AGM — survey comments and responses (part 2)
In part 1 of this posting, I went over some of the comments that were submitted in the surveys that were sent out to parents in November 2009. In this posting and in part 3, I will review some additional comments and provide explanations or responses.
House team formation
Last year, we had about 65 House teams — between Junior Shamrocks (younger) and Recreational (older) programs. The challenge each year is identifying a sufficient number of volunteer coaches for these teams. I speak to many club administrators (presidents, program directors, directors of coaching) across the region and I hear the same thing. Where we’ve identified coaches, the next challenge is allocating players to teams. In Dublin, there is the added element of competitive balance (making sure that the teams aren’t too lopsided) versus trying to keep teams localized (for example, by school) in order to simplify things like carpools.
Here is an example comment:
There is one team in the division that my daughter played in that has been together for a number of years. That team won the league last year and won all of their games this year.
I’ve heard feedback in both directions — keep teams localized and together versus shuffle the teams so that there isn’t a legacy team that always wins the league. In many cases, we see requests from parents for specific coaches, which makes the allocation process more of a challenge. I will ask the House Committee to look at the issue of locale versus shuffle as part of our player allocation process in 2010.
How are coaches picked? Does a child entrant have more selection or pick as to who they would prefer?
We look at surveys and we evaluate the previous year’s coaches to determine a list of candidates. Where there are gaps (not enough coaches in an age group), we go out and try to solicit additional coaches. Sometimes, this process results in delays in finalizing the team formation for an age group where there are not enough coaches.
We received a couple of comments in private emails regarding delays in finding out which team their son/daughter had been assigned to. This is something that I’m looking very closely at. Historically, we’ve relied on word-of-mouth (via coaches) to let players know their team assignment. If a coach is out-of-town or for some reason doesn’t connect with the player’s family, this leads to a communication gap. The club doesn’t find out until much later leading to more problems.
In 2010, we will put in place a system (to-be-determined) to inform players and families their team assignment status through electronic mail or some other direct means. I’m looking at different registration software packages that may assist us in communicating with families.
Uniforms
In 2009, we switched to both a new uniform retailer (Dayak’s Den) and a new Premier uniform vendor (Xara Soccer). The decision to make these changes occurred after a number of meetings with several uniform retailers and a series of Board meetings in early 2009, and in response to our experiences during 2007 and 2008.
While the survey results indicated a roughly “B-” grade for uniform experience satisfaction (middle-of-the-road in comparison to all of the surveyed topics), there were a number of comments in regards to uniforms.
I have had my kids in soccer for 15 years and, unlike many other elements of the experience, I have come to the conclusion that there is no gray area in regards to uniforms. I have had one of the three following outcomes as a soccer parent:
- The uniform experience was fine, because it was efficient and hassle-free.
- The uniform experience was horrible, because it was inefficient and a hassle, and no one cared.
- The uniform experience was horrible, because it was inefficient and a hassle, but at least I felt like someone cared.
Our goal is to get to outcome #1 — and, at least from the survey results, this was the experience that many people had.
Outcomes #2 and #3 occur when things uniforms/gear come in late, when it is done wrong, when communication breaks down, when expectations are not met.
Where these things happened last year, we are working to correct them with the retailer and the vendor.
Here are a few comments and responses:
I am not happy that the uniforms continue to change year after year. However, you did make it as easy as you possibly could for the parents this year–but, it was still confusing to me as to whether we had the right ones or not.
We’re going to have some kind of a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) guide on uniforms this year. I think this will answer some of the questions. We’ll go over the surveys and solicit feedback on the type of information that we need to pull together for the FAQ. Our plan is to continue with the current House uniform (3rd year) and the current Premier uniform (2nd year) at least through 2011.
Sizing always seems to be mixed up, and uniforms haven’t been available on time most years, including this year.
We will have information available at registration in regards to the ordering timeline. The challenge that we have is forecasting so-called “late registrations” and ensuring that we have stock on hand. We’re working with the retailer to ensure that we do not have any shortfalls in 2010.
On the Premier side, we’ll have the uniform ordering information (process and timeline) available at tryouts.
There were a couple of comments regarding the new Premier uniform style. Here is an example:
The (old) uniforms with the Dublin crest are more attractive than the new uniforms.
I think our uniform style compares well to those of the surrounding larger clubs — Mustang, San Ramon. The use of the club name (Dublin United) in larger letters clearly identifies us versus Livermore, Castro Valley, Almaden, and Novato (other clubs that wear green).
Certainly, everyone has their opinion of style and taste, but the intent is to have a consistent mark (the “Dublin United” in the stretched Celtic font) that can be applied to our uniform and logowear.
Volunteer hours
In 2009, the Board increased the volunteer deposit fee to $100 and the number of hours required to 8 (from $75 and 6 in 2008). The intent was to increase the number of volunteers in order to support the club programs.
Here are a collection of comments:
The required hours for volunteer are too many, and not enough opportunities to participate.
I was charged a volunteer fee but didn’t get the opportunity to volunteer. My husband did help referee a game but we didn’t know if that counted towards our time.
There are way too many hours required for parents to volunteer for such a short season. 8 hours per family is way too much. Plus, there should be a refund policy that if you work 4 hours you get half of the work deposit back, etc. rather than an all or nothing scenario.
8 hours of volunteering is hard to realize especially for a single parent. Knowing that I would not be able to do the full 8 hours, caused me to not do any volunteering
The #1 item on my 2010 plan is to reevaluate and reimplement the volunteer program. With the exception of our professional coaching and training staff, the referees, and our compensated registrars, Dublin United is a volunteer organization. This means that all the events that are put on (fundraisers, tournaments, meat sales, picture day, registration support), all of the behind-the-scenes planning, all of the liaison meetings with the City, Chamber of Commerce, district/regional/state soccer organizations is done through the efforts of volunteers. The club fundamentally depends on the active volunteering efforts of the community.
It is frustrating for people wanting to volunteer not having the information they need to select their opportunity or to have a volunteer number that is unreachable for some families due to concurrent commitments. These are areas that we plan to address in the coming year.
The 2010 volunteer process will be developed and announced in the next month.
Costs
The Board and staff are very conscious of the cost structure of our programs. In mid-2009, we performed a fundamental restructuring of how we budget and allocate funds within the club and our forecasting model for future revenue and expenses. Our Finance Director (Brandy Mattimore) has worked diligently on managing the club’s finances within cost guidelines.
As a consequence of the overall review of the 2008 expenses, a desire to fund development of training and player development programs, and to properly balance the cost overhead between the House and Premier programs, 2009 saw a slight increase in registration fees and a significant increase in the Premier (“comp”) fees.
Unfortunately, 2009 was also a year in which the nation and our local region experienced a significant economic downturn. In response, the Board formalized and budgeted a financial aid program intended to mitigate the fee increase to those who could not afford it.
Here are a couple of comments about cost from the survey:
Very expensive program given most of it is relying on volunteers, fund raising and sponsorships
Think more of this program as a way to develop talent and interest in soccer … and less as a financial profit center. the price tag is far too high, compared to anything else out there, and there’s not enough stress on the game itself and developing the players and the teams.
The club operation is just to do $$$$$$$
The Board and staff have done quite a bit of research into the costs of similar programs in the region — registration, “comp” fees, trainer fees, coaching fees, uniforms and equipment, field overhead, staff overhead, and tournaments. We’ve also looked at fees charged by other youth sports in the area.
Based on that research, it is our belief that Dublin United’s fees are inline with (and in many cases better than) what is out there, both in terms of cost and value. The Premier program is about 20-80% lower than the costs of neighboring clubs. We’re working hard to come up with a 2010 fee structure that improves value while maintaining the cost advantages that we have and identifying new competitive cost opportunities.
We’re also looking at how to keep current costs inline and reduce overhead where we can, without sacrificing efficiencies or club operations.
I disagree with the comment about “not enough stress on the game”. If you look at our programs — in particular Junior Shamrocks and the development of a club-wide player development curriculum — I think Dublin United has taken great strides during 2009. I think our Technical Director, Nick Lusson, has put together many of the pieces that we have been lacking and, based on my assessment of the preliminary plans, 2010 will be an even better year.
I think we need to do a better job of communicating and marketing — letting you, the membership, know where we’ve made progress, where we see opportunities, and how our program is a great choice for the development of your sons/daughters. One of the reasons for spending time putting together these blog postings is to provide the framework for that discussion.