Best Practices
in Recreation Risk Management
Risk Management
Best Practices
Ian McGregor, Ph.D.
George Brown, Ph.D.
Recreation
President, SportRisk
Exec. Director Univ.
University of Alabama
Best Practices: Background
 Project started in 2012 in Canada
 Reasons:
a) need for a better risk assessment
benchmarking tool
b) need ability to do comparisons between schools
 ‘Best Practices’ vs. ‘Standards’ approach
Best Practices: Background
Best Practices developed in 16 areas:
Programs: Sport Clubs; Intramurals; Youth Camps;
Instruction; Outdoor.
Facilities: Weight Room; Aquatics; Arena; Fields;
Fitness Centre; Climbing Wall; Facilities.
General: Risk Management Committee; Travel;
Waivers; Emergency Response.
Best Practices: Background
For Programs & Facilities: 6 categories
Staffing
Supervision & Instruction
Training
Facilities & Equipment
Documentation
Emergency Response Plan
Best Practices: Background
For ‘General’ Surveys:
All categories are unique
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
‘Demographics’ Survey:
Key information on each school
e.g. school size;
state; %male/female
Best Practices: Background
Surveys developed by experts in each
Best Practice area (Canada and the US)
Surveys consist of statements e.g.
Weight Room is supervised at all times.
Youth Camps program has
‘missing camper’ procedures in place.
Best Practices: Background
Statements and weightings for each Best
Practice statement were
 Developed and vetted by
experts/ seasoned professionals
in the field.
Best Practices: Background
For each statement, respondents asked if
2
They were currently doing the BP
1
Planning on doing it
0
Not planning on doing it
Best Practices: Background
Each statement is weighted to reflect
relative importance:
3
Critical
2
Very Important
1
Important
Best Practices: Background
Scoring system developed by multiplying
Response x Weight Factor
‘Currently doing’ (2) a Best Practice with a
3 ‘weighting’ gives a total of 2x3 = 6
‘Planning to do’ (1) a Best Practice with a
2 ‘weighting’ gives a total of 1x2 = 2
‘Not planning on doing’ (0) a Best Practice with a
3 ‘weighting’ gives a total of 0x3 = 0
Best Practices: Background
A Category Score (e.g. staffing) is calculated
for each category within a survey.
A Total Score for each Best Practice area is
obtained by adding all the categories within a
survey.
Best Practices: Implementation
Surveys administered through SurveyMonkey
Then downloaded to Access (creating a database)
Surveys piloted at 5 NIRSA schools - then modified
In 2015, surveys implemented at 35 NIRSA member
schools and 40 Canadian schools
Report, comparison graph sent to each school
Best Practices: Implementation
Surveys administered through SurveyMonkey
Then downloaded to Access (creating a database)
Surveys piloted at 5 NIRSA schools - then modified
In Fall 2015, surveys implemented at 35 NIRSA
member schools
Report, comparison graph sent to each school
Results
Recreation Director (& Risk Manager) from
each school receives:
A Report focusing on ‘action recommendations’
A Graph for all 16 Best Practice areas showing
comparisons with all schools
Analysis of Report
Suggested process:
1.Each area reviews, responds to the results
(using ‘Institutional Response’ column)
2.Risk Management Committee and Institutional
Risk Manager review all responses.
3. Action plan is created.
The University of Alabama
• Institutional Information
–
–
–
–
37,100 enrollment (77% increase over 12 years)
Comprehensive programs and services offered
Three indoor facilities operated
35 acre outdoor fields complex, seasonal outdoor
pool, tennis courts
– Challenge course, bike Operations, additional
satellite recreation site in planning/design
Utilization
• Over 80% of student body participates in a program,
service or facility
• Daily traffic within facilities is 87% student
• Wide array of membership categories available
• Participation in all indoor facilities is up 15-20%
• Health and wellness collaborations with employees
• Third-party contractual relationship for AT/PT service
Risk Management Process
• Risk Management by all. No defined point person for
department. Responsibility becomes shared.
• Risk management is a standing topic of all staff meetings
• AT/PT leadership attends and reports at staff meetings
• UREC Risk Management Advisory Committee meets
quarterly. Chaired by UA Director of RM.
• Many staff maintain SportRisk training updates
• Relationship with UA Risk Management/Office of Counsel
Use of Best Practices
•
•
•
•
•
UREC staff responded to surveys
Results submitted to McGregor & Associates
Compiled reports reviewed by staff and discussed
RMAC reports shared. Comments and guidance.
UREC staffed begin analysis of potential gaps and
areas to address
• Review Process (steps) enacted
Review Process
• Step 1: Identify variance in priorities (“A” Level Recommendations)
• Step 2: Review initial response (Don’t plan to or Plan to)
• Step 3: Discuss feasibility of steps to adopt the recommendations
• Step 4: Determine what processes, costs, staffing, timelines are necessary
• Step 5: Create program, service and facility priorities
• Step 6: Implementation
• Step 7: Evaluate effectiveness
Database Applications
1. Benchmarking Results
Conference (SEC)
Peer Institutions (SUG)
By Region (NIRSA or State)
2. By Specific Query of Program/Facility
“What % of institutions w/in SEC have a concussion protocol for Intramural Sports?”
“ What % of public institutions implement active shooter emergency training”?
Takeaways
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Know your department
Avoid blame but anticipate defensive postures
Realistic (SMART GOALS) should be applied
ALL staff own the process (UA is big on the process!)
RMAC serves to assist, advise and maintain accountability
Recognize incremental changes are good
PATIENCE IS A VIRTUE!
What’s Next?
Lots of possibilities!
3 Levels of Involvement
Level 1
Report with Action Recommendations
- Based on gaps uncovered by surveys
Graph showing how you compare with
- Other schools in all 16 Best Practice areas
3 Levels of Involvement
Level 2:
Breakdown by state/province; school size etc.
Breakdown of original Graph into components
 staffing, supervision, training, facilities & equipment,
documentation, emergency response
 16 unique graphs
3 Levels of Involvement
Level 2:
Breakdown by state/province; school size etc.
Breakdown of original Graph into components
 staffing, supervision, training, facilities & equipment,
documentation, emergency response
 16 unique graphs
New ‘Global’ Best Practices survey
Assesses business-related risks in your department:
> Financial; Data; HR; Facility Security; Reputational
3 Levels of Involvement
Level 3:
Graphs by component
e.g. Training comparison across all 16 Best Practices areas
Allows you to address consistency issues across department
3 Levels of Involvement
Level 3:
Graphs by component
e.g. training comparison across all 16 Best Practices areas
Tools and resources to address gaps
 policies, checklists, training resources
 developed by Campus Recreation experts
3 Levels of Involvement
Level 3:
Graphs by component
e.g. training comparison across all 16 Best Practices areas
Tools and resources to address gaps
 policies, checklists, training resources
 developed by Campus Recreation experts
Custom Queries
Custom Queries
Examples:
What % of schools have a RMC - in California, and
across N. America?
What % schools our size, in our athletic conference,
have a concussion protocol in place?
% schools in state with a missing camper protocol?
What do you want to know?
NIRSA Conference Special!
Register for LEVEL 1
Special Conference Rate: $400
email [email protected] by April 30
Indicate your school wants to participate in
‘NIRSA Conference Special’
Best Practices Program
For more information on
Best Practices program
http://www.sportrisk.com/best-practices
www.SportRisk.com