The department will be closed from Monday 23 December 2024 and will reopen on Thursday 2 January 2025. We will respond to queries in the new year. Best wishes for a safe and happy festive season.
Intro
In March 2018 the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries (the department) announced the Sport and Recreation Strategic Funding Review.
The purpose of the Strategic Funding Review was to look at the department’s investment into Western Australia’s sport and recreation industry, and to address upcoming opportunities and challenges within the portfolio.
This document has been informed by responses to the consultation period that was held between October and December 2018 with feedback collated into 22 strategic findings and 12 preliminary operational recommendations.
The next stage of consultation will provide a platform for feedback to:
The feedback process is part of a final round of consultations, which will include further workshops, a survey and an invitation for feedback on this document.
This document was open for comment until Thursday 21 March 2019.
This document has been informed by responses to the consultation period that was held between October and December 2018 with feedback collated into 22 strategic findings and 12 preliminary operational recommendations [1].
The strategic findings have been derived from discussions relating to the ‘17 Areas for Further Discussion’, identified in the Common Ground discussion paper. They have been grouped into two themes, with the following key discussion points emerging:
Operational recommendations contained in this document are a result of the consultation process and an internal review of existing funding programs and gaps in current services.
Key discussion points that have emerged include:
This document will be open for comment until Thursday 21 March 2019.
The findings and recommendations will be incorporated into a final report for endorsement and implementation in the 2019-20 financial year.
It is evident from the consultation process that this is just the start of the conversation. Continual review and engagement with the industry is required to ensure that positive sport and recreation opportunities are available to all members of the community.
In March 2018, Minister for Sport and Recreation Mick Murray hosted a sport and recreation sector briefing that outlined the successes of the previous 12 months, as well as challenges and priorities identified within the Sport and Recreation portfolio. [2]
Key priorities included:
Key challenges identified by the Minister for Sport and Recreation included:
Since the Minister’s sector briefing, the Strategic Funding Review has commenced and has progressed with a series of meetings and workshops with the sport and recreation industry.
The first major step occurred in October 2018 with the release of the Common Ground discussion paper. Common Ground outlined the areas of agreement and areas for further discussion between the sport and recreation industry and the department.
Common Ground was the precursor to a consultation period held in October and November 2018.
This report marks the next major step of the Strategic Funding Review with the publication of the preliminary strategic findings and operational recommendations.
The Common Ground discussion paper, released in October 2018, provided a consolidated response to the areas of agreement between the sport and recreation industry and the department, and identified areas for further discussion.
The industry was invited to provide feedback to the Common Ground document through either a written response and/or by attending a workshop.
The industry was invited to provide written responses to Common Ground by Friday 23 November, with extensions being granted to 7 December 2018.
Workshop participants were also encouraged to provide written responses, if they felt that their contributions needed further elaboration or consideration.
Written responses were received from the following 10 organisations:
A series of workshops and leadership forums were held across the State between 14 and 30 November 2018. More than 150 participants attended the workshops.
The workshops were facilitated in a consistent manner to ensure streamlined discussions. Notwithstanding, a diversity of responses was received.
On enrolment, participants received a copy of Common Ground and a workshop pack. The workshop pack contained a summary of the ‘17 areas for further discussion’ detailed in Common Ground, and background information on the department’s current funding programs.
Participants were encouraged to review and prepare responses prior to attending the workshop.
The leadership forums and reference group meetings also used the workshop pack to guide conversation.
Each workshop had three sessions, with the discussions that arose through these sessions used to guide the findings and recommendations within this document.
As the duration of the workshop would not allow all 17 areas to be explored in detail, a prioritisation process was completed to determine the top five areas of agreement per workshop.
This was completed first individually, by table and then as a collective workshop. These five agreed areas were then discussed in detail.
These discussions have been collated into strategic findings for the reflection of the department and industry.
This session involved participants reviewing the department’s existing funding programs for their views on relevance, complexity and areas of improvement. Participants in the workshops were able to prioritise the order and duration of discussion on each program.
These discussions have been collated into operational recommendations for the department’s action and will be tested with the industry.
This session enabled participants to discuss any gaps of programs and services provided by the department.
The department has considered the identified gaps and has recommended new approaches as a response to these gaps. These will be tested with the industry for bearing before implementation.
The findings within this section of the report reflect the discussions held between the department and the industry during the consultation period. The findings have expanded upon the ‘17 areas for further discussion’, identified in the Common Ground discussion paper.
The findings have been grouped into two themes:
This topic area was listed in every consultation session, apart from one, as a top five priority and was ranked first in three out of the seven sessions.
Many organisations stated that the department’s funding helps them develop their capacity and capabilities, improve their professionalism and provide sport and recreation opportunities to the community. All would be significantly impacted without funding through the department.
A consistent comment was that the department gathers a significant volume of data through its funding requirements, through the application and acquittal processes. It was consistently expressed that the impacts of this data collation should be shared with the industry and used to advocate for the value of the funding programs.
There was also a high level of conjecture as to whether all sports should be funded, with calls for professional sports[5] to either have reduced or no funding. While this view may be considered subjective, it is consistent with the challenge stated in the Minister for Sport and Recreation’s briefing in March 2018.
A counter-point, however, was that the costs associated with the delivery of international and national competitions to organisations increases the need for financial support.
Comments were also made as to the appropriateness of servicing State-wide outcomes; this expectation needs to be balanced by the capacity and capability of an organisation. This has been further examined in the review of the Industry Investment Program.
Additionally, it was indicated during the consultation process that short funding terms and a focus on delivery of ‘sport’ rather than participation limited organisations’ ability to deliver sustainable change.
Despite the stated challenge of having less funding available and being in a financially challenging environment there were many comments suggesting the amount of funding should be increased.
During the consultation process, industry responses to what they perceive as the department’s core business were relatively consistent among respondents. These included:
An area of contention that was frequently raised during the consultation process was the department’s role in service delivery. This was met with mixed feedback, with some respondents noting the value of the department’s service delivery arm for example, industry workshops and advocacy events. Others considered that it was the responsibility of the industry to undertake this role and that the department should be the facilitator, contributing advice, insight and support towards the achievement of outcomes. This will be an area that will continue to be examined by the department, and the department’s role may change depending on needs and priorities emerging within the industry.
There was also a consistent comment from the industry about providing continuity of personnel, with examples of the benefits that department staff provide to organisations through relationship management.
As with the challenge set by the Minister for Sport and Recreation in March 2018 there is a need to review the level of service the department provides to organisations to ensure maximum benefit to the wider industry, particularly those organisations with limited capacity. This issue has been explored with recommended changes to the Industry Investment Program categorisations and level of servicing.
The industry was also given the opportunity to assess what it considered to be its core business. It was identified that providing participation opportunities, building the capacity of the sport and ensuring it is well governed were their key duties.
It was suggested that historically, the industry had not stepped into the gap to provide advocacy for itself, with the onus on the department to do so. Comments also suggested that the industry is task focused, rather than strategic. It was noted that a significant change in thinking would be beneficial in order that individual sports cease acting in competition with each other. This would enable the industry to act as a collective, with peak bodies playing a key role, strengthening the industry. There were some practical suggestions as to what the industry could do more of to improve its role in advocacy, including assisting in coordinating the annual Industry Census, which is currently lead by the department.
The role of the WA Sports Federation as the peak body for sport was discussed with feedback suggesting WA Sports Federation needs to take an increased leadership role in providing advocacy for the industry.
Consultation participants commended the department for the level of industry engagement during the Strategic Funding Review. In particular, the early involvement of the sport and recreation industry was cited as a success, enabling industry buy-in and giving it a voice in the development of engagement strategies.
During the consultation process, the sport and recreation industry had a consistent point of view, stating that a ‘one-size fits all’ approach from the department is not suitable to service the industry. It was suggested that the department should tailor services to the capacity and capability of each organisation.
It was noted by respondents that administrative processes and the levels of reporting are often inadequately represented across the various funding programs. Some State Sporting Associations gave examples of being required to undertake more administrative processes than some clubs which receive higher funding allocations through a different grant scheme. This anomaly has been further explored through the review of the Industry Investment Program.
It was initially thought this topic would consider the consolidation of funding programs, but when discussed in the workshops the larger concern was the duplication of effort to secure funding and repeated submission of the same information to the department.
It was suggested that if the various agreements could be consolidated into a single agreement (especially if outcomes are aligned) this would greatly reduce administrative burden, especially on smaller organisations. The emphasis would then be on the department to work with the organisations to ensure that the local and regional outcomes are delivered and that organisations can plan, at the minimum on an annual basis.
The overwhelming comment raised, during the consultation process, was for an extension of the funding term from one year to three years for the Industry Investment Program. Many of the examples indicated the operational impacts of single year funding – particularly retention of staff and securing leases for premises. The provision of three-year funding with the tailoring of requirements to reflect an organisation’s capacity and standardisation of applications and acquittals would address many of the comments made. The details of this are provided within the Industry Investment Program section.
A common issue raised by the industry, especially smaller State Sporting Associations, was a desire for the department to provide best practice resources, including templates, example policies and procedures.
During the consultation period there were several announcements by Sport Australia relating to their approach to funding National Associations. It is still unknown how these announcements could impact the resourcing and focus for Western Australian State Sporting Associations. This presents an opportunity for Western Australia and will be an ongoing process with communication between the department, WA Sports Federation and Sport Australia.
It was clear from feedback received during the consultation process that the sport and recreation industry needs a greater level of advocacy about the benefits of sport and recreation to the health sector. Key to this intent is the ability to articulate the value into similar metrics of the health sector.
To do this successfully, a greater level of investment is needed into research and evaluation. Key areas of research identified by the industry included return on investment and social impact value. It is believed that being able to articulate these measures in a reliable way would advance advocacy efforts for a greater allocation of the State’s budget and may be able to assist the industry in applying for funding programs from outside the department.
In relation to the establishment of a universal unit of measurement there was support for the concept and agreement that measuring participation would be more meaningful than just membership. It was concluded that this needs to be explored through a separate piece of work.
It was also noted that the relationship between the industry and the Departments of Health and Education should be strengthened, facilitated with assistance from the department.
While this was not a topic that rated highly in the consultation workshops, when it was discussed, it was discussed at length.
There was recognition that this is a complex area and that there are challenges and potential changes needed to the traditional delivery model. However, what this may mean for the industry remained unresolved.
There were comments suggesting that the focus on funding sport needs to be broadened to include active recreation and physical activity. This is in line with the new strategic direction outlined in the National Sports Plan ‘Sport 2030’ by the Federal Government. This is notwithstanding that the industry does not view its core business as engaging the ‘inactive’ population. If the department intends to expand with a physical activity lens, it needs to consider the resource implications for the industry and how broader partners may be engaged.
There was also concern that the State and Federal governments are disconnected from each other in their strategies and support of sport delivery. It was suggested that the State Government should work with, and advocate to the Federal Government to streamline messaging.
Further, it was noted that there is a distinct point of difference between the traditional sport servicing model from a metropolitan and regional perspective, with the regions concluding that the level of service is often not reflective of investment. It was suggested that additional delivery models be explored to complement the traditional delivery model. This is considered within the Regional Grants section of this report.
Through the consultation it was noted that local government is often the forgotten partner in sport and recreation, and that engagement should occur more regularly.
There was also a considerable commentary regarding gaps in the current funding programs that the department offers. This included how the department supports events, participation and active recreation opportunities.
It was generally accepted during the consultation process that Western Australia faces challenges based on its geographical size and dispersed population.
Many of the examples provided during the consultation were specific to the respondent’s circumstances, regarding funding equity and the cost of providing services in Western Australia. Specifically, this refers to regional and remote Western Australia compared to the East Coast of Australia.
It was acknowledged that the impact of Sport Australia’s national programs and expanded funding framework implementation remains unknown.
The recommendations within this section of the report have been derived from internal reflections and through industry consultation.
The department will test the preliminary recommendations for support in the next stage of consultation.
A consolidation of the discussions and recommendations for the individual programs are summarised as below.
The importance of the Industry Investment Program was consistently reiterated throughout the consultation period, with some organisations noting that the program is integral for them to maintain their core business.
As stated earlier in this report, it was strongly advocated that the Industry Investment Program should be funded on a three yearly basis instead of the current one year funding schedule. Concerns included that an annual funding agreement impacts on some organisations’ capacity to enter leases for office accommodation and/or to secure and retain suitable staff. Reinstating a three year funding period would provide greater certainty and stability for organisations. It is therefore recommended that the Industry Investment Program returns to a three year funding period.
The other key topic discussed in relation to the Industry Investment Program was the additional grant agreements organisations enter into, which deliver on similar outcomes within their Industry Investment Program allocation. The most consistently mentioned program was the regional grants scheme. It was discussed that there should be a review process to reduce the duplication of services and reduce the administrative burden for organisations. It is therefore recommended that Regional Servicing Grants and Regional Organisation Grants will be consolidated within the Industry Investment Program.
To achieve these recommendations, a review of the Industry Investment Program categorisations was required. The department has drafted new categorisation criteria, Appendix B, for feedback from the industry before implementation in the 2019/2020 financial year.
As an overview, proposed changes to the categorisation process include:
It is proposed that new categorisation criteria be adopted, with organisations’ funding level aligned with their allocated category. This will address instances where elements that have been historically added have resulted in organisations within the same category having different base levels of funding. It should be noted in instances where State Sporting Associations’ new funding allocations result in a decrease of funding, a 12 month transition period will be implemented.
Previously funded Industry Representation Organisations will evolve to be either a Peak Body or a Sport and Recreation Agent. Further consultation is required with impacted organisations to either confirm their status as a peak body or to assist in the recognition process for a Sport and Recreation Agent. This process will be announced following the next round of the Strategic Funding Review.
It should also be noted that in November 2018 the Minister for Sport and Recreation wrote to all State Sporting Associations notifying them of the introduction of a target of 50 per cent female representation on sport and recreation boards. The department has agreed to work in partnership with the industry to develop a staged implementation plan. This will be considered further in the next stage of the Strategic Funding Review and with the Gender Diversity Advisory Group, with the staged implementation plan reflected in the final categorisation tables.
There will be an ongoing review process with the industry to examine the criteria and the ability of the industry to make recommendations for changes. It is also proposed that the values of the categories and increments be reviewed prior to the next three year funding block (2022/2023 to 2024/2025).
The current categorisation criteria are provided in Appendix B. It is recommended that the industry provides comment of the criteria in the next round of the Strategic Funding Review consultation.
The Targeted Participation Program was reviewed in 2018, commencing a funding partnership with Healthway. The revised program is a consolidation of three smaller grant programs; Community Participation Fund, Youth Engagement Scheme and the previous Targeted Participation Program.
At the time of the Strategic Funding Review consultation process, the announcements of the 2018 funding round had not been made. As a result, the feedback to the program was mixed. During the workshops it was explained that part of the funding partnership is a comprehensive evaluation process.
Based on the changes from the previous programs and an understanding that there is an evaluation process to be undertaken, the conclusion from the workshops was that it is too soon to determine effectiveness and value. It is proposed that any recommendations for change will be associated with the findings of the program’s evaluation.
This is notwithstanding that initial feedback about the program included the comments:
These comments will be considered within the program’s evaluation.
Changes to the Targeted Participation Program will be considered as part of the evaluation process to be undertaken in 2019.
The Every Club program was launched in 2018 after a comprehensive review of the department’s previous Club Development Officer Scheme.
Like the Targeted Participation Program, the overall feedback was that it was too soon to know the impact of the program.
In developing the Every Club program there was an extensive research process undertaken by the department. One of key the issues explored was the responsibility for sport and recreation club development. It was concluded that responsibility for club development should be that of the department, State Sporting Associations and local governments alike. A variety of support should be provided to clubs based on their priorities, ability and capacity. Through the Strategic Funding Review consultation process, it is apparent that this is still a pertinent issue for the sport and recreation industry. There is a need for ongoing communication and coordination to reduce duplication and identify gaps. It is therefore recommended to review this scope of works and continue to work with the industry and local governments to determine the roles and responsibilities in club development. It is recommended the department hosts a session between the industry and local governments to discuss this issue further.
The consultation process revealed that there are questions about whether the Every Club program should be refined to reflect differences between the capacity and capability of clubs in regional and metropolitan Western Australia. Also to be taken into consideration is the capacity of local government to deliver and support clubs.
The Every Club program will commence year two of funding in 2019/2020, with this there is the potential to undertake a health-check of the funded programs to identify areas for improvement.
The KidSport program was acknowledged as being highly relevant and needed by the industry. It was acknowledged that the recent review has seen a simplification of processes from an administrative standpoint.
It was suggested however, that there is a need to review the delivery mechanism for regional and remote communities where access to on-line registration, club structure and documents including the Health Care Card are difficult. The department has progressed with this recommendation and is currently looking to pilot a new initiative in selected regional communities. It should be noted that this will not be part of the KidSport program. It will be a further support to facilitate participation in regional and remote communities in Western Australia.
Other feedback was related to policy changes that were enforced in 2017 and 2018, in particular, a desire to return to $200 per annum and reintroducing equipment and uniform as eligible items. The department has committed to examining the impacts of these changes through a review in 2019/2020.
The department currently has a range of funding programs that support the delivery of sport and recreation opportunities in regional and remote communities. It was identified through the consultation that the current regional funding programs face a range of challenges and have potential areas for improvement.
The Regional Servicing Grants, which provide funding to State Sporting Associations to service regional areas, were noted as valuable, however it was clear there were numerous administrative challenges. The program has resulted in the duplication of services with some organisations having to make multiple applications and having multiple funding agreements. It is proposed that it is integrated with the Industry Investment Program, due to the level of cross over. Benefits of this recommendation include:
Similarly, the Regional Organisation Grants program should be monitored so organisations that are required to deliver to regions via their Industry Investment Program funding do so. They are then not seeking additional funding to meet this core function.
The role of the Country Sport Enrichment Program was not discussed at length during the consultation process. However, there were suggestions that funding for large regional sporting carnivals could occur through this program. This will be further explored in the next round of consultation with the department proposing the establishment of a mid-tier events funding program.
The Active Regional Community Grants program was noted during the consultation process as a relevant program, enabling a localised response to community initiatives. It was suggested that promotion of this program needs to be increased. It has been recommended that this program remains as it is and is promoted more broadly.
The Regional Athlete Travel Subsidy Scheme was also considered to be relevant, however there were requests that the eligibility of the program be extended to include coaches and officials, as well as the potential for club-based equipment to be included. The Regional Athlete Travel Subsidy Scheme is currently funded through Royalties for Regions until June 2020. A review of the eligibility is not currently being considered, however may be reconsidered in any future project proposals.
Note: Recommendation 4. Within the Industry Investment Program - Consolidate Regional Organisation and Regional Servicing grants within the Industry Investment Program.
The Community Sport and Recreation Facility Fund is a well established program, and its value was extensively discussed through the workshops. The main areas of improvement discussed related to the size of the funding pool, views of the eligibility and potential funding split between metropolitan and regional locations.
The State Sporting Infrastructure Fund is well understood by recipients of the program, however not widely known outside of the metropolitan area. When explained that its purpose is to assist in the operation of State level sporting infrastructure managed by State Sporting Associations, there was general acceptance that it would not be a widely known program.
Separate processes will occur in 2019 in relation to the State Sporting Facilities Plan and the Community Sport and Recreation Facility Fund.
Through the development of the Common Ground document and through the consultation process there were suggestions as to areas where the department may have a current gap in service delivery or funding.
Key areas that have been identified for possible action include the following:
The department will consider how these gaps could be mitigated in the 2019/2020 financial year and will be further explored through the next consultation process.
The department is seeking a final round of feedback from the sport and recreation industry. This will enable the industry to comment on the recommendations proposed in this report, and ensure it accurately reflects feedback from the consultation period.
This process will include further workshops, a survey and an invitation for comments on this report.
There will be a series of workshops will be held for sport and recreation organisations to attend between February and March 2019.
A survey will be disseminated to participants who attended the initial workshops requesting their views of the findings and the recommendations.
A survey will also be sent to all organisations that receive funding through the Industry Investment Program.
The survey will be used to measure the level of support for the recommendations. It will also provide the opportunity for comments.
The industry is encouraged to respond to the findings via a written submission.
This document will be open for industry comment until Thursday 21 March 2019.
The findings and recommendations will be incorporated into a final report for endorsement and implementation in the 2019/20 financial year.
An implementation strategy document will be developed in parallel with the development of the finalisation of the Strategic Funding Review.
Most State Sporting Associations will have attributes across the various categories. The determination of the categorisation is based on a mean score across all criteria.