2024–2025 funding round
The Club Night Lights Program exemplifies the State Government’s commitment to the development of sustainable floodlighting infrastructure for sport across the State.
The purpose of the program is to provide financial assistance to community groups and local governments to develop sports floodlighting infrastructure. The program aims to maintain or increase participation in sport and recreation with an emphasis on physical activity, through rational development of good quality, well-designed and well-utilised facilities.
The CNLP can fund new lighting installations, or upgrades to existing lighting infrastructure, which will maintain or increase physical activity and participation.
Examples of projects which will be considered for funding include:
Funds will not be available for:
An amount of $10 million is allocated over 4 years from 2021-2022 through to the 2024-2025 financial years. Notionally, $2.5 million will be allocated each year.
The department will assess the total eligible cost of your project (excluding GST) from the information provided. Any ineligible items shown as eligible will be deducted from the eligible project cost. This may result in the funding eligible for your project being less than the amount you have requested.
The department does not guarantee you will receive the full amount of the grant requested or the maximum level of funding. The level of financial assistance offered will be based on the overall significance of the proposed project, including the benefits provided to the community. If applicable, receiving financial assistance under this program does not guarantee future stages of your project will be funded.
There is no obligation on your local government or state sporting association to make a financial contribution to a project, however a contribution from all stakeholders (which may include local government, state sporting association and user clubs) in a project that meets local and sporting needs will be viewed favourably.
State Government funding for any project cannot exceed two thirds (66.66%) of the total project cost.
An important part of the funding process is to ensure the community can bear the true cost of running and maintaining a facility well into the future.
Developing a life cycle cost approach when considering your project’s parameters will provide you with a solid and informed base from which to make the most effective financial, economic and operationally sustainable decisions. This life cycle assessment should be undertaken in the planning of any project so all parties have an understanding of the upfront, ongoing and replacement costs over the life of the project.
A life cycle cost analysis must be provided for projects with a total cost over $500,000.
Please refer to our Life Cycle Cost Guidelines.
A sinking fund is established by setting aside revenue over a period of time to meet future capital expenses. The annual amount to be set aside is determined by the expected life of the asset using the formula:
Expected cost of replacement (including inflation) divided by the expected number of years before replacement
The responsibility for maintaining and operating a facility rests with the local government, the club or a combination of both. It is important that applicants can demonstrate they can maintain the facility by developing a sinking fund for asset replacement. Local governments, as the asset owner, are expected to ensure that part of their assessment of a project includes confirmation they will underwrite any shortfalls.
Voluntary labour is work undertaken by people, without compensation or reward.
The value of work undertaken by volunteers can be included in the applicant’s contribution. Voluntary labour is allowable up to $50,000 in value, however the grantee’s cash contribution must match any non-cash contribution to the project.
Administration of projects, preparation of applications, claim forms, documentation, etc, is not recognised as a claimable item. In general local government staff hours will not be recognised.
Voluntary labour can be classified as follows:
General work is being undertaken where no recognised qualification is required. This includes work that is supervised by a skilled person and labourers.
A person with a recognised qualification specific to the work to be undertaken, i.e. electrician, grader driver etc.
A person with a formal tertiary qualification specific to the work to be undertaken, i.e. architectural, legal, engineering, surveying work or similar.
Donated materials can be recognised as part of an applicant’s contribution (see examples at the end of this section). Donated materials must be recorded on a schedule of donated materials, which must be endorsed by the local government.
There is no limit on donated materials, however the applicant’s non-cash contribution cannot exceed the applicant’s cash contribution to the project.
Any local government cash/labour/machinery/materials are to be costed as part of the applicant’s cash contribution, not as voluntary labour or donated materials. However, certain services are considered to be part of the local governments normal function, for example shire engineers and administration/finance staff, project management and costs associated will not be recognised.
Donated materials may not be recognised where the donor is the supplier or contractor involved in the project. It is essential that the applicant completes a valid tender process before considering donations or discounts related to suppliers and contractors.
Note: If the supplier or contractor provides materials at the wholesale price or lower, then the difference between the retail price and the wholesale price may be recognised as a donation, (for example, it has to be demonstrated that the donor is foregoing their profit component in favour of the applicant/project).
There are a variety of voluntary labour and/or donated materials combinations possible. Applicants must first estimate the total cost of the project and then work backwards to see if the method by which they intend to fund the project is allowable. The most important rules are:
You must contact your nearest department office to discuss your project in order to be eligible for funding. There are 9 regional offices located throughout Western Australia.
Application forms are available from your nearest department office (regional WA) and local government (metro area only). A draft for information purposes can be downloaded.
Applicants must be either a local government or a not-for-profit sport, recreation or community organisation incorporated under the WA Associations Incorporation Act 2015 and have an Australian Business Number (ABN). Clubs must demonstrate equitable access to the public on a short term and casual basis.
The land on which the facility is to be developed must be one of the following:
Throughout the planning process you must liaise with department officers to ensure that you adequately address the assessment criteria and that information in your application can be clearly understood. The emphasis of the assessment factors is on a planned approach to facility provision and will require the applicant to demonstrate need and to consider planning, design, and management issues to substantiate the need for the proposed project.
Officers assessing applications will provide a rating against the level of project consultation. Where no consultation has occurred, the rating will be zero which will affect your chances of obtaining a grant. To apply for a development bonus, you must contact your nearest department office in order to determine whether you are eligible to apply.
The key principles of facility provision explain in depth the principles against which applications for CNLP funding will be assessed. Your application will be assessed on the quality of information you provide and how well this information meets the key assessment criteria. You must answer each question in the application form and supply all requested information.
Assessments have been based on the following criteria:
Further details are available in the department’s document Key Principles of Key Principles of Facilities Provision.
If you are applying for lighting above training standard, emphasis will be placed on projects formally identified by state sporting associations as a strategic location for match standard lighting.
Projects must also demonstrate that they can be delivered within the funding period. Projects will be assessed against the scope, time and budget being proposed. You must demonstrate that your project will be completed within the nominated timeframe.
Applicants must liaise with their local government regarding planning and building approvals pertinent to their project. Your local government will assess all relevant applications and is to rank applications in priority order for the municipality.
No distinctions should be made in the ranking between local governments and community applications.
Applicants must liaise with their state sporting association to discuss the project. State sporting associations are involved in the assessment of applications and may be able to provide valuable information when planning your project, particularly on information related to technical design issues and providing evidence of strategic planning for floodlighting locations.
Advice from all of the above forms part of the assessment of your project.
Your application form, together with the supporting documentation required, must be submitted to your local council by the relevant date outlined in the application process and timeline section. Please note that many local governments will close the application period sooner to accommodate council meeting schedules. It is recommended that you check the closing date for CNLP applications with your local government to avoid missing out.
More information on Club Night Lights Program timeframes.
Funding under this program is administered in accordance with the grant agreement, which is executed by successful applicants. Some key obligations of the recipients and conditions of the grant are below — please note actual conditions may differ at time of grant acceptance:
The State Government, through the department, provides a significant contribution to the sustainability and development of the sport and recreation industry. This is achieved through financial assistance and the provision of expertise, advice and services. It is important that recipients of this support recognise the State Government contribution during the funding relationship.
Accordingly, successful applicants are required to abide by the grant acknowledgement requirements.
All information provided to the department and gathered during the grant assessment process will be stored on a database that will only be accessed by departmental personnel. The database is subject to privacy restrictions in accordance with the Privacy Act 1998 (Commonwealth) and the Freedom of Information Act 1992.
There are publications available on the department’s website which will assist you in preparing your application.
Suggested publications are:
The model is separated into two stages. Stage One — Intelligence Gathering consists of a decision-making tree to guide the collation and interpretation of data as part of a needs assessment process.
It is a 13-step process, complete with guidelines on how to identify gather and analyse data.
Stage two is a sustainability matrix developed to assess the feasibility of facilities and programs. This stage consists of 52 criteria, which are grouped into nine weighted categories. Weighting guidelines have been developed, though communities may choose to use a number of consensus building techniques to alter these so that they reflect local values. Each criterion is rated on a scale of 1 to 4, with the highest score providing the most benefit.
The model is designed in such a way that it can be entered at any point in the planning process. It has also been developed so it can be used by planners or user groups with a range of skills and experiences.
While guidelines have been prepared to assist in both stages, incomplete data still enables the user to gauge the need for, or feasibility of, community facilities and services. The more complete the intelligence gathering process the more robust the assessment.
In addition to guiding need and feasibility related decisions, the model can also be used to assess the functionality of existing facilities and programs, and if necessary provide rationale for their disposal or termination. Stage Two can also be used to compare the cost and benefits between alternative types of facilities (e.g. when determining budget priorities) or to determine the most suitable location for a new facility or program.
It is proposed that the model will be further developed to include a web-based interface. It is anticipated that the model will evolve over time as users test and refine its relevance to different circumstances.
A full application of the model, based on a complete intelligence gathering and interpretation process will make the planning process more robust. In using this model, however, it is important to understand that it is a guide only.
This decision-making tool was prepared by CCS Strategic Management in association with Geografia at the request of the Department of Sport and Recreation. Copyright and intellectual property rests with the Department.
A project control group including local government representatives oversaw the project.
This recourse contains comments of a general nature only and is not intended to be relied upon as a substitute for professional advice. No responsibility will be accepted by the Department of Sport and Recreation for loss occasioned to any person doing anything as a result of any material in this resource.
This booklet was prepared with a view to outlining the Department of Sport and Recreations' requirements for decision making. However, any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed herein are guidelines only and should not be expressly relied on by project proponents.
This decision making tool has been prepared to assist in determining the need for, and feasibility of, community and recreation services. While the model is predominately to be used for facility planning, it has been structured so that it can also be applied to program based solutions.
The model is separated into two stages. Stage One - Intelligence Gathering consists of a decision-making tree to guide the collation and interpretation of data as part of a needs assessment process. It is a 13 step process complete with guidelines on how to identify gather and analyse data.
Stage Two is a sustainability matrix developed to assess the feasibility of facilities and programs. This stage consists of 52 criteria, which are grouped into nine weighted categories. Weighting guidelines have been developed, though communities may choose to use a number of consensus building techniques to alter these so that they reflect local values. Each criterion is rated on a scale of 1 to 4, with the highest score providing the most benefit.
The model is designed in such a way that it can be entered at any point in the planning process. It has also been developed so that it can be used by planners or user groups with a range of skills and experiences. While guidelines have been prepared to assist in both stages, incomplete data still enables the user to gauge the need for, or feasibility of, community facilities and services. The more complete the intelligence gathering process the more robust the assessment.
It is proposed that the model will be further developed to include a web based interface. It is anticipated that the model will evolve over time as users test and refine its relevance to different circumstances.
This decision making tool was prepared by CCS Strategic Management in association with Geografia at the request of the Department of Sport and Recreation. Copyright and intellectual property rests with the Department.
When commencing a facility or program planning exercise, it is important to determine the scope of the project to ascertain key objectives, milestones, and data gathering activities. The scope may take the format of a project brief or tender document and will set out the philosophies and imperatives that underpin the investigation.
In determining the scope, the proponent may ask the following questions:
Determining the catchment of a facility/program or the study area of a needs assessment investigation is an important phase of the data collection process. The catchment of a facility or program will vary depending on its size and function. The study area will vary according to the scope of the planning exercise being undertaken.
At times the two will overlap. If, for example, you are exploring the need and feasibility for a proposal that has been mooted from the community, user groups or as part of the political process, the catchment of the proposed facility or program may be one and the same.
On the other hand, if as a local or state government agency, you are seeking to establish need within a clearly defined area (e.g. a municipal boundary), then the study area is determined through the scoping phase. It is, however, important to understand that administrative boundaries do not necessarily influence the patronage patterns of facilities or programs. Consideration, therefore, should also be given to facilities and programs in neighbouring municipalities.
There are a number ways to determine the catchment of a facility or program. The simplest is based on a radii distance from a facility or program outlet. These radii will vary depending on the facility.
Some guidelines are provided below:
While circular catchment analysis is a useful starting point, it does not take into account major barriers (e.g. rivers, major roads), accessibility (e.g. road networks, public transport options) or population densities (see Standards Based Gap Analysis Guidelines). The diagram below provides an example of how these factors may influence the catchment of a facility.
Note: Even though some areas are within the 5km catchment of facilities, physical barriers restrict their accessibility. As a result they become part of those areas in which there is a potential provision gap (see coloured areas above).An alternative approach to measuring catchments may be through a 'ped-shed' analysis, which involves determining accessibility distances based on transport and pedestrian routes. Geographic Information Systems can be of assistance.
Once the study or catchment area has been determined (as outlined in Section 2), it is essential that the status quo is defined. An audit of all relevant existing facilities in the area is appropriate.
Ideally as much information as possible! Make sure that you also collect data on school and private facilities.
For facilities the following information is recommended to be collected and stored in a readily accessible data base for all existing facilities. This data file represents an asset register, condition report and utilisation record for the facility.
For programs that are not facility specific the nature of the program, location(s), frequency, fees and participant data should be collated.
The key elements for analysis related to planning for new facilities or programs are the location, capacity and condition of the existing services.
Council records are generally the best source, however, they are rarely in a single data file, location or format. Usually it is necessary to gather and compile the necessary information for your own analysis. For facilities a site inspection is essential, during which a photographic record can be taken for future reference. This site visit also allows for a current inspection of the facility condition and its suitability for future use, modification or removal.
For programs, auditors ought discuss the program with providers and attend sessions if possible. Note that at the time this model was developed the Department of Sport and Recreation was in the process of developing a Facilities Mapping System to establish a metropolitan facilities database.
The following questions should be asked for each of the existing facilities and programs:
Demographic analysis allows you to align the planning process to the population you are trying to serve. It can provide insight into the social and economic dynamics of local communities and ensure the proposed facility or program is suited to the targeted user groups.
Demographic data can be obtained from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) website free of charge or for a nominal fee. While basic demographic data is regularly updated, detailed information is only available for Census years (1991, 1996, 2001 and 2006).
This data is available at a variety of geographic scales. The basic unit is a Census Collection District or CCD. Amalgamated data sets can be acquired at postcode, suburb, local government, regional, state and national levels. Talk to ABS staff for additional advice.
As a facility or program planner you will also need to consider population change (growth/decline) and future demographic profiles. The most appropriate data source for this information is the WA Department for Planning and Infrastructure population forecasts, called Western Australia Tomorrow. This can be downloaded from Planning Western Australia. This information can be used as the basis for understanding population growth (and by implication, demand for facilities) and to estimate likely age profile changes.
Census data contains a range of valuable information. Data likely to have an influence on the provision of community and recreation facilities and services include:
We recommend that, as a minimum, you attain data for two Census years at a local government or suburb level to view changes over time. When analysing this data it is important that you compare suburb or LGA data to state, national or regional averages to see local variation.
There are a number of ways and software tools available to analyse and interpret Census data including tables, Excel graphs and the use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS).
Prior to commencing your data analysis it is important that you convert it to a format that can compare geographic scales (e.g. state to local government areas).
For example, if comparing age profiles for the 1996 and 2001 Census for a local government area to state averages, each cohort needs to be converted to a percentage of the total (see tables below for the 'Shire of Westralia').
Data Converted to Percentages for Comparative Purposes
Comparative age demographic
A
s an indicator of temporal changes, graphs comparing raw data between censuses are a useful device. Population pyramids comparing gender distribution are also recommended.
Analysis using GIS software can also be used to determine demographic clusters. One method that can be applied is to calculate the ratio within data sets (e.g. ratio of under 30s to over 30s) for each CCD. Most GIS software can interpolate these ratios across a geographical area to produce a map that highlights concentrations of various demographic indicators (see map below produced by MapInfo).
If, for example, you were making decisions about the location of a youth facility, preference would be given to lighter shaded areas.
It is important to know the average participation rates, frequency of participation and the characteristics of the participants most likely to use the facilities or services you will provide.
Notes: pax this is the average number of participants involved in the activity on this day #wks this is the number of weeks that this activity operates for each year
The provision of facilities and programs according to a set standard, or simply because the neighbouring locality has one, is not advocated.
It is, however, useful to gain an insight as to whether the facility or program you are considering will fill a gap in provision, strengthen an existing level of provision or push this and existing facilities/ programs into competition or oversupply.
Similar to the catchment analysis in Section 2, this exercise seeks to address the appropriate level of provision, but this time on a per capita, or standards basis.
Generally this information is somewhat difficult to come by and exists in a variety of locations. Some standards can be developed locally. Others are simply a mathematical assessment making use of the most reliable data available. Normative participation standards and locally captured participation standards are described in Sections 5 and 6. These provide the best means of establishing a reference or standard.
Note that this table records the level of existing provision which is not necessarily an indication of what may currently be required and certainly does not indicate future provision needs.
The second example is taken from work done by the North Metropolitan Region Recreation Advisory Committee (NMRRAC) several years ago. In generating this work the member councils of the north metropolitan region collated the number of facilities they had in place by each of the categories below and then interpolated the level of provision for a range of target populations. The figures shown below are for a catchment population of 100,000 although figures also exist for 135,000 and 150,000.
Note: These standards are an example only and are not necessarily applicable to all localities. These figures do not include facility provision by schools and other institutions.
Using the NMRRAC numbers as a standard against which to compare future provision presumes that the current level of provision is adequate, sustainable and appropriate for the new circumstances. The numbers should not be used in isolation or presumed to be a minimum standard of provision. They do, however, give some indication of what past planning strategies and community expectations have provided.
third example relates to standards developed from the practice of demand based planning. This example is taken from a presentation delivered by Dr Tony Veal from the University of Technology Sydney to the PLA Annual conference in October 2005.
Here he uses a mix of normative statistical data, locally captured data and guesstimates based on local knowledge to derive a standard of 0.49 Hectares of land set aside for soccer pitches per 1,000 persons.
The value of community and stakeholder engagement should not be underestimated when planning facilities or programs. It can provide important insights into community values and views, ensure the plans and facility/program location are in tune with local sentiments and provide important information about the likely use of the facility. It can also act as a community capacity building initiative in its own right. To manage this process it is recommended that you develop a communications strategy as part of the project scoping phase.
The extent of consultation will depend on the nature, size, function and location of the proposed facility or program. The following table provides a consultative guide to the appropriate level and method of consultation for facilities. Programs are less likely to have an impact on the surrounding community, but consultative activities should be considered. Thought should also be given to special interest and special needs groups, e.g. indigenous, disabled, seniors, youth and people from non-English speaking backgrounds.
One-on-one meetings are a useful consultation device. Best conducted earlier in the planning process, they provide the opportunity to gain candid insights from stakeholders. Meetings would usually be focused on a set of themed questions.
It is highly recommended that as part of the stakeholder consultation process, facility planners and proponents have preliminary discussions with potential financial contributors or partners. This might include funding agencies (e.g. LotteryWest, Department of Sport and Recreation), neighbouring local authorities, land developers, principal user groups and potential tenants.
Facilitated workshops are a useful means for community and stakeholder input. It is recommended that workshops include a brief presentation on key issues (e.g. demographic profiles, participation rates, location of existing facilities). The workshop participants should then be broken into groups and given specific tasks (such as discussing facility or program needs, developing ideas for the vision for the locality/facility/program etc) and then report back to the group as a whole. Themed workshops may be one way to manage a large number of stakeholders.
Mail-out or telephone based surveys of residents and users groups is an excellent source of information and means of gauging community opinion. Usually two sample sets are required (one for user groups, another for residents).In the case of user groups it is recommended that the following minimum information is attained:
A community or stakeholder reference group can provide a refined format for public input whereby the group meets on an ongoing basis. They usually act in an advisory capacity without decision making authority. Each meeting should be well structured, with a clear logic between meetings. Members should be provided with background information to assist them to provide meaningful input.
Once a draft concept plan has been prepared, it should be placed in a publicly available display area and advertised for community comment. Time should be made available for members of the community to meet and discuss plans with representatives of the facility's proponents.
Note that other guidelines relating to community engagement are available from the Citizens and Civics Office of the Department of Premier and Cabinet. A wide range of consultation and engagement processes and strategies are covered in their publications. They can be accessed via this link:
Policies can be defined as overarching documents, procedures or plans that will have either a legislative or governance influence on the facility/ program planning process. They can also be an important source of additional information.
At a minimum it is recommended that you review the following:
Satisfying the need identified and justified in stages 1 through 9 of the model may be approached from a number of perspectives. The best solution may well be non-asset based, meaning that it is not necessary to go about building a new facility. Rather, the need may be met by offering a service or program in the user's environment or from an existing facility. Refer to the Department of Sport and Recreation's Asset Management Guide for further assistance in this area available at the Department of Sport and Recreation
An asset based solution may also not require the development of a new building. Potential solutions could include use of an existing building in which there is capacity to accommodate the need, retrofitting of an existing facility to enable the need to be properly accommodated, expansion of an existing facility to accommodate the need or ultimately, and probably as a last resort, the construction of a new purpose built facility to accommodate the need. Note that facility solutions should also consider use of an existing school or commercial facility.
It is recommended that all potential solutions are identified in this stage and evaluated using the sustainability matrix in stage 2. This process will help determine the most suitable solution to the need. It will also answer any questions from external parties who may have a particular view on which way the need should be addressed, potentially without any substantial information to validate their view.
For non-asset based solutions the investigations in this stage relate to who will deliver the service or offer the program, how, when and where. They become issues of resource logistics rather than facility development requirements.
For asset based solutions, regardless of whether a facility is to be new, retrofitted or extended the determination of location is an essential step and one of the more complex and contentious tasks in the facility planning process. To maximise the accessibility of facilities/programs they should ideally be located equal distance apart, in a hierarchical structure with well connected road and public transport systems.
Even though some policies recommend this approach to urban planning (e.g. Liveable Neighbourhoods) there are a multitude of other factors influencing land development patterns (e.g. topography, land ownership, historical land use, differences in demographic profiles etc). As a result, locational decisions become more complex.
A useful starting point is a catchment analysis. Taking into account accessibility constraints and opportunities (e.g. public transport, road and natural barriers - see figure in Section 2), identify the catchments of existing facilities/programs and earmark provision gaps. This will narrow the location to a general region. Note that local government boundaries should be excluded from consideration in this stage.
Once identified, a series of other criteria need to be assessed. These should include:
As well as comparing the feasibility of facilities, the Stage Two Sustainability Matrix can also be used to assess the benefits of one location over another by taking into account design, policy, funding, environmental and accessibility variations.
It is essential to develop a conceptual design for each potential solution, at least in schematic form as early as possible in the process. It is not necessary to move past the schematic stage at this point but elements and their relationship to one another and the surrounding environment should be roughly agreed. This information will be useful when you do engage an architect or designer.
Alternatively, at this point you may consider developing a program concept. At minimum this should consist of a statement of intent, target audience, equipment requirements, space requirements, staffing needs, frequency and an outline of the program structure.
For a facility this information is generally generated in-house, potentially by the project steering group, before the engagement of an architect designer. For a multipurpose community centre the process could produce a schematic something like the one shown below:
Please note that there are a large number of regulations and guidelines to be considered in the development of sport and recreation facilities. Perhaps one of the most important is the actual sports dimensions required for the sport or recreation activity to be accommodated, including the necessary run-off or clear space required around the competition or performance area. Sporting dimensions can be sourced via the following link.Sports Dimensions for Playing Areas (1998) Archive copy
Other regulations, standards and guidelines will include those related to facility design and construction including the Building Code of Australia, Disability Services Act and the Health Act. The Department of Sport and Recreation's Asset Management guide has a list of relevant legislation and guidelines in Appendix K on page 54 available at The Department of Sport and Recreation.
Even though the specific application of their requirements is not necessary at this schematic stage it is useful to note that there are guidelines and controls which govern facility design and construction.
For an active playing field the NMRRAC models for local and district facilities could be used as a guide to design.
An example of a technical diagram produced for a facility in Wanneroo.
For facilities a quantity surveyor will provide an estimate of the construction and project costs. A useful format for construction costs estimates in the pre-feasibility stage is as follows, shown here for a multi-element facility. Note that the elements can be interpreted as functional spaces such as halls, rooms or pools but must also include circulation space, storage areas and amenity areas:
This table (prepared in Excel) shows land acquisition in year 3 and a build program in the fourth year from the current date with costs escalated at 8 per cent per annum. Both Rawlinsons and Department of Housing and Works publish a building cost index which can be consulted to attain a current escalation rate. Provisional sum allowances are made for unknown items such as site and service establishment at this stage. For programs, quotes for various services and capital costs will need to be sought.
Capital and project costs can be readily obtained from a quantity surveyor. The quantity surveyor should also be able to provide whole of life costs and maintenance estimates which can be fed into an operating cost schedule. Operating costs should also be prepared based on proposed programming, projected participation rates, fee structure and management structure.
Note that the Department of Sport and Recreation provide a useful life cycle costs guidelines publication to assist in cost schedule development available at the Department of Sport and Recreation
The capital and operating cost estimates (Total Project Cost) will provide the proponent with an indication of the overall cost to establish and operate the facility or program. This exercise then leads to element modification, exclusion or reconsideration of the design and the preparation of a funding strategy.
Funding strategies for the development of Western Australian sport and recreation facilities have been very strongly influenced by the State Government's CSRFF program. This program can be viewed in detail on the Department of Sport and Recreation's web site the Department of Sport and Recreation.
Generally, the CSRFF strategy allows for up to one third of the project cost to be met by the State Government, one third by the host local authority and one third by the project proponent or user groups. Note, however, that there are restrictions and limitations to the extent of funding offered by the State under this scheme and a full one third contribution to the total project cost is rarely achieved.
Other facilities funding sources include:
An organisation called Our Community (our community) also provides information on grant programs. This is a commercial organisation and there is a small charge for access to detailed information on the site. You may regard the cost as worth paying.
Many of the above organisations will also provide funding for programs and services. Healthway are a specialist program funding agency which can be accessed through this link: HealthWay Western Australia
A funding model such as the one below should be prepared for the project.
This project example shows a multi-purpose sporting facility development proposal being driven by Hockey. Note that the Hockey club proposes the raising of a commercial loan for any funding shortfall associated with the project. The figure for commercial loan funds shown in blue indicates that the best case scenario calls for a loan of $309,097, however, the most likely outcome, or perhaps worst case scenario, calls for that loan to be $919,097. This analysis provides a statement of viability for the project, i.e. if the funding cannot be secured then the project is simply not viable.
Program funds come from a variety of sources including local government grant schemes. Check with your local government authority for assistance given to local clubs. The Department of Sport and Recreation offers a series of program funds including the Sport and Recreation Community Grants Scheme.
Healthway are a specialist program funding agency which can be accessed through this link: HealthWay Western Australia
Social wellbeing is a very broad term. Generally it is defined as the degree to which a population's health, education, income, leisure and economic needs and wants are being met. Data gathered during Stage One should guide this assessment.
Sense of community can be defined as the degree to which people feel part of a wider social network. Indicators may include participation and volunteer rates, facility usage, number of people within an individual's network, feelings of safety and security and levels of trust. Surveys and consultative activities can assist determine these factors.
Facilities can act as important meeting points for different parts of the community. Indicators may include the likelihood that the facility will be used by a cross section of the catchment population.
Facilities that cater to a wide range of age groups are more sustainable as they: 1) enhance the catchment potential and 2) promote social interaction. In assessing this criterion, consideration should be given to the catchment age profile and the nature of the facility (e.g. seniors centre, skate parks are designed for specific age groups)
Facilities that cater to both genders are more socially and financially sustainable. While acknowledged that some facilities/programs will have an inherent gender bias, efforts should be made to promote use by both men and women.
As part of the Stage One - Intelligence Gathering exercise, certain social issues may be identified (e.g. unemployment, declining numbers of youth, perceptions of safety and security, health problems in local population). Facilities/ programs that, in part, address these issues should be considered more socially desirable.
Measuring the extent to which a facility or programs will increase participation rates is a difficult task. The best method is to determine whether demand on existing facilities and programs is limiting the ability of groups and individuals to participate in activities of choice. At times (but certainly not always) the physical presence of a facility (e.g. footpaths) will improve participation rates.
Definitions for the less advantaged in the community would include people with mental and physical disabilities; low income families; unemployed or people with significant health issues. Data attained during Stage One should assist in this process.
Comparing projected participation rates carried out as part of the Stage One - Intelligence Gathering with the facility’s/program’s projected target user groups should enable an assessment of this criteria.
Ensuring that the proposed facility's/program's catchment does not overlap with existing facilities/program's is critical to their long term sustainability. Refer to Stage One - Determining Catchment/Study Area Guidelines:
Comparing catchment/ study area population profiles carried out as part of the Stage One - Intelligence Gathering with the facility's/ program's projected target user groups should enable an assessment of this criteria.
Comparing catchment/study area income profiles and participation profile carried out as part of the Stage One - Intelligence Gathering should enable an assessment of this criteria.
Comparing catchment/study area ethnicity profiles (carried out as part of Stage One - Intelligence Gathering) with the facility's/program's projected target user groups should enable an assessment of this criterion. The key is to ensure that the cultural leisure preferences are matched to the intended function of the facility/program.
Gauging local community support is a complex task. Support can me measured in degrees based on the results of a survey (e.g. strongly support, support, opposed, strongly opposed) or consultation activities.
Gauging regional or catchment support can be measured through a survey sample, public comments or as part of the broader engagement process (e.g. workshop outcomes).
While difficult to ascertain, Council resolutions and conversations with officers can provide an indication of likely local government support.
While difficult to ascertain, funding guidelines and conversations with officers can provide an indication of likely DSR support.
While difficult to ascertain, state sporting association strategic plans and conversations with officers can provide an indication of likely SSA support.
The needs of special interest groups can be determined as part of the broader and community engagement process.
Commitments from community groups and potential tenants/user groups can be attained as part of the consultative process. An exchange of letters is recommended.
Indigenous and non-indigenous impacts can be assessed through the consultative process, a review of local planning schemes or by engaging an anthropologist or heritage consultants.
Liveable Neighbourhoods, the Western Australian Planning Commission's planning and design guidelines, promotes integrated urban form, high levels of passive surveillance, pedestrian friendly streetscapes and a hierarchy of POS and facility distribution. In regional areas, this may be less relevant. In this instance, rate the facility a 4. The same should apply to program based solutions.
Network City promotes high-medium density nodal developments connected through a network of accessible roads and public transport options. In regional areas, this may not be relevant. In this instance rate the facility a 4. The same should apply to program based solutions.
The policy review should identify the core intent of the Department of Sport and Recreation's Strategic Directions policy statement and evaluate the alignment of the proposed facility or program development with that policy.
The policy review should identify relevant local government policies, procedure and community facility and service strategic plans.
Corporate strategic plans provide an overarching direction to local government. They usually consist of a vision statement, set of guiding principles, key initiatives and performance indicators.
Many local governments participate in regional recreational advisory groups. Many have developed facility and program based strategic plans. These should be identified as part of the policy review process. Where these have not been prepared rate the facility/program a 4.
The WA State Sustainability Strategy (SSS) guides a number of key government policies and initiatives. An overview should be prepared as part of the policy review.
The policy review should identify any other state government initiatives that are relevant to the proposed facility or program. If no other policies are deemed to be relevant rate the facility a 4.
Integration with the surrounding urban fabric can be measured in terms of the facility's connections (e.g. footpaths, roads) to nearby land uses, sightlines and views, architectural consistency and the extent to which land use conflicts are possible. For some program solutions this criteria may not be considered relevant. In this instance it should be rated 4.
Accessibility via public transport can be measured in terms of proximity and frequency of buses and trains to the facility or program. Consideration should also be given to the extent to which public transport frequency matches peak usage times.
Accessibility for pedestrians can be measured in terms of proximity and network of cycle ways and footpaths. Ped-shed analysis may also assist in rating this criterion.
Locational decisions relating to facilities and programs should, in part, be tied to a standards based gap analysis. Guidelines are provided as part of Stage One.
Use of facilities and programs by schools and education institutions is an important contributor to the long term viability of facilities and should be promoted where possible.
Visibility and exposure has marketing, accessibility and safety benefits.
It is now accepted that the safest community spaces are the busiest, particularly at night. The extent to which a program or facility generates day, night, weekday and weekend activity can be used as an indicator.
This requires an indication of the compatibility and connectedness between potential user groups. Complementary seasonal users will generally rate high. Groups that are already working together and groups are collaborating to lobby for the proposal will rate high.
Whilst facilities and programs must be fit for a purpose, the more multi-purpose they are, the greater appeal and applicability they have to a cross-section of the community. Very specific or single purpose facilities and programs rate poorly.
Shared use facilities generally rate high from a feasibility point of view as they encourage synergies, expand the catchment potential or increase its financial robustness. Programs that promote or enhance the level of shared use of a facility should be rated high.
ESD includes solar passive orientation, environmentally friendly building materials, renewable energy sources, grey water reuse, waste recycling and energy efficient plant and equipment. In the case of program solutions this criteria is not relevant and should be rated 4. NB: Considerations should be given to the facilities design to minimise the Ecological Footprint (EF).
Facilities that are visible to nearby neighbours, businesses and passers-by are afforded protection by onlookers. Exposure to the street, open car parks and sensitive landscaping to prevent secluded zones are highly desirable. In the case of program solutions this criteria is not relevant and should be rated 4.
Ready access to the facility is important to enable and encourage utilisation. The shorter the connections within the community and the greater the variety of access options the better. In the case of program solutions this criteria may not be relevant and should be rated 4.
Development of a facility on a degraded site to enhance the amenity value of an area is generally welcomed. Clearing of natural bushland, however, is generally less well accepted. In the case of program based solutions this criteria may not be relevant and should be rated 4.
Community based environmental programs can be defined as initiatives or activities that raise community environmental awareness or promote sustainable household behaviours, e.g. tree planting, recycling programs, water wise campaign, etc.
Management and design issues will determine how responsive the facility will be to waste minimisation initiatives. In the case of program solutions this criteria may not be relevant and should be rated 4.
Expense recovery is a key performance indicator for community facilities and services. A financially viable facility or service will be able to generate sufficient income from its activities to meet its operating costs.
Where facilities and services are likely to incur a trading loss or operating deficit, it is useful to spread financial costs across more than one party. Given that community facilities and programs are usually built on local government owned or controlled land, it is often the host LGA that is left to meet any operating shortfall. It is an advantage if this deficit can be offset by contributions from others, such as the Department of Education and Training, commercial operations or surrounding LGA's in the case of regional facilities and programs.
Due to the expense of establishing community infrastructure and services the aim is to maximise utilisation of facilities. Those that are only seasonal or only used for limited periods, rank lower that those used all hours and all year round.
As part of the pre-feasibility process, funding investigations should be carried out.
Local government reserve funding is a potential revenue source and an indicator of Council support for the project.
Funding from other local governments is a good indicator that the project has a regional focus. It is particularly relevant when the facility's/program's catchment extends across more than one municipal boundary.
The potential for multiple funding sources/project partners should be encouraged wherever possible.
Community infrastructure and services are expensive and often there are many competing demands for funding within a community. The higher the priority a local authority places on this proposed facility the more likely it will be to succeed.