The Advantages of Partnerships for Parks

A Short Background on Partnerships

As limits on the Great Society programs became clear in the 1970s, policymakers turned to public-private partnerships as a way to enlist the private sector's help in meeting social needs. The term "public-private partnership" initially referred to joint investments by the sectors in city revitalization projects. it has expanded to include joint public-private action across a range of program areas. In the early 1990s, popular writers like David Osborne (Reinventing Government) challenged public leaders to emulate the best examples of private management. one result has been a rapid increase in public-private collaboration.

Citizen surveys consistently show strong support for local, state, and federal park systems, and park usage has grown dramatically over the past several decades. A 1994 National Parks and Recreation Association study showed that $30.7 billion of state and local recreation investment would be needed between 1995 and 1999 to meet public demand.¹ Civic and political leaders have responded to these needs by raising the total municipal bonding represented by parks and recreation issues by 50 percent in recent years. U.S. census figures reveal that local spending on parks and recreation between 1980 and 1993 increased from $3.4 billion to $8.4 billion, or from $24 to $55 per capita, a 6.5 percent annual growth rate.

Even as parks' popularity grows, however, park managers report that funding support for their agencies is not solid. Few can count on budget increases to match growing responsibilities. In large cities, parks expenditures have been flat or declining. There has been inadequate investment in landscaping, playscapes, ballfields, walking and biking trails, recreation centers, and other community facilities, which are not replaced when they come to the end of their useful lives. Poor maintenance of even sound facilities has invited graffiti and inappropriate behavior. Trash, overgrown landscaping, and deteriorated equipment are common. Reduced programming has made it harder for inner-city residents to play games, learn skills, and participate in community events. Decline in the quality of public space degrades one of the strongest assets neighborhood residents have—their sense of community.

The tension between citizens' demand for more and better parks and insufficient public resources can be resolved when park managers and nonprofit agencies collaborate to mobilize citizen support for parks. Partnerships between public agencies and the nonprofit sector have several advantages, with perhaps the most important advantage being that the nonprofit sector brings new resources—funding, expertise, and new constituencies—to the parks field.

WHY PARTNER WITH NONPROFITS?

Between 1977 and 1994, the nonprofit sector overall was the fastest-growing part of the national economy, growing 4.3 percent annually, compared with a 2.1 percent growth rate for for-profit business and a 2.3 percent growth rate for government.² The nonprofit sector is an important player in meeting public needs. Government support of the sector has helped to drive nonprofits' growth.

In some areas, nonprofit and government partnerships have become central to service delivery. In community development, for example, nonprofits have ushered in a revolution in housing, economic development, and community planning. New strategies supported by national foundations have contributed greatly. Instead of project-focused grants that underwrite single-shot initiatives, community development funders now stress the need for systems change—altering relationships among policies, programs, and institutions in ways that lead to effective and sustained solutions to social problems. In this work, fostering collaboration has become a core system change strategy.

Click to enlarge

Parks managers are well positioned to replicate the successes of public and nonprofit collaboration in community development and other areas. One reason is the growing strength of the nonprofit parks sector. Recreation and sports groups are among the fastest-growing nonprofits today, with operating expenses increasing at 12 percent per year ($1.8 billion to $3.5 billion), compared with 9 percent for the rest of the nonprofit sector.³ Environmental organizations are increasing their spending at 8.2 percent per year ($1.5 billion to $2.4 billion). Together, these two categories of nonprofits increased spending from $3.3 billion in 1989 to $5.9 billion in 1995. To compare, state and local spending on parks and recreation was $16 billion in 1993.⁴

Nonprofits are also strong partners because they can involve the community of park users directly in park design, construction, programming, and management. Membership organizations, in particular, often can mobilize volunteers and monitor their work more easily than parks agencies can.

Exhibit 1 on the following page, which details the partnerships and projects the Fund's Urban Parks Initiative is supporting, reflects the reasons why it makes sense for public agencies to team with nonprofits. Each of the projects involves collaboration among multiple parties and aims not only to improve parks and sustain them over time but also to create durable collaborations between public and private parties—that is, to build a support system for parks. As the exhibit also shows, with one exception, the public partners are municipal parks and recreation departments. The nonprofit parks support partners include parks foundations, "friends-of" organizations, and several groups focused on broader urban initiatives. These diverse projects feature efforts to improve major urban parks, create new urban greenways, construct or reconstruct neighborhood parks, and introduce new community arts, recreational, scientific, and cultural programs.

1. Cited by Martin J. Rosen, "Partnerships: The Key to the Future for America's Urban Parks" in Urban Parks and Open Space, Alexander Garvin and Gayle Berens (Urban Land Institute and Trust for Public Land, 1997).

2. Virginia Hodgkinson and Murray Weitzman, Nonprofit Almanac: Dimensions of the Independent Sector, 1996-1997, San Francisco: Josey-Bass Inc., 1996, figure 1, page 2.

3. IRS Form 990 Transaction Files 1990-1997, as adjusted by the National Center for Charitable Statistics.

4. U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic and Statistics Administration, Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1996, Table No. 478, "State and Local Governments—Summary of Finances: 1980 to 1993," p. 302

Comments and questions may be
sent via email.