overview...strategy survey 2017: review of purpose, governance and name - members' consultation...

Strategy Survey 2017: Review of Purpose, Governance and Name - Members' Consultation

ALL MEMBERSHIP (England, Wales and Scotland)

Overview The 2017 AGM, held in Sheffield, highlighted that Sporta UK has grown as an organisation

and is now at a key point in its history, with questions around whether it retains the status

quo of purpose or seeks to strengthen its visibility and influence in the UK sport, leisure and

cultural sector.

The Sporta Executive is proceeding with a review of Sporta's purpose, governance and other

arrangements, including the proposal to change our name.

This document provides a summary of the feedback from the survey. Notable members’

comments have been included to provide some deeper context when analysing the results.

Contents 1. Purpose of Sporta 2. Membership 3. Executive Board 4. Regional Structure 5. Network Groups 6. Cultural Development 7. Campaigning and Communications 8. General Meetings 9. Additional Services 10. Funding 11. Name Change

Total respondents: 35

Regional breakdown:

Sporta Strategy Survey 2017: Feedback Report

of 20

1. The Purpose of Sporta Sporta is currently constituted to be a Members' Association. Our current main functions are to represent and secure the interests of Members (e.g. to governments, funders and regulators) and to share information and experience.

Q1 - On a scale of 1-10, give your view on how important you feel are the purposes and benefits of your Sporta membership going forward (1 = not important at all, 10 = extremely important)

Comments:

I think the most important purpose is to distinguish the charitable trust model from commercial leisure providers…the focus should be to emphasise why Sporta is not just 'another club'; it is more of a 'movement' which brings together like minded people and organisations who are more than profit and who really want to involve and give back to local communities…a group that collectively is 'doing the right thing for the right reasons'

More of the representation to stakeholders includes promoting the good work of the sector, and

as such there may be less need to expend limited resource on showcasing and awards.

An association that actively reaches out to the leisure and cultural sector, large and small,

strengthening the collective voice

Missing: collaborative approach in addressing common issues and working collectively to find a solution that individually would have been difficult/costly/time consuming, e.g. Sporta pension; high quality tax advice…more could be done in this vein as a collective approach.

Action 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 MEAN SCORE

Representing the broad interests of members to key stakeholders and influencers (Gov’t, Sport England, Arts Council, etc)

0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 13 20 9.4

A networking forum to meet with peers at Senior Leader level

0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 12 17 9

Providing a framework for Trust managers to develop their knowledge and share learning through structured development sessions (eg. Finance Group, HR Group, Culture Group)

0 0 0 0 2 1 6 9 10 8 8.3

A vehicle to draw down funding for allocation to members through a structured programme e.g. Make Your Move

0 0 1 1 5 5 9 5 5 3 6.9

A vehicle for using shared membership funding to explore and challenge legal issues, such as tax and procurement, for the benefit of all members

0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 17 11 9

An association that actively showcases and promotes the good work of the sector (eg through Awards, regular bulletins and trade press activity)

0 0 0 0 0 3 5 7 12 8 8.3


of 20

2. Membership of Sporta

Membership is open to non-profit distributing organisations which operate local leisure, sport and

cultural facilities and services that are open to the public. Group structures which include a charitable

body only as a device for securing VAT and business rate reliefs are excluded.

Q2 - Is this still how you would like membership to be defined?

Choice Number of trusts

Yes 35

No 0

Unsure 1

Comments:

It is important that we define ourselves both against the private sector and “sham” trusts (more aggressively) but also for localism, community benefit (including employment, economic impact and local connectivity) and charitable status.

If "sham" trusts are allowed to join Sporta then it completely loses its integrity and purpose. There would then be no point in a genuine trust being a member!

We have to maintain credibility and distinguish ourselves from those who are just pretending It seems strange to define an organisation by who it excludes. I would like the thinking to be

turned around so that we define who we do want to include.

Yes, provided that it is always possible to identify, and therefore exclude, organisations which are

“sham” trusts.

Q3 - Should we consider admitting a wider range of members? e.g. organisations which are

genuinely not for profit but are not charitable and/or are not fully independent from public

bodies/local authorities


Yes 8

No 18

Unsure 11

Comments:

It is important we widen the opportunity for broadly aligned organisations to join to achieve scale to optimise our capabilities, influence and sustainability.

The broader our membership of the sector is the more effectively we can argue that we represent the whole Leisure, Sport and Cultural sector.

I think we would need to consider what type of organisation. On the one hand this could dilute our focus - on the other it could enrich our membership and expand its influence.

If membership becomes too broad it may be more difficult to represent members effectively or lobby/communicate externally

I would be concerned that this would then also widen the requirements / needs coming from these organisations which would dilute the available capacity and resources.

Again I would prefer to see a list of organisational types that are eligible rather than those who are not. Those that are not for profit would fit with what I believe is the right ethos for Sporta.

Perceptions of external agencies may be adversely affected by a misreading of the status of such

examples, harming the core membership and [current] reason for being of the organisation


of 20

3. Executive Board

Our current constitution provides for an Executive board of 10 directors which include Chair, Vice

Chair, Treasurer and Hon Secretary. Directors retire every year but can be re-appointed if no other

candidates come forward, with no limit of terms.

In an effort to widen engagement, an alternative has been proposed, to have rotating fixed-term (two

or three-year) appointments, renewable for a maximum of two further terms - as favoured by e.g.

Charity Commission and Sport England.

Q4 – Which is the preferred option?

Option Number of trusts

Maintain Status Quo 2

Move to appointments with rotating terms 23

Unsure 0

Comments:

There is merit in the alternative proposal. However, we wouldn't want to lose experienced individuals from the board or lose too many people at once.

Whilst it is considered 'best practice' by Sport England, it is only relevant if they are funding Sporta (which has only happened once)

I don't believe we should have maximum number of terms as this could be counter-productive and result in the loss of strong board members unnecessarily. The Executive does however need to have sufficient powers to replace board members where necessary to keep the board fresh, vibrant, dynamic and relevant to current and future challenges.

When you have great people you shouldn't just throw them away. That said we should continually actively search for new committed people and if we find them, have a constitution that enables them to join the board in some capacity to add value

[Rotating terms] would be more in line with expected levels of governance Better practice than the current system…need to allow for the designated regional rep. not to

necessarily have to be the Chair, hence allowing for the additional workload/ time commitment to be shared out a little more.

By having rotation it encourages others to take on the roles and provides for different

perspectives in the leadership roles.

Q5 - Should we seek to appoint board members from outside the membership, to provide specific

expertise and widen diversity?

18

14

4

0

5

10

15

20

Maintain Status Quo Appoint board membersfrom outside the

membership

Unsure

Q5: External Board Members


of 20

Comments:

If specific expertise is needed then it can be requested on an item by item basis. No need for permanent board membership.

The Board should not grow too large and any additional co-opted member should be there

specifically for relevant expertise, e.g. Legal

External [Board Members] should be able to advise on particular items, but shouldn't be given Board status (either as a Director or NED).

It would bring a degree of detached observation and may also enable the continued contribution of past members who, frankly, may now have more time to contribute. However, it is a member’s organisation so there must always be safeguards to ensure members always hold sway.

This would enable the appointment of strong advocates and critical friends from key agencies/sectors/companies who may not be directly from the membership. There does need to be a balance to ensure 'control' of decisions remains with the membership, with the Chairperson being a member.

The board should be able to select a board member that has skills/expertise or networks that would benefit the membership.

Co-opting of additional members should only be done when there is a clearly defined need. Engaging with others with specific skills could always be done separately anyway

Providing any possible conflict of interest is well managed and we don't have Board members who are associated with direct competitors I could only see this as a positive step.

4. Regional Structure

Sporta's structure is as a UK body with six ‘regions’: Scotland (for which significant devolved

arrangements have been created); North West; North East & Yorkshire; Central; South West & Wales;

and London & South East.

Q6 - Do these regional arrangements help fulfill our purpose, or should it be structured differently?

26

6

4

Q6 - Do these regional arrangements help fulfull our purpose, or should it be structured differently?

Maintain status quo Modify the structure Unsure


of 20

Comments: Regional meetings are very much about networking with peers and can involve discussions about

more local issues so are very valuable for that purpose Strongly believe the regional network is at the core of Sporta and fundamental going forward,

given the cultural differences between the approaches to Trust delivery in the south/north of England/ Scotland.

Regions allow a vehicle for more in-depth debate which can then be fed into the Executive

meetings.

Currently the arrangements appear to work but this is not to say that they cannot be improved. In my own region there is now a case for separate arrangements for Welsh members.

Not been to many regional meetings so far but when I have, I did not take much away from them and did not find them useful

Seems to work in the Central region on the basis that although it covers a huge area, as we just meet 3 time p/a and as we have a CPD element included it is reason enough for people to commit to travel and meet

For East Midlands/Lincolnshire area…north east is a 3 hour drive so not practical in terms of regional meetings and Central is very board, again often requiring long journeys.

As the larger operators become more widespread there is a risk that each region will lose its local identify. The current process works well for logistics but may also warrant a review.

Q7 – Would you like Scotland and the regions to have a more prominent role in Sporta?

Comments:

The current balance is about right. There are some big issues on which Sporta must project itself nationally. However, the regional structure and the theme groups allow for a different kind of interaction at differing organisational levels. I think this is a strength.

It depends on the strength of individual regions and whether they fell they can't adequately influence decisions at the moment. I'm not personally aware of such issues.

The executive have demanding day jobs…I am impressed at the level and quality of commitment now, to expect more is unrealistic.

I think it would be helpful if all Regional Chairs met with the Board on at least one occasion per

year. This assumes that the Regional Chairs are not already on the Board.

209

7

Q7 - Would you like Scotland and the Regions to have a more prominent role in Sporta?

Maintain status quo Increase regional influences in Sporta Unsure


of 20

5. Network Groups In the last couple of years Sporta’s network groups have increased to now include: Finance, HR,

Cultural, Single Sites, Public Health and, in Scotland, Health Improvement, Sport Development and

Marketing.

Q8 – Do you welcome this expansion?

Answer Number of trusts

Yes 34

No 0

Unsure 1

Comments:

Trusts are becoming more complex - groups need to be created to help trusts to share expertise and manage growth and development in new areas.

These are a useful member benefit and help to justify the membership fee If there is a need and a proven benefit in sharing good practice and addressing challenges together

then see this as a real positive and an extension of one of the core benefits of Sporta Trusts, i.e. our collaborative approach.

The more staff involved the better it will be in the long term.

Having a forum with clear purpose and agendas helps to facilitate collaborative working and efficiency in the development of new systems and processes.

Q9 – Is there positive feedback from staff members who attend the network groups?

Comments:

People tend to attend groups that are useful to the organisation and not those that don't. On that basis, continued involvement is usually reflected in positive comments.

9

1

25

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Unsure

No

Yes

Q9 - Is there positive feedback from staff members who attend the network groups?


of 20

The annual conference/awards are particularly well received as this gives Sporta a profile within the wider staff team and recognizes the Trusts involvement in a national network and sector which is good.

Perhaps more continuous feedback from the groups as to what they have done or planning (just a brief outline so that CEOs can see the value and ensure/encourage their colleagues to participate)

Q10 – What would be your particular priorities for network groups? Please list top three

Area Number of trusts

Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3

Health (public health / health improvement) 10 4 6

Finance 9 6 5

HR 3 7 4

Sustainability / future proofing / innovation 3 3 1

Sharing best practice 3

Single site trusts 2

Culture 1 1

Consultants 1

Governance 1

Funding opportunities 1 2

Asset Transfer 1 1

Sports Development 1 1

Devolution

Demonstrating impact 1 1

Procurement 1 3

Other (inc. marketing, legal) 3 2


of 20

6. Cultural Development

More members are now operating cultural facilities and services. Some form of trust model is also

being recognised as appropriate for local cultural services being outsourced from local authorities,

especially for libraries and theatres. Our Cultural Group in England has attracted interest in

involvement from the Arts Council and LGA and a Scottish group is being launched this year.

Q11 – Is the cultural group, and the trust model development in cultural services, of interest to you?

Comments:

Would be good to see an increase of members from the purely cultural sector. There are many non-leisure Cultural Trusts who know nothing about Sporta or don't necessarily

see it as something for them at the moment

Q12 – If so, what issues should we prioritise to ensure a positive impact for members’ interests?

Please list top three

Area Number of trusts

Rank 1 Rank 2 Rank 3

Partnerships (Arts Council / Local Authority etc.) 4 1 2

Sustainability / future proofing 1 2

Integration of culture and leisure 3

Libraries 3 1

Funding for cultural programmes / events 3 1 2

Linking arts and health 3

Commerciality 2 1

Other (inc. volunteering, measuring outcomes) 2 1

20

15

0 5 10 15 20 25

Yes

No

Q11 - Is the cultural group, and the trust model development in cultural services, of interest to you?


of 20

7. Campaigning and Communications With such change and challenge in the sectors we are assuming a greater campaigning role with

national bodies, and local and national government, notably in relation to procurement practices and

challenging trading models of private contractors. This has diverted resources and increased risk,

although all are being carefully managed.

Q13 – Do you support campaigning work?


Yes 33

No 0

Unsure 2

Comments:

We support a strong campaigning role but we need to explore the role of the 'super trusts' who are perceived by many outside the sector as being little different to the private sector. Perhaps this will require them to be more overtly supportive of smaller trusts and the localism movement.

This is core to what Sporta should be about. Procurement practices are the biggest threat to the sector. Independent Trusts are no longer

viewed as the preferred vehicle by many Councils Sporta needs to use its collective voice/weight much more and consider this one of the main ways

in which to do this. So important to keep banging the drum of why we are different and what difference we actually

make I think this work should be very targeted to drive benefits for Sporta members. I don’t believe we

need another generalist lobby group. So - campaigning to eat 5 a day: no. Campaigning to affect VAT on charitable activities: yes.

We should take a harder line, with robust arguments in place to deal with any reciprocal finger pointing.

Without effective campaigning in this area we risk the extinction of single contract Trusts

This is of paramount importance especially in these extremely difficult times.

We need to think carefully about how we do this so as not to alienate local authorities and to create difficult relationships at a local level. The fact that the playing field is not level or even of the same size and shape at the outset makes it difficult to find the right balance and focus.


of 20

Q14 – Should we see an increase in work in this area?

Comments:

We must expect this to be a long term project and a long slog to change opinions and practices. I think it is vital if we do not wish to see homogenised services across the UK. Too much influence

from so called consultants and increasing lack of awareness of the market by those commissioning, especially local authorities.

As we re-brand it will be very important to drive the message Perhaps Sporta needs to set up its own consultancy services to better guide future contracts to

ensure they are not tailored towards large scale private/commercial contractors! Particularly around our contribution to public health, working towards public health professionals

having a better understanding of our sector and how we can work together (and vice versa). We need to be mindful of potential risks…a strategy to influence more than challenge may be

wiser.

We should be increasing work but I'm not sure we have our mandate sorted as yet and if the right

people are engaged.

Q15 – Do we need to invest greater resource in campaigning?


Yes 18

No 3

Unsure 14

Comments:

We need to be careful that too much campaigning could have unintended negative consequences. A key driver for the establishment of most trusts would have been tax/finance efficiency of the model - challenging “sham trusts” too vociferously may cause issues for us all. Greater campaigning on evidence and awareness of the social impact and morals of trusts would be positive.

We first need to analyse where we are to direct the campaigning...I am increasingly of the opinion that we should mobilise public opinion. Contrary to the received wisdom, I believe that many people are interested in who is delivering their services…the current climate is ripe to challenge the profit motive of some of our competitors.

Tends to be an area where expertise is required in order to truly effectively influence. So long as we can justify the need for further investment and it is affordable

Yes. I assume that as our membership increases so does our income.

9

4

22

0 5 10 15 20 25

Unsure

No

Yes

Q14 - Should we see an increase in campaigning work?


of 20

8. General Meetings

As well as the AGM, Sporta holds two General Meetings each year at accessible locations throughout

the UK. The meetings typically consist of formal members' business and discussion, along with short

workshops and/or presentations from members or external bodies in the sector. An evening meal for

CEO/MDs and sponsors is also held at most meetings.

Q16 – Do you (or a deputy) attend AGM/GMs where possible?


Yes 30

No 5

Q17 – If you (or a deputy) usually do attend, please rank on a scale of 1- 10 how useful you think

AGM/GMs are (10 = extremely useful) (n=30)

Data type Value

Average (Mean) 7.6

Average (Median) 8

Highest 10

Lowest 4

(NB: Values adjusted to reflect score out of 10, rather than 100)

Q18 – Please indicate any preferred changes to Sporta AGM/GMs across the areas below

Area Suggestions Content

I think strong, interesting and relevant speakers will attract more attendees. Note the appearance of Andy Burnham.

Input from industry experts and high quality speakers welcomed

I like the presentations from colleagues introduced last year.

More high quality panel sessions

Involving insight from other sectors together with best practice examples from our sector

OK, but very limited feedback/ follow-up / progress made from workshops held. Groups of CE's/MD's not always the best to give a rounded view/ finish off what's discussed! Workshops need to be better structured / facilitated and followed up on.

These have recently improved, but need to spend more time focussing on key issues as at most recent AGM.

Showcasing best practice on relevant topics is useful, as is involving key players relevant to our sector (e.g. CLOA, UK Active, etc as was done recently)

Workshops are useful

Format

I believe they could be longer as too often we are cut short because some appear to want to leave by 3:30!

Work best if linked with another event where possible

Longer days: 10am-6pm or later, to make the most of the time together. Drop the painful sponsors’ slots sessions; there are better ways for them to engage with the Sporta membership.

More 'workshop' style - fewer PowerPoint sessions

Would prefer more time in workshop discussion instead of presentations as this enables ideas and discussions to come forward


of 20

Accessibility

Keep the meetings in venues that are easily accessible by main line transport ensuring day visits to the meetings (without overnight stays) are easily achieved.

Continue to rotate - hosted by showcase venues would help Needs to be in a city with good transport links Usually attend Sheffield as only couple of hours journey and not requiring overnight

stays

Level of employee attending (currently mainly limited to CEO/MD)

I think we should encourage a deeper involvement from other, relevant staff. It’s a good development tool for other staff.

Could add contemporary topics for seniors managers running alongside Senior management, CEO/MDs, plus potentially Board members Yes - increase awareness to attract the "wider team" members, and not seen as a

form of a CEO / MD club Option should be there for Trusts to invite Senior Managers if they wish. Board

members should also be eligible to attend

Frequency

Any less than 3 per year could stifle Sporta progression I think it is ok. If it were to change I would drop a general meeting and have two

decent sized occasions with bigger agendas and potential dinner, speaker etc. This could be influenced by the views of Sporta central team who have to organise the events

Would like 4 GMs per annum with dates set in advance for the year 2 per year; plenty given the 4 x regional meetings as well. Twice a year

Location

Central UK please Move around the regions Rotate geographically Central London/Leeds/Birmingham/Manchester/Sheffield/Glasgow/Edinburgh -

nowhere else, as otherwise fairly inaccessible. London is very expensive however appreciate this is good for southern based

members East region can at times be a long commute Have an occasional NW meeting venue Keep rotating BUT preferably with at least one industry forum (i.e. Elevate, LIW)

Other comments

Just the Sponsors slots which are difficult - I can't think of a way to change just that we know people are not listening to the Sponsors presentations at the meetings so there are no winners. Perhaps the best way seems to be during the evening dinners where they can wine & dine?

Emails could be more "marketable" i.e. via a mail chimp or similar vehicle for updates / news


of 20

9. Additional Services Sporta does not currently provide services direct to Members, other than through supporting

networks, but this is an area increasingly being discussed at meetings

Q19 - Should we look to provide or organise additional services? e.g. negotiation of

supplies/procurement, information/educational resources, activities and events


Yes 1

No 14

Unsure 11

Comments:

Supplies and procurement for trusts is an interesting area linked to the role of 'super trusts'…have not used their purchasing power to allow smaller trusts to 'piggy back' their scale. This would reaffirm their commitment to the sector as a whole rather than just their own expansion.

Could broker this support - as opposed to providing it which would be a distraction. In my experience this proves very difficult and resource intensive in term of supplies/procurement Use the buying power of larger trusts to the wider Sporta membership’s benefit; needs specialist

/ additional staff to do this and broker arrangements on the wider Sporta membership's behalf. Organising educational type events should be part of the Sporta remit. I like the principle but am mindful of capacity issues. If there is a strong view for a given area, this

should be explored further.

I don't think that would be feasible without increasing costs and therefore subscriptions fees. I think this takes away from our core purpose and dilutes our limited resources.

Q20 – If yes, what might these be?

I think that issues such as those uncovered by MYM will be of great interest to members…aligning with local strategic needs around health and wellbeing.

Joint buying/procurement might be interesting, support developing knowledge around education sector opportunities, opportunities to develop new large partnerships to add value to members.

Negotiation of supplies/procurement, information/educational resources Defending your own contract advice. Procurement is tricky, but could yield real benefits Sports equipment/ Les Mills class rates (especially given they're a sponsor!); discount off

insurance costs and other products from Sporta sponsors; health insurance; office supplies etc. Procurement of key services and suppliers Trust structure support for governance standards would be useful. Procurement makes sense - it would only really work significantly if the larger Trusts came on

board with the idea though. Procurement and shared services


of 20

10. Sporta Funding

Sporta is financed by membership fees and sponsorship income. In 2016-17 members provided £150,000 and sponsors approximately £85,000 (excluding Scotland and Awards sponsorship). This gives us a good financial base but, having expanded resources in the past three years to three full-time and one part-time staff members in England and two part-time members in Scotland, we are at capacity in current work-load and financial resource.

Q21 – Are these the right financing arrangements?


Yes 21

No 6

Unsure 8

Comments:

We could expect a greater contribution from the 'super trusts'. More from sponsors would be great but I appreciate sponsorship is a precarious business and I wouldn't want to become so focussed on financing at the expense of action for the members. A spread of sponsors is desirable so we don't become dependent on one big organisation.

Would not want to see an increase in proportion of income from sponsors as it is important for maintain its independence (and the sponsors pitches at meetings are a bit painful!)

I think the fees are reasonable but believe the major Trusts could be charged 'per contract' to increase income. Understand it would not be feasible to charge the same rate per contract as a single contract Trust but could be looked at. I don't think the sponsors get much for their money at the GMs but assume the contacts are worthwhile.

Larger, super Trusts (50+ sites) should be paying significantly more Increase membership fees Sponsorship income is risky and the percentage of total income quite high which may represent

a risk. Regional sponsorship should cover costs of Sporta staff attending.

Members should be obliged to engage with sponsors when procuring services in their area. We could potentially earn more from Sponsors if this were guaranteed

Other income generation sources might be worth exploring such as consultancy services

Q22 – If we are to develop new/expanded work areas, new income should be raised by:

12

25

1414

3

15

86 6

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Membership fee rise Charges to members for specificservices

Charge to members for meetingsor workshops

Q22 - New income raised by:

Yes No Unsure


of 20

Comments:

An all-inclusive membership fee is preferred, rather than base fee with separate charge for network/workshop meetings.

Favour option to pay for supplementary services as a fee increase could inhibit membership growth.

A small fee for workshops and additional services should be considered Increase in fees is likely to result in loss of members given the tight financial position we are all

in. Meeting charges also likely to reduce attendance, however a donation/charge for food and refreshments is reasonable (and now the norm). With regard to fees being based on turn-over this is not helpful when operating cultural services as turn-over doesn’t usually equate to profit and similarly large doesn’t mean we all have lots of resources!

A mixture of all three. However, care needs to be taken that workshop fees don't put people off from attending. There shouldn't be any charge simply to attend meetings. I'm unsure whether Sporta spends funds on social aspects the night before meetings and so on but, if so, perhaps that's an area where savings could be made.

Workshops should cover their costs with a small charge for attending

A difficult balance when already some trusts question the value they receive. We don’t want to risk losing members.

Q23 – On a scale of 1-10, how do you rate your membership fees as value for money (1 = low, 10 =

high) (n=35)

Data type Value

Average (mean) 8.2

Average (median) 8.3

Highest 10

Lowest 2.5


Sporta's fee bandings are based on turnover of the member and recognise that the largest members

typically have less need of Sporta services. Sporta have always been sensitive to the fees and their

increases. The Executive review the fee bandings annually, and are keen to understand Members'

views and sensitivity to increases.

Q24 - In light of the changes in the trust sector, the new and escalating challenges arising, and the

requirements of Sporta to respond, would you as a member respond favorably to increased

membership fees? (0 strongly against member fees increasing, 10 totally accepting of member fees

increasing) (n=35)

Data type Value

Average (mean) 5.7

Average (median) 5.1

Highest 10

Lowest 1.2



of 20

Comments:

Whilst I agree with the assumption that larger trusts have less need for Sporta services, I do feel that the larger trusts have a greater need for support in lobbying on issues affecting the trust model and sector. Therefore I strongly feel that larger trusts should pay proportionately to benefit from what Sporta does.

I think the increase should be significantly more for super Trusts (50+ sites).

Q25 - Do you feel as a trust that you engage in, and access all the opportunities available through

Sporta? i.e. regional meetings, network groups, specific services e.g. pensions project.

Comments:

We only have a small management team so days out have to be carefully balanced with business needs, perhaps wider use of online workshops and groups might be attractive to more participants.

1

0

11

23

0 5 10 15 20 25

No

Unaware what the opportunities are

Partly, would welcome hearing about allopportunities

Yes, as best as possible

Q25 - Do you feel like you engage in, and access all the opportunities available through Sporta?


of 20

11. Name Change Q26 - Please comment below with any suggestion for an appropriate new name. (NB: all comments

have been included for full information)

Sport and physical activity in the title would make a nod to CIMSPA as our chartered professional body - SPACTA. Perhaps too close to Sporta and sounds a bit like an organisation out to kill James Bond. I quite like LECTA and not so worried about the 'L' word. But again, a bit too close to a serial killer. People will begin to associate us with murder. One point - having just about achieved some recognition of Sporta as a national body with some clout we will have to start all over again with brand recognition. Any acronym based name is old fashioned - why not adopt a brand that is more generic and indicative of what we do - physical activity, health and wellbeing. It should embrace, sport, physical activity of all types and the many and diverse cultural activities we manage. This could be indicative or abstract, but meaningful and memorable. The name behind that could remain unchanged? I agree that leisure is not the best description. I would suggest a professional is appointed to explore and recommend some options to ensure that the best possible name is chosen which can effectively reflect the ambitions and responsibilities of the trust. It may need to consider inclusion of elements such as health/wellbeing. It may require some subtle variations, for example for thematic sub group areas, to help more clearly communicate with target stakeholders/partners. If the consensus view is to change the name then out of the two suggestions I'm personally not keen on the abbreviation LECTA (makes me think of Hannibal). I think the current strapline to Sporta 'Social Enterprises within Culture & Leisure' describes the organisation well and could be an alternative. We still predominantly work in the 'leisure' industry so I favour retention of this in any name change. Overall I think we could 'over think' the issue. Not convinced we need a change but if so, go with LECTA (everyone will refer to it as Sporta for the next five years!) Both options would work. Would prefer to drop 'community' and agree - ALECT. Don't like LECTA (Silence of the Lambs!) Would prefer a name that can be said, rather than consonants you have to list. E.g.: PACT (Physical Activity & Cultural Trusts) COMPAC (Charitable Organisations Managing Physical Activity & Culture) CHASE (Culture-Health-Activity-Social Enterprises) MPACT (Management of Physical Activity & Cultural Trusts) ASE (Association of Social Enterprises). I feel strongly that if we can’t find a better name, we should stick with what we have until we do! Think LECTA is ok - would need good logo/ brand/ strapline to support and reinforce. Don't like the use of the work "community"; bit 70's. Still tend to think that appointing a marketing company (Big Wave?) to come up with proposals alongside suitable strapline/ logo and how the brand would be positioned, especially around the change from Sporta to the new name, etc. would be a good way forward. No easy answer but reference to Trusts given our values and purpose plus perhaps 'leisure' and 'healthy' connotations probably have to feature. LECTA isn't bad as it's not dissimilar to Sporta and has a ring to it as opposed to ACLECT which is difficult to pronounce. LECTA or similar sounds fine to me. Not sure, the suggestions don't include a reference to health or physical activity specifically but nor do we want something that is too wordy. We could take ASA's lead and be bolder: Energise UK - our members helping communities through culture, sport and leisure. Leisure, Sport & Cultural Trust Association ACLECT


of 20

I dislike the leisure label. It has come to be associated with shopping and dining - both of which are peripheral to our work and very much ‘not charitable’. I would focus on the core of what I think we are about: Culture, healthy living and sport. I would strongly advice that you don’t make the new name an issue for the membership, you will end up with a hotchpotch. Instead, establish the core principles, which for me must include culture, and then employ a brand specialist to come up with a name. LECTA and ACLECT are both rather good examples of what we don't want. I do feel that the Sporta name needs to change as it has too close a connotation to sport, which is far from what leisure and culture trusts exist to do. The Sporta name already has a strap line associated with it 'Social Enterprises within Culture & Leisure'. We should drop the Sporta bit and focus more on the 'association of social enterprises within culture and leisure' keep the brand appearance, change the acronym ASECL. Not sure about LECTA! CHARTA: Culture, Health, and Recreation Trusts Association I am in favour of a name change to better reflect where we are now. I believe "sports and recreation" has equally bad (and perhaps worse) connotations than leisure. I am not too precious about the acronym but believe the words Community, Trust, Culture and Leisure should be in there! LECTA if a new name is needed I think that Physical Activity needs to be in there somewhere, maybe at the expense of Leisure? Also note: I wouldn’t change the name - maintain as SPORTA which has gained reasonable "brand" awareness. We're happy with the name Don't really have an opinion on this. To me it's more about what Sporta offers its members in terms of services etc. than the actual name Sporta is a recognised brand that has become nationally recognised by out of sector stakeholders. The definition is not so relevant. Changing would mean losing this brand identity and the likely outcome being everyone calls it SPORTA! Regardless to the new name! I think changing the name is unnecessary and will lead to confusion of what the organisation is and who it represents - further confusion alongside UK Active, Skills Active, CIMSPA, CLOA etc. Agree with the notion of a name change and agree with the reservations regarding the word leisure, but accept there are limited alternatives to best describe the association.

Scotland:

One favourite: The Leisure and Cultural Trusts Association

LECTA this seems more appropriate. I don’t feel strongly about the name if the outward facing activity is right In my view, leisure is the best word to describe the range of services that Trusts deliver across the sport, culture, countryside and community remits our organisations deliver. I don't believe that we need to use the term Leisure and Culture. Trusts are based on former Local Authority Leisure Services, and this connection can be important in understanding what we do. If we are not all charities or social enterprises then it would be inappropriate to use these terms in our title. The Association of Leisure Trusts would be my suggestion.


of 20

I like LECTA. We won’t get a name that satisfies all. Beginning with "the association of"...does what it says on the tin - then suggest "leisure, cultural and health promoting charities" [ALCC]

END.

Sporta, July 2017

overview...strategy survey 2017: review of purpose, governance and name - members' consultation...

Documents