4 Levels

[Clive Coles]

I am with you on this one Seabird.

It galls me too when I compare the amount of so called profit Clubs make on an event compared with the amount of levy BOF extract from the event revenue.

Clubs rarely cost in the time and effort that is expended by volunteers ~ if this was added into the computation I am sure almost all events would be shown as running at a loss.

But BOF have to be funded somehow. We have to make a contribution either through a subscription or from event revenue.

At the moment, thanks to Mike and his team, we seem to be able to attract external funding through Sport England. On the back of that we are able to (partly) fund our international aspirations and finance an expansion of paid staff and, I suspect, most of the development costs of the infrastructure improvements. How long this external funding can be sustained at current levels is very much in the balance. We could be heading for rougher waters as 2012 approaches.

That's why I often adopt my GOM persona and ask questions like:-

Why are we doing this ? Is there a need ?

BOF are not very communicative over what they are doing next. We only tend to find out about new web site developments when new facilities get launched. Some, like the results upload, seem to slip in under the radar.

The Annual report will not doubt tell us how well we have done. There will be lots of pats on the back and thanks to people who quite rightly deserve recognition.

It would be nice however if BOF also outlined what they were still planning to do over say the next 3 years. I hope BOF are not overcommitting ourselves to fund ongoing infrastructure improvements. What would be the consequence to club finances if external funding was significantly reduced ?

[Mrs H]

Brilliantly put Spookster - I've been trying to say the same thing in a much less scientific way for months now - how did you decide which events to go to before? It's just the same as it ever was.

If you want to be sure all your mates are going to the same events then form a little committee - cherry pick a selection and call it a league or something and let everyone know which events are in it - like the nopesport urban league you might even create some competition to be one of the nominatd events and raise quality even higher. Why are you expecting someone to make the value judgement for you?

If you've got something special going on at your level 2 - new map, new area, 18 courses grade 1 planner, oodles of EVO -THEN SHOUT ABOUT IT

Spookster can you roll that analysis out to a wider audience do you think - or is it too late?

[Spookster]

Seabird - Thanks for the info on Ilkley. At the Northern Champs SYO made a £230 surplus (I don't call it profit, because I'm not paying it out to shareholders!), and paid a levy to BOF of around £1540. But I'm not "galled" by it, because I know about all the good things that have (and are) happening with it at BOF.

Clive - yes, the BOF Annual Report will tell you a lot about what has happened. But not everything - we do need to find more ways to communicate all the good news and successes. You rightly ask if the money is being well spent. We do that on the Board too, and will need to be even more robust in doing so as (not if) government funding reduces.

Mrs H - thanks! It's not too late.

[Blonde bombshell]

Well done Spookster. The 314th reply on the bottom of page 21 finally explains clearly and simply what the 3 levels are. If only this had come earlier.

I found your breakdown within the levels a great help as well. Do you think that will be enlarged and implimented nationally?

An old baffled orienteer is suddenly feeling more intelligent (I think I understand it now).

[Spookster]

Well done Spookster. The 314th reply on the bottom of page 21 finally explains clearly and simply what the 3 levels are. If only this had come earlier.

I found your breakdown within the levels a great help as well. Do you think that will be enlarged and implimented nationally?

An old baffled orienteer is suddenly feeling more intelligent (I think I understand it now).

Well, I hope it will be implemented nationally, but of course that will require all associations to pick it up and run with it at level 2, and clubs at level 3. So, please ask your club and association how they are going to help make it happen at those levels. It isn't going to be mandated or implemented by BOF (other than at level 1).

[andypat]

Hopefully at the very least, clubs will advertise what level the events are! This not happening to any great extent in Scotland yet as far as I can see.

[SeanC]

Seabird - you're right about consumptive taxes, they definately impact on attendance, though that depends on the amount people will pay, and for great events like the Ilkley Moor event, that might be reasonably high (at least for a majority).

Increasing BOF membership fees would be an alternative, but that would bring it's own problems, as would some kind of club income tax.

One idea which might seem a bit wacky - could competitors give organising clubs optional tips (and I don't mean "remap the paths near control 7") or donations if you prefer that word. Those of us who can afford to pay a bit more for our sport could then help it's future by giving clubs' money to invest in development. A meal out always seems to end in a £5 tip for service that is meagre in comparison to that provided by volunteers at an orienteering event. So long as this was extra money and not used to fund the absolute necessary work of a club (however that is defined) it might be a good way of funding development in tough financial times?

[Clive Coles]

But Spookster

Regional Associations are not in control of timetabling their level 2 events

Just download

http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/downloads/eventinfo.php

and select the up to date Fixtures Group working arrangements that are currently being operated.

if anyone thinks that Regional Associations have control over their level 2 programme timetable they are kidding themselves. The more regional events they stage the more likely the National Fixtures Group will refer back requests to suggest a different date or venue.

But of course the National Fixtures group don't wish to scrutinise the entire Sunday morning Fixtures programme. How will they see the wood for the trees ?

No ~ all they need to authorise are the big regional events which are likely to attract competitors from other regional association clubs.

That's the flexibility 4-levels provides. If we adopt the 4-level proposal we should change the Fixtures registration process so that the National Fixtures Committee retain the authorisation power over the second level ( large regionals) and allow the Regional Associations to authorise their smaller regional programme (the third level).

That puts the control ( i.e scheduling & authority) where most of us want to see it ~ National Fixtures group in control of level 1 and the "large regionals", Regions in control of the main Regional programme and Clubs in control of their local event programme.

[Spookster]

Regional Associations are not in control of timetabling their level 2 events

Just download

http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/downloads/eventinfo.php

and select the up to date Fixtures Group working arrangements that are currently being operated.

I'm not involved in fixtures registration (apart from discussions at club committee level), but as far as I can see that is not how it is supposed to be working. Peter Guillame's document, dated April 2009, may well be the latest version published, but more recent discussions appear to supercede it.

Look at the November 2009 Events Committee minutes:
http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/d ... 1_2009.pdf

For Level 2 event registration It says in there: "Approved by Association and registered by Regional Fixture Secretary."

Since the original ESRG recommendation was that all standard events should go into level 2, there is no way that National Fixtures should be getting involved in all that.

[RJ]

Spookster.... the involvement of the National Fixture Sec and the Regional Fixture Secs really only applies to a very small number of events. The Level 1 and Level 2 (those that need date co-ordination) are barely 10% of the total number of events put on by clubs or groups of clubs. These are the events that are designed to attract a wide audience, sometimes even a national audience.

The other 90% of events are decided by clubs within their 'club horizon', which might extend 80-100 miles. These events will clash with other events, but the clubs will decide to go ahead with their own once they have examined the list of already registered events. The Regional Fix Sec may not be involved at all. These are the District events, which basically have an extended 'local' audience.

To say that the governance is the criteria for the event structure is flawed. True club only events are staged regardless of what else is going on..... level 4. Those club 'controlled' events that are appealing to a slightly wider audience, but are not being aimed at the 'national' audience are level 3.

[EddieH]

I hear what you are saying RJ but am glad that Spookster has crystalised the idea. If there are exceptional "regional" events that really need national fixtures coordination then IMO it would be better to decide they should be moved to level 1 rather than create further change and disruption.

Anyway who is to decide which events these should be?

Co-ordination of the the new level 2 events would be far better arranged with some informal discussion between neoighbouring regions. There are no exceptional level 2s that require more coordination than that. After all if they really are that good it is the clubs putting on other events that are likely to suffer, not the events themselves.

[awk]

The other 90% of events are decided by clubs within their 'club horizon', which might extend 80-100 miles. These events will clash with other events, but the clubs will decide to go ahead with their own once they have examined the list of already registered events. The Regional Fix Sec may not be involved at all. These are the District events, which basically have an extended 'local' audience.

You mean to say that none of your district events were ever co-ordinated and agreed at regional level? Blimey. I'm sure that in a region like NW you're likely to get more than one of those events in the region on a day, but not part of the regional calendar or discussion? Of course if they are simply in the club remit, then L3 is certainly the place for them. The club can then create what differentiation it likes.

Eddie - I do agree. If an event needs national management, it should go into level 1. That would make more sense than having a separate level.

It's interesting that the people still talking of voting in favour of 4 levels, all have a completely different image of what those 4 levels will consist of. That I think is the danger - 4 levels simply won't create the flexibility that Clive is talking about.

[Spookster]

To say that the governance is the criteria for the event structure is flawed.

It may be flawed in your world, but it makes sense to me, and it makes sense to others.

True club only events are staged regardless of what else is going on..... level 4.

We agree, but they are called Level 3 presently.

Those club 'controlled' events that are appealing to a slightly wider audience, but are not being aimed at the 'national' audience are level 3.

Is "audience" a good differentiating critera? And even if it is, a "wider audience" but not "national" sounds like a regional audience. We call those Level 2, but we give the opportunity to the region to co-ordinate those at association level. And we let the region decide what requirements are necessary.

I think the crux of this is the need (or otherwise) for these "special events" at what you call Level 2. Apparently they need better fixtures protection, better controllers, and 12-month embargoes. I disagree - a special extra level for those is not required. You just need to differentiate them within the existing structure.

Put a good event on, publicise it well, and people will come!

[RJ]

.....Put a good event on, publicise it well, and people will come!

If you look a little closer at the advertising that is done by clubs it is quite obvious that there are FOUR levels at which they advertise. If they want something special that will attract a wider, possibly even national, audience then they will spend MONEY on that advertising. Eg. Pike o' Blisco, LOC Regional event. But LOC Ulpha Cumbrian Galoppen doesn't get advertising, other than fliers handed out locally.

Both events are, good, publicised well, but are advertised and DESIGNED for different audiences..... Level 2 and Level 3, in a four tier system. end of....

[distracted]

The more this discussion goes on, the more I think that the idea of event levels - however many - is very artificial.

One of the major failings of all of the recent reviews that have happened in British Orienteering is that the basic questions seem not to have been addressed. For this debate, they could have been:

1) What is the purpose of having an event structure?

2) Should we be trying to compartmentalise all of our wide range of events into a set of n (arbitrary) categories?

3) Does having an event structure make any difference to participation in the sport?

Given the "outcry" to the change, it seems that it if events didn't have any levels things might be better! As a recent discussion at club level has shown, the "level" of an event doesn't actually make any difference to the way the event is put on. Whether it's the British Champs or a local Saturday event - the clubs are still going to run them the same way for the same expected audience.


It would certainly stop a lot of this arguing, and force people to market their events more effectively, if the event levels didn't exist... So maybe we shouldn't be publicising "levels" of event, and make people to decide where they go on things that actually matter?