|
|
 |
by Jon Malinowski, Ph.D.
The American Camp Association’s Committee
for the Advancement of Research and Evaluation
recently completed its triennial Site, Facilities,
and Program Survey (SFPS). This lengthy and in-depth
polling of 700 Association members reveals the
great diversity — both positive and negative — of
the industry’s camps.
Basic Camp Operations
At the most elemental
level, the SFPS reveals the current state of
basic camp operations. Residential camping was
the most common offering of the participating
member camps. Over 69 percent of camps reported
offering a residential program. Day camping was
offered by 51 percent of camps, suggesting that
many members offer a combination of day and residential
programs. Family camping was also relatively
common, with 32 percent of camps offering a program,
as was renting space for retreats (34 percent
of respondents) or conferences (21 percent).
Nearly 31 percent of camps offer a trip or travel
program. Day use and special event or site rentals
were also common with about a third of all participating
camps. It’s clear that camp owners and
operators have found a diverse combination of
services to serve a wide audience and to stay
financially sound.
Of the camps surveyed, 50
percent operate in the summer only, but nearly
42 percent report year-round operations (see
Chart 1: Camp Operations). The likelihood
of year-round operations is higher in warmer
states for obvious reasons. For example, 48 percent
of California and 60 percent of Texas camps in
the survey reported being open all year, but
in New York and New Hampshire the numbers are
only 29 percent and 24 percent respectively.
Who do camps serve today? Of the camps surveyed,
11 percent serve only males, and 21 percent serve
only females. Socio-economically, 24 percent
of camps reported serving the poor, 48 percent
serve low-income campers, 81 percent middle incomes,
and 50 percent high incomes. Over 65 percent
of camps reported serving a major city, 71 percent
serve suburban communities, 41 percent serve
rural areas, and 4 percent reported serving reservations.
Only 1 percent of camps reported primarily serving
international markets. In terms of race and ethnicity,
75 percent of residential camp populations in 2006
were white, 10 percent were black, 7 percent
were Hispanic, and 3 percent were Asian. For
day camps, 73 percent of campers were white,
12 percent were black, and other races and ethnic
groups were similar to residential programs.
Session lengths between day and residential
camps do not vary much. The most common length
of stay for day camps in 2006 was one week or
less, followed by sessions of seven weeks or
more. Therefore, it is most common for day camps
to serve campers for a short amount of time or
nearly a whole summer. The most common session
length for residential camps was also one week
or less, which was reported as being the most
typical session length by 21 percent of camps
with a residential program. The next most common
lengths were seven weeks or more.
Camps remain
rooted in rural settings despite the highly urban
landscape of the United States. Only 13 percent
of camps reported operating in an urban or suburban
setting. Rather, nearly 73 percent of participating
camps described their setting as “rural, nature-based.” Over
42 percent of camps have access to a natural
or man-made lake, making a lake the most common
water body on a camp property. Just over 30 percent
of camps have a pond on site, 9 percent have
a river running through their property, 30 percent
have a stream or creek, and less than 3 percent
are on the ocean.
The typical camp served 919
youth in 2006. The maximum reported was 22,000
campers! Additionally, camps reported serving
1,060 youth in rental groups. Overall, the camps
that responded to the SFPS reported serving an
average of 1,980 youth. It was less common for
camps to serve adults. The average camp served
only ninety-three adults in day camp or residential
programs, and 624 adults in rental groups. Overall,
camps reported serving between 8 and 45,000 individuals
during 2006, with an average of 2,696.
Getting
a client to purchase a good or service more than
once is important to nearly all types of businesses,
and camps seem to be succeeding. Return rates
in 2006 were 65 percent for youth and 68 percent
for adults. Considering that a percentage of
all youth may grow too old to return to a camp,
these numbers seem to be fairly successful. About
73 percent of rental groups also return each
year.
In 2006, camps with residential programs
had full-time staffs averaging five people with
an additional four persons serving as full-time
volunteers. To supplement full-time staff and
volunteers, residential camps hired an average
of sixty-three seasonal staff members and thirty-two
volunteers. The return rate for paid staff was
58 percent and just 30 percent for volunteers.
Day camps employed six year-round staffers and
three volunteers in 2006 and added an average
of sixty-one paid seasonal workers and sixteen
volunteers. Therefore, residential and day programs
tend to average about the same number of paid
workers, but day camps lag behind residential
in terms of attracting seasonal volunteers. Return
rates were 58 percent for paid staff and 27 percent
for volunteers. The largest reported staff was
1,333 total workers for a residential camp and
1,113 for a day camp.
Facilities
A large component
of the SFPS is to inventory what facilities camps
have on their property. Dining facilities are
obviously crucial to the operation of most camps,
and not surprisingly, 56 percent of camps surveyed
reported having indoor dining facilities with
heating and/or air conditioning. Twenty-nine
percent of camps reported having a facility without
heating or cooling, and just 13 percent reported
having no indoor facilities. Overall, 40 percent
of camps report having some type of outdoor eating
areas, including low-impact dining areas and campfire
circles.
Lodging facilities show even more diversity.
The majority of camps, nearly 65 percent, reported
having on-site cabins. Lodges were the second
most common type of lodging, reported by 27 percent
of camps. Just over 25 percent of camps utilize
tents. Other types of lodging, such as motel-style
rooms, yurts, tree houses, and tipis were reported
by less than 10 percent of SFPS participant camps.
About a quarter of camps also reported maintaining
some manner of tent camping on-site, but water,
sewer, and electric hookups for the tent sites
were rare.
Whether the beds are in a cabin, tent,
or yurt, camp sizes are certainly larger than
they were when the industry was young. The average
camp in the survey reported maintaining 239 beds
during 2007. A 2003 ACA survey showed that camps
reported an average overnight capacity in the
summer months of 297. Whether the latest survey
indicates that camps are smaller is not clear,
it is worthy of more research. Enrollment surveys,
which have been reported here, show that some
areas of the country have been gaining campers
while others have been losing, so perhaps there
have been changes in maximum capacity.
Specialized
facilities vary widely among camps. Some types
of facilities and amenities are common. For example,
74 percent of camps own playing fields and 71
percent have an arts and crafts area. Just over
69 percent also have hiking trails. These facilities
were by far the most common. Pools were owned
by just over 49 percent of camps. Just a couple
of decades ago, there were hardly any camps that
offered ropes courses or climbing walls, but
these are becoming much more common. According
to this tally of the membership, 43 percent of
camps reported owning a climbing wall, 37 percent
had a high ropes course, and a majority of camps,
51 percent, stated that they owned a low ropes
course. Less commonly owned were skate parks (5
percent); theaters and dance studios (18 percent);
and computer labs (14 percent).
Obviously, not
all camps can afford to own or build every facility
they need, so many camps rent or lease facilities
for programming, although the number of camps
doing so tends to represent only a fraction of
all member camps. The most commonly rented or
leased facilities included pools (9 percent of
respondents); playing fields (8 percent); high
ropes courses (6 percent); and horse riding rings
(6 percent).
What are camp directors and owners
planning on building or expanding in the next
few years? The most common response was lodging
(see Chart 2: Percentage
of Camps Planning Expansion).
About 11 percent of camps reported plans to expand
on-site lodging. More campers in bunks means
more campers to feed, and therefore, it’s not surprising that 9 percent
of camps reported plans to expand dining facilities.
New nature centers are also planned by 11 percent
of camps participating in the study. Kids will
also enjoy more ropes courses and climbing walls.
Nearly 10 percent of all camps reported plans to
expand low and high ropes courses and climbing
walls. After they swing from the trees, campers
at 6 percent of the respondent camps will be able
to swim in new or expanded pools. Gymnasiums also
seem to be a growth area with 8 percent of camps
reporting plans to expand gyms.
While camps have
always had to worry about brick and mortar, the
Internet era has brought new infrastructure needs
necessary to keep campers, staff, and parents
connected. But computer access for campers or
other program participants remains relatively
uncommon. Only 19 percent of the camps participating
in this survey provide computer access for their
campers. However, 79 percent have computer availability
for staff. When Internet connections are available,
DSL is the most common type of access available.
Programming
The SFPS collects detailed information
about what program activities camps are now offering
and gives a glimpse into what it means to be
a “camp” in
the modern age. As shown in Table
1, in the area
of sports and recreation there are few surprises
among the most commonly offered activities.
Arts
or hobby-related activities also remain common.
Arts and crafts were offered by 92 percent of
all camps in the study, making it the most common
activity in the industry. Theater or drama activities
were the only other activity in this category
offered by over 50 percent of camps (54 percent),
but activities such as dance (44 percent); music
(44 percent); ceramics (31 percent); and photography
(28 percent) are common. Academic instruction
seems to be rare and is, in general, only offered
by less than 10 percent of camps.
Because many
camps rent their facilities to outside groups,
the SFPS asked camps to indicate the most popular
activities among rental groups. The clear winner
was challenge or ropes course activities, which
was on 12 percent of respondent lists (see
Chart 3: Popular Activities Among Rental Groups). Swimming
was the only other activity that stood out from
the pack. These findings indicate that being
able to offer renters a variety of activities
may be a successful strategy for commercial success.
Camps and the Environment
Land management and
environmental education was a particular focus
of the SFPS this time. The role of camps as stewards
of the environment is clear when looking at the
amount of land that the industry controls and uses. The average camp
in the SFPS reported having 287 acres of land with
190 acres available for programming. Camps reported
nearly 72 acres, on average, set aside for conservation
or restricted for development. Extrapolating nationwide,
this means potentially that ACA member camps may
be responsible for well over 170,000 acres of undeveloped
land, an area 30,000 acres larger than Zion National
Park. When you consider that forests can be found
on 58 percent of camp properties, meadows or prairies
on 42 percent, and over 30 percent of respondents
reported wetlands, the diversity of camp-controlled
environments is truly remarkable and highlights
the need for a continuous focus on environmental
education and land management.
But, camps do not
universally embrace the need for dedicated staff
in the field of nature or environmental education.
Just over 86 percent of camps reported having
no (73 percent) or just one (13 percent) full-time
paid staff member for nature or environmental
education. Furthermore, almost no camps reported
having any full-time volunteers for this purpose.
The situation is a bit better when looking at
seasonal staff. About 20 percent of camps reported
hiring five or more seasonal staffers for nature
or environmental education, and 13 percent or
more also had volunteers on staff for this activity.
The only environmental activity taught by a majority
of camps in the survey was fire building (53
percent). Only 36 percent of camps offer conservation
education, and only 38 percent teach environmental
ethics. Just under 22 percent offer weather education,
and under 20 percent offer any type of activity
with wildlife study.
Finally, the survey asked camps to report
on their recycling activities. Almost 17 percent
of camps reported no recycling efforts, but most
camps do recycle to some degree. Nearly 68 percent
of camps recycle aluminum cans and over 55 percent
recycle cardboard. Between 30 percent and 40
percent of camps recycle glass, and about 50
percent recycle white paper. Mixed paper and
newspaper are recycled less commonly.
Originally published
in the 2008 September/October issue of Camping Magazine.
|
