1. Cheri L. Bradish, Ph.D., Department of Sport Management Brock University Lessons from BIG and little Brother: An Examination of Regional Sport Councils in the United States

2. 100+ communities in the USA partners of local/regional governments also referred to as commission, authority, council, corporation, federation, foundation supported by the National Association of Sports Commissions (NASC) Regional Sport Councils Defined

3. Objectives to attract, stimulate, and promote sporting events and facilities to improve overall quality of life for host community, while contributing to actual economic impact to serve as recognizable and identifiable advocates and experts Regional Sport Councils

4. Study Overview powerful, yet misunderstood sport organization (s) nationwide study: Is there a difference in organization structure and characteristics between regional Sports Commissions* which are large in size, versus those that are small in size, according to metropolitan area served? Regional Sport Councils

5. Methods two-part SCOSS survey 86 ‘active’ NASC members (77% response rate) balance between large* (greater than one million) and small** (less than 700,000) inhabitants * 5.6 m – 1 m (mean 1.9 m) ** 672,000 – 9,999 (mean 317,128) Regional Sport Councils

6. “Large” Sport Councils

7. “Small” Sport Councils

8. Results: Structure similar findings for measures of organizational structure for large versus small sports councils (reflective of similar ‘size’ of independent organizations) Regional Sport Councils

9. Results: Characteristics more ‘small’ market councils are dependent on other government entities overall budget sources: lodging/bed taxes, corporate partnerships internal ‘bid’ activities/minimal external ‘activities’ varying perceptions of success (small) economic impact important to both (large: event hosting, small: room nights) Regional Sport Councils

10. Results: General type: independent (70.8% L; 35.7% S), CVB (12.5% L; 42.9% S) 94% not-for-profit 77.2% lack amateur sport mandate mean annual budget ($828,652 L; $592,144 S) Regional Sport Councils

11. Results: Personnel full-time: 6.63/5.11 part-time: 3.93/2.1 interns: 2.43/1.94 volunteers: 1400/250 Bod: 35/21 Regional Sport Councils

12. Results: Budget (%) lodging/bed tax: 44.96/68.53 corporate partnerships: 41.61/33.27 government assistance: 36.67/28 events revenue: 22.67/13.66 Regional Sport Councils

13. Results: Activities Internal –Solicit bids (88/79**) –Writing bids (88/71) –Presenting bids (83/75) –Assembly bid team (83/68) –Obtaining funding (75/79**) External –Facility management (17/29) –LOC marketing (13/11) –Ticket sales (8/14) –Community recreation (8/18) –Event management (8/7) Regional Sport Councils

14. Conclusions similar in structure (regulated) strong community support as a means to social and economic development diverse activities beneficial to create an ongoing ‘lobby unit’ resource dependent activities are outsourced/minimized yet should be enhanced, or better coordinated for communities Regional Sport Councils

15. Recommendations examination of councils (budget/type) examination of the effectiveness of the bid and management activities performed community perception of the effectiveness and legacy of council volunteer capacity Regional Sport Councils

16. Questions?