by Louise Hanvey

"Children probably spend more time in the average week in leisure, play and recreation than they do in school. Yet we marginalize it. Many people don’t understand the importance of quality play, whether it’s provided by a government agency, with the family, or just on the street. Access to quality recreational activities for all children is preventative public health." - Ian Reid, Professor of Recreation and Leisure Studies, University of New Brunswick

Introduction

Recreation provides children and youth with opportunities to develop skills and build their sense of self. When young people participate in sports, cultural programs and other recreational activities, they have better emotional health and they perform better academically. Over the years, the CCSD’s report The Progress of Canada’s Children has tracked children’s participation in recreation and looked particularly at issues of access. According to the National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (NLSCY), changes between 1994 and 1996 show mixed results: children are participating less in sports and in art lessons; their participation in clubs or community groups and in computer or video games has remained relatively stable; and their participation has increased in summer camps. Poor children, however, continue to lack access to these kinds of recreational activities. Regardless of the type of activity, children in the lowest-income families participate less than do children in the highest-income families.

Survey

In the summer of 2000, the CCSD, in collaboration with the Canadian Parks and Recreation Association, conducted a survey of municipal recreation departments across Canada to examine children’s access to the programs. A total of 167 municipal recreation departments were surveyed, with all provinces and territories represented among the respondents.

Five program areas were explored in the survey:

• Aquatics programs for school-aged children
• Aquatics programs for youth
• Athletic programs for school-aged children
• Athletic programs for youth
• Arts programs for school-aged children
• Arts programs for youth
• After-school programs for school-aged children
• Drop-in programs for youth.

What programs are being offered?

The majority of the departments surveyed offered all of these programs. The most common programs were aquatics programs for both school-aged children and youth, and athletic programs for youth. Almost all departments offered these types of programs. Recreation departments were less likely to offer arts programs, but the majority still did so. About three-quarters offered arts programs for school-aged children and two-thirds offered such programs for youth. Just over half the departments (56%) offered after-school programs and 70% offered drop-in programs for youth.

Are there user fees?

The vast majority of these recreation departments charge a user fee for at least some of their programs. Over 90% of the departments charged user fees for some of their aquatics, athletics and arts programs, while 87% charged for after-school programs, and 70% charged for youth drop-in programs.

The majority of the recreation departments surveyed charged user fees for all of their programs. Aquatics were the most likely to have user fees for all programs – over 80% do so – and an additional 15% have charges for some aquatics programs. Athletics programs were slightly less likely to have user fees charged for all programs.

Chart 1: Proportion of respondents charging user fees

Are all children charged user fees?

Among recreation departments that have user fees for all of their programs, the vast majority charge all children. Of the 122 recreation departments offering aquatics programs for school-aged children, and the 120 offering aquatics for youth, over 90% charged all participants user fees. Of the 113 departments charging fees for all athletics programs for school-aged children and the 97 that charge for all of their youth athletics programs, 86% and 78% respectively charge all children the user fees. And over 80% of the departments charging user fees for their arts programs for both school-aged children and youth and for their after-school programs and youth drop-ins levy charges for all participants.

What does this mean overall? The proportion of departments that charge user fees for all children varies according to the type of program offered. Approximately 80% charge all children for aquatics programs; fewer charge all children when it comes to after-school programs (48%) or drop-in programs for youth (31%).

Chart 2: Percentage of recreation departments charging user fees for all children

How much do they charge?

It is virtually impossible to precisely report the costs of recreation for children – or even the average costs – because there were great variations in how much each of the recreation departments charged. The user fees charges depended on the program type offered and its duration.

Here are some examples. With aquatics programs, user fees varied from $20 to $65 for a block of lessons (usually 8 to 10) for children. Youth aquatics programs often involved an instructor or leadership component. These were considerably more expensive – in the neighbourhood of $100 to $200 per course. User fees for athletics programs also varied greatly – from $10 to $300. In most cases, the costs ranged from $40 to $200 for participation in a block of sessions for soccer or basketball, for example. User fees for hockey programs often depended on the arena rental costs, which were cited in some cases as $25 per hour. Many survey respondents indicated that the costs depended on the group running the sport. User fees for arts programs tended to be less costly, with most respondents estimating a session of arts-related classes to be $25 to $75. Again, however, there were exceptions, with studio workshops charging over $30 per class. Charges for youth drop-in programs tended to be at a cost per session, and they varied from $1 to $4.

Are there differences across Canada?

The likelihood of recreation departments charging user fees for all of their programs differed across Canada. In almost all cases, a greater proportion of departments in Alberta and Ontario charged user fees for all of their recreation programs. In almost all cases, Quebec had the lowest proportion of recreation departments charging user fees.

Ninety-three per cent of Alberta departments charged for all aquatics programs for both school-aged children and youth. This compared with 70% of the departments in Quebec. In Ontario, 93% of the recreation departments charged user fees for youth aquatics programs, and 85% charged for aquatics programs for school-aged children. In the areas of arts and athletics, the same pattern emerged.

Chart 3: Recreation departments charging user fees for all aquatics programs, by region

The pattern was somewhat different for after-school programs and youth drop-ins. In British Columbia, 80% of all recreation departments charged user fees for their after-school programs for school-aged children, compared with 29% in Alberta and 44% in Quebec. In Ontario, 60% of the recreation departments charged fees for all their youth drop-in programs, compared with 15% of departments in Quebec, 27% in Manitoba and Saskatchewan, and 32% in British Columbia.

Have the user fees changed?

In the majority of cases, user fees for aquatics, athletics and arts programs have risen over the last five years. In a further 15% to 20% of cases (depending on the program), the user fees had just been implemented in the last five years. In about one-quarter of the cases, user fees have remained the same, and they have decreased in less than 2% of cases.

The largest proportion of recreation departments reported increases in user fees from 10% to 25%. This was true for approximately 40% of aquatics and athletics programs and about half of the arts programs. On average, there were smaller increases in user fees for after-school programs for school-aged children and the youth drop-in programs.

A barrier to participation?

Respondents were asked if they thought that user fees presented a barrier that restricted some children and youth from participating in the department’s recreation programs. Between 13 and 20% of respondents felt the fees presented a significant barrier, depending on the type of program. More than half said the user fees presented a moderate barrier to participation in aquatics, arts and athletics programs, and about 40% thought the fees restricted access to after-school and drop-in programs.

The majority (85%) of respondents were making efforts to maintain or increase the financial accessibility of their programs, and their strategies varied. Most respondents said their philosophy dictated that they did not want to see children or youth unable to participate in programs due to financial hardship. The most common approach used to put this philosophy into operation was to offer subsidies for low-income families, and many departments had a special fund set aside for this purpose. In most cases, however, the subsidy was capped at a certain level and families had to self-identify in order to receive the subsidy. In other instances, all children were subsidized, again, using a variety of forms. Some recreation departments subsidized a percentage of all their programs. Some offered families a fixed fee per child per year. Others offered families a specific time per year that they could attend, for example, during one week a year. Some offered specific programs free of charge to all children, such as a learn-to-swim program.

Many programs levied surcharges to specific groups in order to help fund their children’s programs. For example, surcharges for adults or non-residents were used to offset the costs of the programs for children. A number of departments sought outside funding to support their recreation programs. In the majority of cases, this funding came from the private sector, but in some instances the municipal recreation department worked in partnership with the non-profit sector. Some departments had access to government grants programs, and some allowed families on financial assistance to volunteer time to the agency in return for credits or free access to programs.

Chart 4: Do user fees present a barrier to participation?

Other barriers to participation

Almost all the survey respondents (88%) identified other barriers that might prevent school-aged children and youth from accessing their programs, but there were differences across the regions, with Alberta being the least likely to identify additional barriers.

Recreation departments reporting other barriers, by type of barrier
Barrier	Number of respondents
Transportation	79
Family/ parental support	33
Social/ cultural	29
Equipment	28
Lack of facilities	17
Lack of awareness	10
Lack of volunteers	10

The most common barrier identified was transportation. Many children and youth simply have no way of getting to a facility in order to participate in the recreation programs. In rural communities, for example, there is no bus service, but even in urban communities, there are problems. In some cases bus service was available, but it was identified as being poor, particularly in the evenings. Facilities were often located far from the children’s schools, with no transportation available.

Parental or family support was also seen as a barrier. In the majority of cases, it was not because parents did not want their child to participate, but rather that they were too busy working or organizing other family members to be able to support their children in the recreational activity. Single parents were often identified as having great difficulties in this area.

Social and cultural barriers were also thought to be significant. Some respondents said the department served a diverse mix of children from many ethnic groups, and that the children did not feel comfortable participating, they did not see the activities as relevant, or they had no previous experience and therefore felt uncomfortable. In some cases, this was thought to be a family issue, where families had no previous experience with recreation, did not value it, and did not encourage their children to participate in it. Among youth, peer pressure was sometimes identified as a barrier to participation – the activities were not considered to be "cool" or did not interest the young people. Other respondents indicated that families living in lower socio-economic situations were often uncomfortable with the services or uncomfortable having to identify themselves as being in financial need.

Other significant barriers to participation in recreation programs included limited facilities, high equipment costs, and a lack of volunteers.

Just over half the departments (57%) surveyed had developed strategies to reduce these barriers, including offering programs within walking distance, providing transportation, and changing program schedules to better accommodate working parents. Other strategies included working with different cultural and community groups to promote the programs and services, ensuring that their program staff were reflective of the community they served, and by holding equipment exchanges to reduce parents’ costs.

Again, there were differences across the country: 75% of the recreation departments in Ontario had developed such strategies, compared with only 25% in Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

Louise Hanvey is a Senior Research and Policy Associate at the CCSD.

This research is based on the results of a survey of municipal recreation departments conducted in the summer of 2000 by the Canadian Council on Social Development in collaboration with the Canadian Parks and Recreation Association. All charts and graphs present data from that survey.

Canadian Council on Social Development, 190 O'Connor Street, Suite 100, Ottawa, Ontario, K2P 2R3