Loading...
Memo Join Recreation Board Goal Setting Program . DATE: February 6, 1991 TO: Honorable Mayors and City Council Members THROUGH: City Managers, James Miller and steven Mielke FROM: Joint Recreation Board BY: Richard Wilson, '(' { ~ Recreation Director ~\vJ SUBJECT: Joint Recreation Board Goal Setting Exercise ----------------------------------~-------------------------~-------------------~~--- ----------------------------------------------~----------------------~--------------- The Joint Recreation Board conducted two goal setting exercises in the summer and fall of 1989. The facilitator for these meetings was Lyle Sumek of Sumek and Associates. Three high priority goals were identified. These goals and there outcome are as follows: l. DEVELOP A MISSION STATEMENT. This was accomplished as a first task. It leads . the Board in all deliberations, may be viewed foremost on the monthly meeting agendas, etc. The Recreation Board's mission statement is: "To develop, promote and provide quality opportunities and experiences in anticipation of and in response to the leisure time needs and interests of the Hopkins-Minnetonka community". 2. DEVELOP A STATEMENT SUPPORTING USE OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS. This goal continues. Letters have been sent to the Superintendent of Schools for the Minnetonka and the Hopkins School districts, requesting clarification of their intentions. Responses have been received from their Community Education Departments. The Recreation Board is considering further communications, politely pointing out where there have been conflicts in the past and asking for suggestions on how to improve the relationship. 3. CONDUCT A USER SATISFACTION AND A NON-USER SURVEY. This was accomplished during the summer of 1990, by the Decision Resources, LTD. The results of this survey were received in June, 1990. Their Executive summary of the report is attached. The complete report from Decision Resources is available in the Recreation Department office. We are proud to report that the "users" of the Recreation Department programs responded, based on the factors of "general liking of the program", "good instructors" I "good facilities" and "well organized", "a solid overall satisfaction rate of 94%". . RLW: 1mb memo14 -- --.. __ Decision ._ Resources Ltd. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This study contains the results of a telephone survey of 500 residents of the cities of Hopkins and Minnetonka. Two strati- fied samples of 250 users and non-users of Hopkins-Minnetonka Recreation Programs were interviewed. Survey responses were gathered by professional interviewers on May 14 - June 1, 1990. The average interview took twelve minutes. All respondents interviewed in this study were parts of either a randomly gener- ated sample of the two cities or of program users. In general, random samples such as this yield results projectable to their respective universes within ~ 6.2 percent in 95 out of 100 cases. Program users were more likely to be drawn from households in which two adults resided with at least one school-aged child. They have lived in the communities for an average of 10.5 years. Eighty-two percent owned their own homes. Seventy-four percent were married, while sixteen percent were single. Upscale white collar occupations dominated head-of-household job categories: twenty-four percent were professional-technical job-holders, . while forty percent were owner-managers. Retirees were a core group of about fourteen percent. The median age reported was 39.3 years old, with high usership featured in the 25-44 and over 65 age brackets. Almost one-half of the program users were college graduates, reporting household incomes over $45,800.00 annually. Women outnumbered men by about three percent, and Minnetonka natives constituted sixty-eight percent of the sample. Several programs were used by over one-quarter of this sample. The swimming beaches at Shady Oak or Libbs Lakes at- tracted twenty-nine percent of the respondents. Adult softball posted a reported usage of twenty-six percent, as did use of the ice rink warming houses. Youth soccer, both indoor and fall sessions, was the only other program to break the twenty pe~cent participation mark. Program users were then asked to evaluate each program in which they had participated during the past two years. A solid overall satisfaction rate of ninety-four percent was established. Satisfaction was based upon several factors: gene~al liking of the program (forty-seven percent), good instructor (fourteen percent), good facilities (eight percent), and well-organized (seven percent). Dissatisfaction was far more ideosyncratic. Participants were further asked to rate the recreationa1 . program(s) on five dimensions. The strongest evaluations were posted for quality of the facilities (eighty-seven percent 3128 Dean Court. Minneapolis. Minnesota 55416 · (612) 920-0337 "excellent" or "good ") and convenience of hours (eighty-eight percent). seventy-nine percent approved of the quality of in- struction or supervision; seventy-seven percent, the convenience . of registration procedures; and, seventy-four percent, the modest cost of the program. On each of the latter three dimensions, eleven to twelve percent could not comment. In only one case did unfavorable ratings exceed ten percent -- the cost of the program at fifteen percent. Overall, these ratings are impressively high. A request for changes or improvements resulted in three major suggestions. Better facilities and better hours were improvements mentioned by ten percent, each. Obtaining better teachers was a suggestion of eight percent. Ninety-four percent of the participants would recommend the program in which they participated to a friend or acquaintance with similar interests. Their personal enjoyment and worthwhile view of the program were key reasons for recommending it. Repeat program registrants were also very numerous; seventy- seven percent participated more than once. Changing interest and time demands were the key reasons stated by one-time program enrollees. Both the large number of repeat users and the high number of multiple program users indicates that a large and dependable audience has been developed for these offerings. User outdoor and indoor leisure time preferences were also . ascertained. Their most popular outdoor recreational activities were walking and jogging (twenty percent) , baseball (fourteen percent) , biking (thirteen percent) , and golf (ten percent) . Tennis, fishing, boating, yard work, and skiing were also men- tioned by about five percent, each. Indoor leisure time was spent in reading (twenty-four percent) , volleyball (eleven per- cent) , racquetball (seven percent), basketball (six percent) , swimming (six percent), television viewing (six percent), hobbies (six percent), and cards ( s ix percent) . suggestions for recrea- tional programming geared toward outdoor leisure time activities included more trails and more golfing opportunities. Instruc- tional classes were the only programming suggestion dealing with indoor recreational activities. The only improvements or changes that program users would like to see are oriented more toward facilities than toward programming. Limitations on increased usage of current recreational pro- grams tended to revolve around time, transportation, and informa- tion. The amount of time available for leisure was the major limit on further participation; thirty-five percent felt this impacted them a lot. The availability of transportation and travel distances were problems for about one-quarter of the sample, while the availability of information about facilities and programs hindered almost forty percent. The availability of facilities was a moderate problem for about one-third of the . respondents. Examining programming schedules and transportation needs, as well as increasing both general and specific communica- 2 tions, would appear to be the indicated course for removing barriers to further participation. . Recreation program non-users possessed a somewhat different demographic profile. Non-users possessed a median longevity of ten years; but, almost three times as many have resided in the two cities for less than two years. They were more likely to be empty-nesters: married couples with no children at home. Seven- ty-two percent reported owning their own home, so renters are more numerous in this sample. Sixty-four percent were married and a larger than the user sample twenty-five percent were sin- gle. occupationally, the head-of-household job classifications were remarkably similar between the two groups. The median age of a non-user was 44.5, somewhat higher than recreational program participants, and almost twice as many were over 55 years old and under 25 years old. Educational achievement was only slightly different between the two groups, but the median household income was $41,350.00 -- almost $4,000.00 lower than the average of the program users. Women were slightly more prominent in the non- users group, and Minnetonka residents were also somewhat more numerous. The last result is attributable to the large number of Hopkins seniors who use that community's senior and community centers. The outdoor and indoor recreational interests reported by non-users was fundamentally similar to that of program users, with several major exceptions. Walking and jogging was more . popular, at twenty-seven percent. Softball and baseball proved less popular, engaged in enthusiastically by nine percent. Biking was also less popular at nine percent. And, water sports were mentioned by five percent, a marked increase over the inter- est expressed by program users. The accent appears to be on individual, rather than team, recreational pursuits. Differences in indoor leisure time activities included more time spent on crafts and hobbies (eleven percent) , exercise (eight percent) , and swimming (five percent) . However, it should be noted, that bath groups -- users and non-users, alike -- tended to exhibit the same general recreational interests. When asked for suggestions about programming that they would like to see offered, non-users registered the same comments as current program users. More trails and more golf opportunities were suggestions for outdoor recreation; the former more popular than the latter. And, classes were the major indoor recreational interest. Impediments to using current programs were markedly similar to the obstacles facing current users. The amount of free time available was the greatest problem. Information was an issue for forty percent of the non-users. And, like the current partici- pants, the schedule of offerings presented some problems. The only exception noted was the greater obstacle which personal health presented - for eighteen percent. . Overall, the Hopkins-Minnetonka Recreation programs receive 3 ---.---- outstanding ratings. They have developed a firm and recurring audience over time. But, there are certainly several improve- . ments which could be undertaken -- particularly with respect to program information. Also, the aging of the cities will require a program geared more toward empty-nesters and seniors in the future. But, apart from these challenges, both communities are served by one of the most effective Parks and Recreation Depart- ments in the Metropolitan Area. . . 4