payroll volume, along with the partnership with the Contact Centre for registrations
processing, there is no “point-person” within the Department to investigate and
trouble-shoot matters other than the Director and Managers – making senior
staff less available and visible in the community and within the large
workforce they are responsible to manage.
All senior managers in the Department are eligible for retirement within
the next seven years making succession planning an important strategic focus.
Organizational
Model – Existing and Proposed
Currently, the Recreation and Culture Services Department is
organized along functional lines – Recreational Programs, Community Centre
Operations, Theatre, Museum, and Art Gallery.
The Review proposes a District and
Facility-based Model for Recreation Services with a planning wing to support
front-line service delivery.
Programs and Community Centre Operations would be blended at the
Manager levels. The two existing
Managers – Programs and Community Centre Operations are proposed to become
District Manager positions – one for the North District and one for the South
District. (Highway 7 would be the
“natural” boundary, allowing the Department to balance Manager workload /
responsibility as equitably as possible.)
These District Managers would be responsible for all recreation facilities
and program activities within a District.
In addition, each major multi-use recreation facility is proposed to
have dedicated on-site leadership in the form of a Community Centre
Manager. This position would be
responsible for all recreation activities and staff at the major community
centre and for building strong ties with the surrounding community.
The above positions would not be new / additional complement. Rather, they are proposed as reconfigured
existing positions.
A Policy and Program Development branch is proposed to support the
Districts and separate policy development and business requirements from
day-to-day service delivery; and would also consolidate sports field, ice, and
other facility allocations / bookings into a centralized function. This branch would be comprised of a few
existing positions that have Town-wide portfolios (such as Youth, Sport
Council, Seniors), augmented by new positions in other key areas of
specialty/expertise – such as Fitness & Health, Training & Development,
Business Services, and General Programs / Aquatics / Camps.
As with other Commission Reviews, a
phased-in approach to organizational realignment has been taken. New positions are proposed to be phased in
over a five-year period, and would continue to be subject to review and
reassessment during each year’s budget deliberations.
Benefits
of the Proposed Model and Value to Citizens
The District Model is flexible and expandable. It can easily be expanded to three or four
Districts as growth / volume dictate. It
is used successfully by other municipalities the size / scope of Markham (and
larger.) A similar model was introduced
for Operations in 2005, where the majority of Roads and Parks operations were
integrated under District Managers and supported by a technical services wing.
The Community Centre Manager positions encourage strong ties with
communities surrounding major multi-use facilities. Community Centre Managers would provide on‑site
leadership to a centre and a defined area.
Program and operations staff report to one position that is resident
on-site. The Community Centre Managers can adapt programming and facility use
to specific community needs, building the customer relationship, and providing
quick response to on-site issues and needs.
The model builds a Policy and Program Development Branch - which is
essentially an internal specialty and support function that supports front-line
service delivery through longer-range strategic operational planning. Specialty functions survey participants and
the community, monitor trends in their fields of expertise and design programs
and strategies to make the customer experience more relevant. Policies for each program area, including
operations, are developed / updated and communicated by this branch. The branch would also develop and recommend a
defensible pricing policy for all programs, rentals, subsidies, and surcharges
– and would cyclically review and update it.
And it would ensure marketing and promotion is strategically targeted
and that Boards and task forces (seniors, youth, sport, etc.) have adequate
support. Staff and volunteer
orientation, training and development would be consolidated within the
department providing consistency, improved alignment with corporate and due
diligence for this large (2,200+ workforce.)
The Business Services wing of the Policy & Program Development
Branch would also contribute to a better customer experience. For example, it would work closely with the Contact Centre to educate them on program offerings
to encourage patrons on wait lists into other programs that have capacity. It would consolidate and centralize seasonal
allocations and bookings for sports fields, ice and other facilities, making it
easier for the customer to find their rental needs and maximizing rental
potential. Internally, Business Services
would support financial, HR, payroll, technology needs and processes and
provide a single point of contact for corporate departments that deal with
Recreation on these issues. It would
also prepare and manage the Department’s budget.
Efficiencies are found through
realignment of existing staff and / or avoiding the need to hire some staff for
new facilities. For example, existing Fitness staff can be redeployed and
realigned to provide promotional opportunities for most, thus avoiding hire of
three full-time Fitness complement for the new East Markham Community
Centre. Instead, more / better use would
be made of part-time staff - which can be more effective and allow more back-up
contingency with a facility open 18-20 hours each day.
The model creates a wider range of jobs for staff development,
cross-functional back-up contingencies, and succession planning at all
levels. This expands and retains
intellectual and community knowledge within the department for a better
customer experience, provides more choice for internal promotion and back-up,
and assures service and leadership continuity when retirements occur.
Culture Services
At the April 2,
2007 General Committee there appeared to be a preference among
Members for Culture to report directly to the Commissioner of Community &
Fire Services – at least on an interim basis until a Cultural policy could be
developed and the function reviewed in more detail for best long-term fit. Staff support this option, although the
presentation will overview three options for the portfolio, should Members wish
further discussion on the matter. As
indicated in the April 2,
2007 report, staff are also recommending that John Ryerson
(currently Art Gallery Manager) be
appointed, on an Acting/Interim basis to lead a consolidated Cultural
portfolio.
Summary
By implementing the recommended
structure, Recreation will be better positioned to accommodate growth,
succession plan for the future, and strategically plan for operational program
needs that maximize revenue and improve customer experience in consideration of
changing demographics, cultural diversity, and community consultation.
BUSINESS UNITS CONSULTED AND AFFECTED:
Recreation
Services, Financial Services, Human Resources, Contact Centre, Asset
Management, and Strategic Services
RECOMMENDED
BY: ________________________ ________________________
Barbara M. Roth Jim
Sales
Director,
Recreation and Commissioner
of Community
Culture
Services and
Fire Services