Levy Review Summary Presentation 2014 (Incorporating feedback received from presentations and discussions with Centres and Clubs as at 4 August 2014)
Background • 2007 AGM -75% levy increase due to national office financial position and agreed level of service that sport wants to see. • 2008 transformation and strategic review. Acceptance that we needed to change to improve and grow. • 2010 new constitution adopted. • 2011-2013 development of new member management system.
Our agreed strategic priorities Key Priorities • Leadership • Sustainability • Engaging People • Excellence in Performance • Exciting Profile
Benefits of Member Management System New member management system - the heart of much of what we want to do… • We now have the capability to know who our people are; can understand how to tailor products, programmes and services; • Ability to talk to members and meet specific communication needs; • Accurate measurement of membership means we can talk more confidently with commercial partners about opportunities; • Provides the opportunity to consider a different Levy model.
Current Levy Collection System • Current model seen as a controversial “tax” – declaration of numbers debated at every AGM. • Athletics NZ sets its required level of funding. • Centres are invoiced their share based on Registered Members from previous registration year. • Each Centre decides what they will charge clubs. Some subsidise, some pass on direct ANZ cost, some add their own centre fee. • Many interpretations of social member and if they should be “registered” and therefore are not necessarily declared.
Levy Review Process to Date Working Group formed: • Representation from Club, Centre, Rules Committee, Board, Staff; • Workshops in December 2013 and February 2014; • July 2014 - Presentations to Centres and Clubs of working group proposal and feedback sought.
Levy Review Objectives Levy Review set out to develop a new model that would: • Remove the collection burden from the Centres; • Ensure that all participants are on the member management system; • Create an incentivised approach to registration. Working Group Purpose was to: • Assess the current model; • Identify other options, review other sports models; • Agree a preferred option; • Subject it to scrutiny through discussions with Centres and Clubs.
Levy Value • What value does Athletics NZ provide? Much debated and often asked, value perception is different for many members. • The levy provides a financial contribution to Athletics NZ infrastructure – admin, coach, officials, club development, programmes and products, infrastructure for rules, competitions and investment (Sport NZ, sponsors, stakeholders), the IAAF “member” in NZ, advocacy … • A whole lot of “unseen stuff”. Justification of value is a national, regional and club challenge…
Proposed Approach • Clubs continue to pay an annual membership fee (1 Apr – 31 Mar) ($115). • For ALL club members, one broad based, low rate membership fee paid to Athletics NZ via the clubs (and eventually through the member management system). • A separate annual competition fee to enter National Champs. • Potential to add on other services or benefits as we develop and grow products and services. • Clubs and Centres add on their fee.
Proposed Approach Centre and Club Fees: • Set at their choosing; • Based on the Centres and Clubs “value proposition”; • Such fee, may give a member access to centre or club competitions, ribbon days and the like; • Some Centres may choose not to have a fee.
Proposed Approach The Competition “license”: • Acknowledges that not everyone wants to go to nationals; • The Competition fee provides the right to enter all ANZ National Champs, being: (Track & Field, Junior 3000m, Senior 3000m, Combined Events, 10000m, Long Distance Walks, Half Marathon, Marathon, Cross Country, Road Race, Road Relay, Mountain Running, 100km) ; • Entry fees will still be payable; • All competition “license” holders must also pay any applicable centre fee.
Proposed Approach Future Potential: • Research shows that over 600,000 kiwis take part in organised running events; • Potential to deliver a direct membership to these people; • Preference to push them to Clubs and Centres to get programmes and services wherever possible; • Could offer event entry discount opportunities for recreational runners and walkers; • Fees would ensure that Clubs are still the best route for membership.
Current numbers Let’s look at some of our numbers: • Total current recorded “membership”:18,500; • Consistently been around 20,000 (15+ years); • Total number of individuals attending National Champs: 2,500; • Current Levy returns $500k. (18.5k members average $27 per head)
Where does the levy go? The $500,000 represents 10% of total revenue, 25% of total revenue with no SNZ, HPSNZ funding. All other revenue is tagged – the only discretionary spend that we have is the levy. This year’s community development expenditure budgets, excluding salaries and high performance: $54k Club Development initiatives $61k Officials Development $90k Coach Development $82k Communications $52k Member Management & Website Add governance, salaries, finance, general admin…
Some options… Base Fee $10 $15 $17.50 $20 Member Numbers 13000 130,000 195,000 227,500 260,000 15000 150,000 225,000 262,500 300,000 20000 200,000 300,000 350,000 400,000 25000 250,000 375,000 437,500 500,000 Competition Licenses $40 $50 $60 $70 2500 100,000 125,000 150,000 175,000 Remember… • Low rate, broad base • Current revenue required from the Association Levy $500k
Individual impact • Members that don’t go to National Championship events should pay less – more incentive to become an ANZ member and participate in Centre events. • Members that go to Nationals should pay a similar fee to what they are currently paying (dependant on how Centres charge ANZ and Centre levy). • Social and younger members will now pay the membership fee – however at a lower fee it is easier to demonstrate this value rather than current registration system figure.
Challenges and Risks • The greatest risk shifts from Centres to the National body. • Proposed model reliant on full buy-in at Club level. • Needs all members to pay the base fee. • Reduced income to ANZ will quickly result in a drop of service delivery. Ultimately it is salaries that would be cut, therefore reducing ANZ’s ability to deliver programmes and projects. • Need Clubs and Centres to monitor for the benefit of all. • Alternatively creation of some incentive programme of returning a surplus to Centres could be considered.
Feedback Received • Consider a reduced fee for under sevens ($5?). • Consider a reduced fee for students ($10?). • ANZ needs to demonstrate its value better to Centres, Clubs and members. • Consider not charging volunteers. • Need clear definition of membership types. • Consider club affiliation fee – lower vs higher. • Consider splitting competition fee winter vs summer or per number of events.
Feedback Received • Club life members – who pays? • Family discounts – multiple children. • Would road relay numbers be impacted by competition license? • Reduce entry fees if introducing a competition license. • We don’t value ourselves enough – charge more. • Walkers; where do they fit?
Feedback Received • Reduced term membership – pay as you go. • What about Masters fees? • Competition license for Masters who compete a National XC and road champs? • Is the figure of 2,500 competition licenses a true representation of the number of individuals competing in the National Champs? • Time frame achievable – Clubs need to set fees for next year. Mixed feedback on required notice.
How would change be made? • Proposal needs nationwide Club and Centre support. • Your feedback is required! • Once agreement is evident, new Regulations need to be drafted, 50 day consultation period. • After feedback, and once Rules Committee OK, goes to Board for approval. • Any change implemented for 1 April 2015. • Feedback to levy@athletics.org.nz
Next steps • Review feedback received to date. • Further research on the likely numbers and then more remodelling on the membership and license figure options. • Consider timeframes. • Determine how we further engage with revised modelling. • Develop By-law amendments . Remember you can provide feedback to - levy@athletics.org.nz
Levy Review Summary Presentation 2014 (Incorporating feedback received from presentations and discussions with Centres and Clubs as at 4 August 2014)
Recommend
More recommend
