Accreditation agents: examine what park and recreation professionals perceive about receiving accreditation for their agency.

Doing more with less" has become a common adage for public park and recreation agencies. These agencies continually strive to become more efficient, effective and accountable as they justify the allocation and use of public funds. Wearing multiple hats by all staff members has become the rule rather than the exception in parks and recreation. This is, in part, due to prioritizing and allocation of resources as park and recreation departments compete with other county or city services for the ever-shrinking tax dollars. New, innovated and creative ways of "doing business" have become a necessity to survival. Taking a proactive approach is essential for sustainability, with professional standards providing valuable assistance in developing long-range plans. Professional standards are useful for demonstrating and maintaining a set measure of success, as well as stream-lining procedures to their most effective and efficient operations.

In 1996, the Commission for Accreditation of Park and Recreation Agencies (CAPRA) was formed, and the standards for national accreditation in the field of parks and recreation were finalized. The 155 standards identified for parks and recreation encompass 10 categories covering all operations contained in leisure services. These professional standards serve as an aid for improving performance and maintaining quality. They provide park and recreation agencies with an ability to evaluate their operation, while achieving and maintaining a level of efficiency and effectiveness.

CAPRA currently accredits 46 leisure service agencies. Though the number of agencies seeking accreditation continues to grow, there are still many more agencies that aren't accredited. How do the leaders in parks and recreation feel about the accreditation process and it's usefulness to their departments? What are their perceptions concerning the value of these national standards? And why is this valuable tool not being more utilized?

In order to find the answers to these questions and to be able to generalize beyond the participating population, a stratified random sample of accredited and non-accredited agencies nationwide was undertaken. Public park and recreation department beads were surveyed in order to assess their perceptions of the professional standards overseen by CAPRA.

Through the process, 150 city and county run parks and recreation agencies were surveyed, with 47 percent of those surveyed responding. Of those responding, 10 percent of the agencies were accredited, 19.7 percent were from the North, 26.8 percent were from the South, 19.7 percent were from the East, and 33.8 percent were from the West (see table 1).

The questionnaire consisted of 14 items in a 4-point force choice response Likert scale with an internal consistency of .9207. The response choices were: Strongly Agree, Inclined to Agree, Inclined to Disagree and Strongly Disagree. In addition, there were several open-ended questions and a request for demographic information.

Respondents were 82 percent male and 17 percent female. From those respondents, nine percent had less than three years of experience as the department head, 14 percent had four to six years of experience, 18 percent with seven to 10 years of experience and 59 percent with more than 11 years experience as department head. The size of the communities where respondent's organization reside were as follows:

10,000 or less population         3%
10,001-24,999                    10%
25,000-49,999                    11%
50,000-74,999                    13%
75,000-99,999                     6%
100,000-199,999                  16%
Populations more than 200,000    41%

Responses were consistent nationwide without significant differences due to the region, education level of the director, years of experience as the department head, size of the agency or the size of the community in which the agency resides. The only differences were between the perceptions of directors from accredited agencies and those from non-accredited agencies.

Overall, parks and recreation directors felt that national accreditation would help their organization earn credibility, promote excellence, continually improve upon their efficiency, obtain a measure of excellence and establish the field of parks and recreation as a legitimate profession. They did not feel that agency accreditation would increase the level of maintenance obtained or improve the level of programs and services, or assist with improving the level of customer service offered by their organization. The directors were almost evenly split (45 percent to 49 percent) as to the difficulty in obtaining agency accreditation. But those who were not from accredited agencies felt budgetary constraints, staffing issues and time constraints were an obstacle to their organization obtaining accreditation.

Of the agencies responding who were not accredited, the directors felt that achieving accreditation would assist their organization to earn credibility, provide a measure of excellence as well as aid in promoting excellence throughout their organization. They feel the standards have value within the field of parks and recreation and would provide assistance with improving efficiency. They did not feel that the accreditation standards helped to motivate their employees, helped to improve current maintenance practices improve the level of customer service, or influence the success of their organization. A majority (55 percent) of all those responding felt their staff were unaware of the existence of the national accreditation standards.

Department heads who lead organizations that that have achieved accredited status believe being an accredited agency has helped to motivate their employees, assisted them in obtaining a measure of credibility helped to promote excellence, improve efficiency, obtain a measure of excellence, improved customer service, improve programs, and services and achieve achieved a measure of organizational success.

However, the perception of park and recreation department heads who do not oversee accredited agencies is that they are too short of staff; the accreditation process is too time-consuming and there is not enough perceived value from it's achievement. The challenge may not be in the need to change manpower or resources; the challenge may be in the need to change perception.

Table 1

NORTH           SOUTH             EAST              WEST

Illinois        Alabama           Connecticut       Alaska
Indiana         Arkansas          Delaware          Arizona
Iowa            Florida           Maine             California
Kentucky        Georgia           Maryland          Colorado
Michigan        Kansas            Massachusetts     Hawaii
Minnesota       Tennessee         New Hampshire     Idaho
Nebraska        Louisiana         NewJersey         Montana
North Dakota    Mississippi       New York          Nevada
Ohio            Missouri          Rhode Island      New Mexico
Pennsylvania    North Carolina    Vermont           Oregon
South Dakota    Oklahoma          Virginia          Utah
Wisconsin       South Carolina    West Virginia     Washington
                Texas                               Wyoming