This is probably a subject that could be over on the Convention thread but since more people are likely to see it here and hopefully engage in some discussion I'll go ahead and post (and see if i get chastised by the moderator!)
If you are out of the loop on convention topics this one is pretty important and will have an impact most likely on just about everyone who swims in pool and/or open water events.
Here is a quick overview of the proposal but be sure to click on this link and read through carefully: www.usms.org/.../eventsanctionfeeproposal.pdf
TASK FORCE CREATED TO DEVELOP A NEW SOLUTION
A task force was constituted at the 2014 convention with representation from open water,
pool swimmers, LMSCs, Finance Committee and the National Office. Their charge was to
study the issue of event sanction fees and bring forward a recommendation that would provide
opportunity for open water growth without taking dollars from existing programs.
The task force looked at all USMS sanctioned events concluding the cost of insurance and
event risk is not isolated to only open water events. Sanctioned pool events benefit from
USMS insurance and other event costs and should be contributing to help offset USMS insurance
costs just like open water events, clubs and workout groups. Therefore, the task
force recommended an event sanction fee model that adjusts the fee for open water events
and adds a fee for pool events.
Some thoughts:
- With regard to OW, we have already seen where events in our area have chosen to NOT use the USMS sanction because they can obtain 3rd party insurance at a lot lower cost. Is having the USMS affiliation important/necessary to run a successful event?
- Sanction fees are inconsistent in the USMS world but standard in USA Swimming. The difference is in USA sanction fee of $50 goes to the local LSC (USA swims version of masters LMSC) not the national office which is what USMS is proposing (and at a cost of $70), there is also a splash fee that is charged in USA swimming of $6 which again goes to the LSC. Both organizations charge a membership fee, for USA swimming the LSC gets to keep $12 of that fee the rest goes to the national office. Point being, I would support a local sanction fee not a national one.
Lot's more to all of this...as a meet host I look at things very different than a person who is a club member and competes but not involved with the financial side of the business. My concern is any increase in cost will go almost 100% to participants given the very low return on hosting meets (other than things like nationals or select invites)...just for a point of reference in AZ 2 of the largest facilities now charge about $2000-$2500 per day in pool rental.
Smaller LMSCs would hurt from such a thing where a meet would bring in less than 50 participants. :2cents:
From the proposal: "USMS will continue our sanction rebateprogram for LMSCs that are not able to absorb the new model."
Honestly, I'm surprised to learn that none of the regular pool meet entry fee goes to insurance.
I'd rather see a two-part fee like they have with open water (a smaller flat fee plus a per-participant fee), but it seems reasonable to allocate some of the insurance expense to those who are participating in pool events since pool events represent a fairly significant source of potential liability.
Based on projections, 93% of the club's insurance costs would still be covered by membership fees (77%) and open water event sanction fees (16%).
So a few things about the event fee.
Our insurance covers: practices, pool meets, OW events, and clinics. Currently it is being paid for out of (a) general membership fees and (b) (pretty large) OW sanction fees. The thought was that this is unfair to OW swimmers and event hosts, and has resulted in a decrease in sanctioned OW events. It is also a poor strategic decision if we want to expand our membership to include OW swimmers who are currently not USMS members.
The proposed fee levels will not cover the entirety of the insurance cost, the rest will come out of general membership. I'd have to look up the exact amount, but it isn't 100% and I am pretty sure it is less than 50%.
Meet hosts and swimmers are not billed directly by USMS under this plan, the LMSC is. The LMSC can decide how to pay for it. The LMSCs have the flexibility to decide how to pay the event fees -- as they do now with OW fees. They could cover the cost entirely out of their budget, or pass some or all of it to the meet hosts, depending on the financial situation of the LMSC and meet hosts.
This will be maybe a little controversial to say, but I do think it is worth mentioning that (very) many LMSCs -- even small ones -- have substantial bank balances that aren't doing their members much good, basically some LMSCs have been overcharging on their fees for years without investing the money in their members. You should look at the financials of your own LMSC compared to their annual budget and decide for yourself which boat your LMSC is in.
The intent certainly is not to discourage event hosts or LMSCs from offering events, it is an attempt to find a more equitable way to pay the insurance. Otherwise you will (continue to) have members who (a) do not compete and/or (b) are primarily interested in OW who are shouldering an unfair amount of the insurance bill compare to the use they make of it.
Chris, I don't see why the bank accounts of LMSCs have anything to go with this discussion other than done sideways way of rationalizing taking those funds away by those that need or want more $$$ for whatever reason.
Also, since you kind of let the cat out of the bag here on money can you share with those of us who like yo be talked to like 5th graders how much the costs for usms administrative services have gone up relative to the increase in insurance costs everyone is talking about? You can Aldo add in the value in total increase in revenue from new memberships during the same time.
Last thing, how frequently does usms solicit bids for insurance coverage? As I mentioned already others have already found far less expensive 3rd party coverage for events and are moving forward without bothering to get usms sanctions because it's simple to expensive relative to overall costs/profit margins.
A few other questions:
1) Who has been the insurance provider each of the last 5 years?
2) What has been the amount paid in premiums each of the last 5 years?
3) How many claims have been filed each year and how much was paid out in total by year?
Chris, I don't see why the bank accounts of LMSCs have anything to go with this discussion
Only that LMSCs can decide how to handle the event fees. If they have the assets to manage it, swimmers and event hosts may not notice any change whatsoever.
how much the costs for usms administrative services have gone up relative to the increase in insurance costs everyone is talking about? You can Aldo add in the value in total increase in revenue from new memberships during the same time.
This year's proposed budget is here: 2016 Budget Proposal
Last thing, how frequently does usms solicit bids for insurance coverage? As I mentioned already others have already found far less expensive 3rd party coverage for events and are moving forward without bothering to get usms sanctions because it's simple to expensive relative to overall costs/profit margins.
Not sure how frequently. I do know that it is far, far easier to insure a single event than to insure hundreds of events, plus practices, for a 60,000+ member organization. But sure, if you want to keep OW sanctions where they are now, vote against the proposal.
Sorry to be a little brusque, but I have a ton of work to do for my day-job before leaving for KC and I'll get to your other questions when I can.
I'm surprised this thread is pretty silent after 2 days...
I don't think it is unreasonable to ask event hosts to pay a sanction fee for their event. I don't think it is unreasonable for a portion of that fee to be fed to the national office - as they do provide plenty of services for an event host (calendar, meet results database, etc.).
I could be ok with a slightly lower pool fee ($50) and with some sort of LMSC/National office split.
Muppet, I'm not surprised...most people are to busy to try and dig through and understand things like budgets when your really only talking a few dollar for the individual member.
Some stats from the report Chris provided (thanks), again these are real rough because its easy to move certain expense/income line items into other areas of a budget and unless you understand the language its easy to miss. On face value however and after only a few minutes scrolling through the budget here's what I saw (my apologies if am in error, if someone with more knowledge would like to correct me please due so):
2014 Total Income = $2.9 million with a profit of $336K (I'm rounding off)
2016 Total income projected = $3.6 million with a loss of $24k
2014 Insurance costs = $367,000
2016 Insurance costs projected = $387,000
2014 Administration costs = $714,000
2016 Administration costs projected = $887,000
2014 membership services payroll = $1.7 million
2016 membership services payroll projected = $1.2 million
2014 Interest & Dividends = $263,000
2016 Interest & Dividends projected = $120,000
2014 Individual memberships revenue = $2 million
2016 Individual memberships revenue projected = $2.4 million
So I'm sure I'm going to take heat for bringing up my concerns but so be it...its not a reflection on people respect who bust their asses making this organization run. Rather its a concern I have any time someone wants to charge me more money, which means I have to charge my members more money UNLESS its going to increase my membership than lets talk.
The reality for me an I'm guessing a lot of other people who own clubs and/or run events is its getting harder and more expensive every year so every dollar counts. With regard to membership in USMS the truth is I've never had a new swimmer come to me and say they heard about masters swimming through something the local and/or national offices had done EXCEPT from publicity we got from our adult LTS program that we did receive a grant from the USMS Foundation for which we are VEY grateful.
To me that means we need to do something better and different but I can't tell you what that is other than what we have been experimenting with and that is the following:
- We offer free adult learn to swim lessons
- We offer reduced fees for school teachers, police officers and first responder's from the city of Mesa
- We market and discount club membership to parents of age group swimmers on club team and water polo team
So for now I'm not keen on a sanction fee going to the national office for pool events, i'm open to discussion this week however. For OW I'm just not sure the proposal will help...I've had several people I trust in this area tell me they still would not be interested in foregoing the use of 3rd party insurance to get the USMS "brand" on their event as they don't think it will increase participation, but again I'm open to discuss!
what we have been experimenting with and that is the following:
- We offer free adult learn to swim lessons
I have met people on occasions who perhaps would join in order to learn how to swim
Interesting HOD discussion to say the least, I'm left with a few thoughts:
- The Stephenson talking points on the wealthy LMSCs sitting on their money was in full swing
- A great point made that LMSCs that are now charging a sanction fee like SPMS ($50) and have those $$$ worked into their budgets would have to either tack on the new national sanction fee of $70 for a total of $120 (and pretty much ensuring higher entry fees from meet hosts) or reduce/eliminate that revenue stream
- Great points on the lack of incentive for OW events to sanction with usms, here's the deal OW just like triathlon doesn't want or need us....if we want a (late) piece of those pies we better come to them either $$$ vs send them a bill
IMHO if OW is important to USMS (and only 25% say it is) do what USA swim does for key events, offer a stipend to help cover some or all of the expenses to prospective hosts and see if they can make it work. I'm also curious why an event host couldn't attempt to negotiate a 3rd party insurance policy for the event
