IPRA conducts new
study of salaries, fringe benefits

Annual salary information can help park and recreation districts meet their constituents' demand for efficient fiscal operations.

By Regina Glover and Doug McEwen

In the last 10 years, four salary studies have been conducted for Illinois park and recreation agencies. The first three of these studies were conducted by Dr. William O'Brien, Department of Recreation, Southern Illinois University. The fourth was conducted by the Illinois Park and Recreation Association (IPRA) with the assistance of the Park District of Highland Park. These past studies were initiated because of the need to know general salary trends every two to five years.

Today, however, such sporadic surveys are inadequate. With the sophistication of fiscal management systems in park and recreation agencies and the demands by citizens for efficient fiscal operations, the modern park and recreation director needs annual salary information. The rumblings of unionization are running through the ranks of hourly park workers, and citizen boards are becoming ever more critical of professional salary levels. Under these conditions, tough negotiations between the agency board and its director are inevitable. Fringe benefits will also be on the bargaining table.

Accurate, current information on both salaries and fringe benefits is one of the best ways park and recreation executives can prepare themselves for entering negotiations. Such information is invaluable when comparisons are made between the agency and other park and recreation agencies, or between the agencies and other departments (such as police and fire) within a municipal government. Accurate annual salary surveys can help develop trends or changes which can be related to the consumer price index and other cost of living conditions. Overall, an annual salary survey is fast becoming a necessary tool in park and recreation management.

New methods for the 1984 study

In the spring of 1984, the Department of Recreation at Southern Illinois University and the Administration and Finance Section of IPRA joined in a cooperative effort to conduct a new salary survey. The last IPRA survey had been tabulated and assembled by administrative staff of the Park District of Highland Park. The costs of this effort were very high to that park district because many hours were required to transfer data from the returned questionnaires onto computer tape for analysis. It was subsequently proposed that a new technique, optical scan sheets, be introduced as a way of reducing time required for transferring data to a computer tape. It was also thought that the optical scan sheets would reduce human error. A study proposal, based on the new optical scan techniques, was reviewed and approved by IPRA's Administration and Finance Section Board.

Table 1 Average Salary for Selected Positions Position High Salary Low Chief Executive $64,500 $18,205 Assistant Chief Executive $44,190 $18,500 Recreation Administrator $43,118 $12,500 Park Operations Administrator $43,900 $14,000 Golf Operations Administrator $39,547 $15,000 Park Supervisor $28,665 $10,500 Center Supervisor $32,500 $13,000 Park Laborer $11.33/hr $3.35/hr

Illinois Parks and Recreation 8 January/February 1985

Table 2 Selected Financial Characteristics for Public Recreation and Park Agencies Characteristics High Low Equalized Assessed Value $1,420,534,528 $27,888,710 Population Served (Number) $440,372 $4,381 Total Budget $12,199,602 $53,032 Last Tax Levy $6,424,602 $243,000 Number Full-Time Employees 150 3

Table 3 Annual Paid Holidays Number of Days Respondents Percentage Six 2 2% Seven 8 10% Eight 8 10% Nine 17 21% Ten 21 26% Eleven 20 24% Twelve 1 1% Thirteen 3 4% Abstentions 2 2%

The first step in designing the 1984 study was to review the results of the previous one. Using this as a starting point, a series of questions on salary and fringe benefits was drawn up and sent to a selected number of agencies for review. Based on the comments received, a final questionnaire including all the information desired was designed. Once completed, the next step was to design optical scan sheets containing all the required questionnaires. Fitting the maximum number of questions on each while operating within the technical requirements for optical scan sheet format proved to be quite a challenge After some shifting and juggling, a final design for the optical scan sheets was completed and the whole survey (instructions, questionnaire and the sheets) package was again reviewed by the Administration and Finance Board.

The final survey contained three broad sections of questions. The first, demographics, included information on budget, equalized assessed valuation, number of full-time employees, tax levies and the current tax rate for each agency.

The second section, personnel, included data on annual salary, years in present position, years in field, education and sex for 26 different professional positions. These positions, ranging from chief executive to recreation leader, included such categories as bookkeeper, special facilities operator, park superintendent and golf greenskeeper. A part of the personnel section also dealt with the hourly positions of mechanics, secretaries, park laborers and custodians. Information was asked on the number of full-time and part-time employees, salary ranges, average high and low salaries, and years in service. These two sections were identical in format to the last survey.

The final section surveyed fringe benefits. A number of questions were asked dealing with medical and retirement benefits, life insurance, payment for conference fees, travel expenses, payment for membership in professional conferences, housing allowances and agency mileage allowances. Some very detailed fringe benefit questions were asked, such as the policy limits or the amount of employee contributions toward a policy.

While the final survey packet was being printed, the Administration and Finance Section invited 430 local park and recreation agencies to participate and receive the results for a $50 fee. This was the first time a fee had been charged for participation in a survey in order to recover costs. Eighty-two agencies, including park districts, park and recreation departments and forest preserve districts, participated in this study. Collectively they formed an excellent sample of the various park and recreation agencies in the State. The information gained from them provides an accurate view of the current salary and fringe benefit picture in Illinois. Forest preserve districts, park and recreation departments and special recreation associations were not as well represented. More effort will be needed in the next survey to reach those local agencies.

Results

A few of the study highlights are shown in Table 1, which gives the high and low salary for a select number of the 26 positions surveyed. Table 2 also presents selected characteristics for the various park and recreation agencies. Table 3 provides a breakdown of the paid holidays granted annually by the participating agencies.

More detailed results cannot be presented here because this survey was offered to various agencies on a fee basis. There were some members of the IPRA who voiced objection to such a fee, but it must be remembered that the Administration and Finance Section Board needed to cover the costs involved in compiling a salary survey.

The results are available to anyone wishing to purchase a copy. Agencies purchasing the survey are ethically prohibited from reproducing the data or sharing it in any form with other agencies. This is the same mode of operation for a national poll

Illinois Parks and Recreation 9 January/February 1985

such as the Nielson survey or the Harris poll, both of which copyright their results. The results from this survey are currently being copy-righted.

Problems and plans

From the beginning, it was assumed that the 1984 salary survey would reveal a number of revisions needed to meet all the needs of the Illinois park and recreation agencies. Our expectations for revisions proved to be accurate. There were a number of problems with the current survey and the use of optical scan sheets.

In part, the sheets were not correctly filled out by the various personnel. Moreover, the processing of these sheets (checking them for errors) was not as accurate as it should have been.

In addition to these kinds of problems, it was found that the 26 professional categories for salaried positions were not sufficient. A number of park districts have job positions such as computer programmers or executive secretaries that were not included in this salary study. In the future, these positions will need to be included and /or combined with the current headings.

All of the bloopers, errors and inadequacies of the 1984 survey were accurately recorded and catalogued so revisions are possible for future surveys. In addition, the Administration and Finance Section Board is conducting a written evaluation with all participants on salary surveys and future needs. It is hoped that the Board can continue to offer this service to IPRA members. Each distribution of a salary survey enables better data to be gathered, and improvements made, in the process itself.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS: Regina Glover is an assistant professor in the Department of Recreation at Southern Illinois University, Carbondale. Douglas McEwen is an associate professor there.

Illinois Parks and Recreation 10 January/February 1985