65B - SERVICE FINANCIAL REPORT - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

APPENDIX D: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS CRITERIA LIMITS OF COMPARATIVE DATA AND ANALYSIS Comparative analysis (benchmarking) is an important tool allowing for comparison of certain attributes of the City's management practices and fee structure. The process creates a deeper understanding of alternative providers, your place in the market, and varying fee methodologies, which may be used to enhance and improve the service delivery of parks and recreation. It is very difficult to find exact comparable communities, because each has its own unique identity, ways of conducting business, and differences in what populations it serves. The political, social, economic, and physical characteristics of each community make the policies and practices of each parks and recreation department unique. It is important to keep in mind that many park and recreation departments primarily serve residents, others serve a large portion of non-residents, while still others cater to the tourism market. Despite efforts to promote uniformity in comparison, organizations often have slightly different fee structures and associated benefits. For example, some parks and recreation departments may not report all benefits associated with the purchase of a center membership, or may not explain the breadth of indoor recreation spaces they have in the same way as another. The availability of detailed information may also be limited. Additionally, organizations do not typically define the expenditures of parks, trails, facilities, and maintenance the same way. Agencies also vary in terms of how they organize their budget information, and it may be difficult to assess whether or not the past year's expenses are typical for the community. Despite these inherent limitations, the comparative analysis and fee comparisons criteria presented in this document should be used as a catalyst for the City of PRCSA to continue to research fees, market position, and best practices for more specific areas when they are needed. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS DATA SOUGHT The communities selected for benchmarking data should be chosen primarily for their proximity and perceived similarities to PRCSA. Requested comparative data in addition to service specific fee structure may include: • Values, vision, and mission of the organization • Population and demographics • Median household income and household size • Prior year budget, actual expenses, and revenues for the entire department • Prior year budget, actual expenses, and revenues for the parks and recreation divisions • Number and square footage of Community/Recreation Centers • Total acres of open space and developed park land • Number of maintenance acres contracted out and maintenance description • Total miles of Department maintained trails • Number of indoor and outdoor pools • Number of lighted and unlighted softball/baseball fields • Recreation and parks department full-time employees and FTEs Often, comparative analysis data looks to weigh pertinent data along with comparing against a "per thousand" population calculation for categories including: total department budget, total acres, developed acres, miles of trails, Community/Recreation Center square footage, number of pools, number of softball/baseball fields, and recreation FTEs. Parks expenses and FTEs can be calculated per I 65B-59U 55