Sink, Swim, or Float? Pflepsen.pdf · 1 Sink, Swim, or Float? Budgetary Implications of the Organizational Placement of Lifeguard Services in Local Government By W. Jacob Pflepsen

1

Sink, Swim, or Float? Budgetary Implications of the Organizational Placement of Lifeguard Services in Local

Government

By

W. Jacob Pflepsen III

A paper submitted to the faculty of The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Public Administration

March 19, 2012

This paper represents work done by a UNC-Chapel Hill Master of Public Administration student. It is not a formal report of the Institute of Government, nor is it the work of

School of Government faculty.

Executive Summary

Local governments commonly operate ocean lifeguard services under one of three management structures: parks and recreation, public safety, or stand-alone departments. This research examined how organizational placement and other variables impact budgetary decisions for lifeguard services, as measured through per employee spending. Organizational placement under public safety, unionization, and the presence of some specialized rescue capabilities were found to significantly and positively impact expenditures. Results assist local governments in considering the implications of placement decisions on budgetary outlays for lifeguard services, though specific local considerations ultimately drive these choices

2

INTRODUCTION Coastal municipalities1 and counties in the United States often provide lifeguard services.2 Organizationally, oceanfront lifeguard services typically fall under one of three management structures: public safety, parks and recreation, or stand-alone departments.

Table 1: Breakdown of Organizational Placement of Lifeguard Services in Local Governments

Organizational Placement Number of Agencies Percent of Total

Public Safety 71 37%

Parks and Recreation 77 39%

Stand-Alone3 44 23%

Total 192 99%4

These placements reflect longstanding local traditions, though numerous agencies have migrated into public safety departments within the last several decades. Practitioners have long debated the merits of organizational placement, citing potential benefits and drawbacks to each arrangement. This research examined how organizational placement and other variables impact budgetary decisions.

BACKGROUND Atlantic City, New Jersey established the first locally funded lifeguard service in 1891 (Atlantic City Beach Patrol, 2012). This coincided with the newfound popularity of what was then known as “bathing” and the development of coastal resorts. Increasing numbers of local “governments began to acquire beachfront property and guarantee access specifically for the purpose of recreation” (Brewster, 2003, p. 10). Prior to this time, ocean lifesaving had been geared towards rescue of distressed mariners (often at night during winter storms), and had been conducted primarily by the federal government through the United States Lifesaving Service (and its predecessors). As coastal recreation and beach-related tourism have grown, beach safety has been a constant concern. Regardless of their organizational placement, lifeguards are critical emergency responders for coastal communities. In 2010, the most recent year for which national statistics are available from the United States Lifesaving Association (USLA),5 reporting agencies collectively documented 56,799 rescues. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has unequivocally stated: “There is no doubt that trained, professional lifeguards have had a positive effect on drowning prevention in the United States” (Branche & Stewart, 2001, p. vii). The CDC’s research found “that the chances of drowning at a beach protected by lifeguards trained under USLA standards is less than one in 18 million” (Branche & Stewart, 2001, p. 17). Legal precedent also bolsters the need for lifeguard services. In Ward v. United States (208 F. Supp. 118 1962), the United States District Court for the District of Colorado ruled that the United States, the owner of a recreational swimming area in Colorado, “had a duty to require reasonable supervision and that it breached that duty in failing to have a lifeguard supervising the area” which led to the death of a patron (Lankford, et al., 2011, p. 61). “The Supreme Court of Hawaii (Kaczmarczyk vs. City and County of Honolulu, 1982) has determined that while a municipality is not an insurer of the safety of those using public beaches and adjacent waters, governments must exercise reasonable care in maintaining these facilities and in supervising their use by the public” (Branche & Stewart, eds., 2001, p. 13). The Florida

Supreme Court decision Breaux vs. Miami Beach Nos. SC02-1568 & SC02-1569, March 24, 2005

3

“reaffirmed that a municipality that operates a public swimming area has a duty to warn visitors of dangerous conditions, including rip currents” (Clemons, 2005). The City of Miami Beach ultimately paid out $5 million through one of its insurers to settle claims related to this case (Abromowitz, et al., 2011). Mindful of these concerns, local governments6 have organized lifeguard services in a variety of forms, each with its own benefits and drawbacks. Within a parks and recreation department, lifeguards’ role as emergency responders “may be poorly understood,” “but may also lead to them having the opportunity to operate relatively autonomously” (Brewster, 2009). Always comparatively lean, parks and recreation departments nationwide have faced significant cutbacks since the 2008 recession, and many are looking to new service models to continue to be able to provide basic services (Hayward, 2011). In contrast, “public safety services are generally the last to suffer budget cuts when cities face hard times” (Brock, 2010, p. 10). Some have noted the greater career opportunities (Moses, 2009), salary and benefit enhancements, and job security (Griffin, 2009) that come with public safety. These attributes are not without qualification. Since public safety departments are typically led by either firefighters or police officers, lifeguards must acknowledge that they will often be seen as second tier, and that their priorities may be overlooked. In a sense, lifeguards may gain a higher prominence within their local government by being under the umbrella of public safety, but a lower status in their own department (Brewster, 2009). In 2012 alone, at least two lifeguard services are scheduled to move from parks and recreation into public safety departments.7 This research aimed to explore this trend by empirically examining the drivers of these decisions. Previously, only anecdotal evidence existed regarding the organizational placement of lifeguard services. While intangible concerns such as organizational fit, inter-departmental respect, and community perception are valid considerations, they are difficult to objectively assess. Therefore, this research analyzed the relationship of organizational placement and other characteristics of lifeguard services on their budgetary allocations.

METHODOLOGY To begin, field-specific journals and publications, resources accessible from the USLA, and other Internet-based sources were reviewed. No published material besides a 2009 posting on the USLA website’s message board specifically addressed organizational placement; however, the literature review provided numerous sources regarding aspects of this question. A research model was developed that would explain the effect of organizational placement on the operating budget, as measured through per employee spending, while accounting for other variables. In order to ascertain the specific nature of this relationship, the various factors were analyzed with a linear regression model created using IBM SPSS Statistics version 19. Given the wide range of operating budgets (Appendix F), per employee spending was measured as the dependent variable in order to better qualify the raw budget figures. The presence of (or higher levels of) most of the following independent variables was thought to predict higher levels of the dependent variable.

4

Table 2: Variables Studied

DEPENDENT VARIABLE Name Description

Spending Per Lifeguard (FY 2012 Operating Budget ) ÷ (Total Number of Lifeguard Personnel)

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES8 Name Description Hypothesized Relationship to Spending

Organizational Placement Public Safety, Parks & Recreation, or Stand-Alone Higher Spending for Public Safety

Percent Permanent Organizational makeup Higher Spending with Greater Percentages of Permanents

Union Are any employees eligible for membership? If Yes, Then Higher Spending

USLA Certification Is the agency certified to USLA standards? If Yes, Then Higher Spending

City or County Level of local government Uncertain Relationship

Entry-Level Medical Training

First Aid, Emergency/First Responder, or EMT Higher budget for higher requirements

Advanced Medical Training Are any personnel given advancement incentives? If Yes, Then Higher Spending

Law Enforcement Powers Do any personnel have law enforcement powers? If Yes, Then Higher Spending

Motorized Rescue Boat Does the service operate a rescue boat? If Yes, Then Higher Spending

SCUBA Rescue Team Does the service have a SCUBA rescue team? If Yes, Then Higher Spending

Cliff Rescue Team Does the service have a coastal cliff rescue team? If Yes, Then Higher Spending

Swiftwater Rescue Team Does the service have a river and flood rescue team? If Yes, Then Higher Spending

Junior Lifeguard Program Does the service have a junior lifeguard program? If Yes, Then Higher Spending

Region (Appendix B) Location (Proxy for length of summer season) Higher Spending in HI, FL+Gulf, & So. CA

Due to the focus on local government, lifeguard services not funded by cities or counties were excluded (Appendix C).9 Cities and counties in oceanfront areas10 around the nation were contacted at least twice by email or phone and asked a standardized list of questions (Appendix D). 194 agencies were identified, supported by 192 local governments (Appendix A).11 This data collection proved burdensome, as there was no previously existing list of all lifeguard services.12 The survey elicited 94 responses (n=94), an overall response rate of 48 percent, although organizational placement was identified for all agencies in the population. The analysis and conclusions presented hereafter are drawn from this sample, which is representative of the geographic distribution and organizational placement of the 194 agencies initially identified.13 Table 3: Breakdown of Organizational Placement in Sample (Population in Parentheses)

Public Safety Parks & Rec. Stand-Alone Public Works Total

REGION

Northwest 3 (3) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 3

So. Cal. 10 (14) 7 (9) 2 (2) 0 (0) 19

Hawaii 0 (3) 1 (1) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1

Gulf + FL 12 (22) 10 (21) 0 (2) 0 (0) 22

S. Atlantic 6 (11) 2 (2) 0 (1) 0 (0) 8

Mid Atlantic 5 (12) 8 (14) 5 (32) 1 (2) 19

New England 1 (6) 16 (30) 5 (7) 0 (0) 22

Total 37 (71) 44 (77) 12(44) 1(2) 94 (194)

The population data show strong regional variations in placement. Less than five percent of lifeguard services in New England were housed in public safety (1 of 22), while that organizational placement outnumbered all others combined in Southern California, the Gulf and Florida, and the South Atlantic. In North Carolina, every respondent was under public safety. The sample of stand-alone agencies was not

5

representative due to the difficulty of getting responses from these agencies, particularly in the Mid Atlantic, which is composed of primarily seasonal agencies.

FINDINGS The findings, shown in Appendix E, are drawn from the agencies that responded. The overall model explained almost 80 percent of the variance in per employee spending by lifeguard services in local governments (adjusted R square=.796), by identifying which of the independent variables are systematically related to per employee budget allocations. This research also produced frequency statistics of the sample population (Appendix F), which present, for the first time, a snapshot of the budgetary outlays and personnel composition of these agencies. The following factors were found to be statistically significant drivers of the budgets of lifeguard services at the .05 level. ORGANIZATIONAL PLACEMENT This research demonstrated that an organizational placement in public safety is correlated with the highest per employee spending of the three primary placement options. Controlling for all other variables, the model predicts that lifeguards under parks and recreation departments may expect to

receive $4,500 less per year that those under public safety (=-4448.426) (p=.050). Considering the median lifeguard service budget per employee is $7,885.29, this difference may be substantial. The

model also showed a lesser difference with stand-alone agencies (=-1140.544), though this was not statistically significant (p=.714). This finding supports the initial research hypothesis that public safety agencies tend to receive higher levels of funding than do similar lifeguard services with other organizational placements. WORKFORCE COMPOSITION Lifeguarding, like most functions provided by local government, is highly labor intensive. Not surprisingly, the regression shows that the greater percentage of permanent employees, the higher the spending per employee. This variable is correlated with an additional $450 of spending per employee for

each additional percent of permanent staff (=448.353), and was statistically significant (p=.000). Across the nation, the staffing makeup of agencies varies notably. Half (n=47) of the sample agencies are entirely seasonal, with four percent (n=4) of agencies fully permanent. The remainder are a mix of permanent and seasonal employees (n=43). AVAILABILITY OF UNION MEMBERSHIP Availability of union membership is also related to higher expenditures per employee in this sample. Numerous studies (Balkin, 1984; Edwards & Edwards, 1982; Kearny & Morgan, 1980; Edwards, 2010) have found a positive relationship between union membership and the salaries of public employees. This analysis found a similar pattern for lifeguards, assuming that higher per employee spending reflects greater salaries. For this study, agencies were asked whether any personnel were unionized or had the option to join a union or collective bargaining association. Positive answers were associated with higher

levels of spending per employee in unionized agencies, almost $6,000 (=5998.446) (p=.030). This was not broken out by which employees were eligible (if all were not), but simply the availability of membership to at least some employees. Unionization remains hotly contested, and states have various levels of recognition for labor union activity by public employees.

6

SCUBA RESCUE TEAM For every one employee who is employed at an agency that has a SCUBA rescue team, the model

predicts a level of spending over $6800 higher, controlling for all other variables (=6867.394). These teams exist in 23 lifeguard services. Some of these teams are quite large; Miami-Dade Fire Rescue, under which the County’s lifeguard service is housed (known as the Ocean Rescue Bureau), “is second only to the US Navy in the number of SCUBA divers and rescue swimmers” (Wilmoth, 2011). Lifeguards trained in SCUBA are able to provide underwater search and recovery, expanding the capabilities of the lifeguard service. It appears that the significance (p=.031) of the SCUBA teams may in some way be attenuated by the presence of swiftwater rescue teams (r=.632), as such teams would seem to impose additional training and support challenges in a similar manner. Surprisingly, none of the other independent variables had a statistically significant relationship to lifeguard service spending per employee.

CONCLUSION This new scholarship answers a specific question regarding the funding of lifeguard services with respect to organizational placement, though it is not an endorsement of any particular arrangement. While “the importance of competent fiscal management cannot be overstated” (Lankford et al., 2011, p. 75), financial concerns are only one set of considerations for local government leaders. Quality of service, effective local relationships, interoperability of personnel and equipment, and interagency cooperation must also be given serious deliberation. Many times, these issues are shaped by the individuals and personalities involved in such decisions. Local government leaders and managers of lifeguard services must carefully weigh all factors in deciding what is best on an individual basis. Lifeguard services have developed in response to their physical location, and advanced rescue capabilities address specific local challenges. Local governments may be unlikely to invest in lifeguard special rescue teams when those personnel would only be available for a portion of the year, and might instead assign these tasks to other year-round providers if warranted. The “organizational choice” decision may not be a reality for all local governments that offer lifeguard services, as not all of them necessarily support both a public safety or parks and recreation department.

Many smaller municipalities use volunteer fire departments, organizations that may be ill-suited to managing paid lifeguard services.14 The cross sectional data analysis sought to provide an accurate portrayal of the current state of ocean lifeguarding in the United States, though the single-year of data collected did not permit a longitudinal view of the relative spending over time. Future research in this area may look to discern trends through a multi-year analysis. Case studies could also be used to document the experiences of lifeguard services with regard to their organizational placement, especially for those services that recently changed placements.

7

1 The terms “municipality” and “city” in this paper refer to incorporated communities beneath the county level: cities, towns, villages, boroughs, and townships. States have various legal and traditional definitions of these jurisdictional constructs. 2 The term “lifeguard service” in this paper refers to an agency or unit whose primary duty is water observation and patrol of coastal areas to prevent death by drowning, usually through a mix of education, preventative acts, and water rescues. Agencies may be formally called a lifeguard service, but also beach patrol, ocean rescue, surf rescue, ocean safety, marine safety, et cetera. 3 Many stand-alone agencies, particularly in the Northeast, are under a beach department, which also may also include beach attendants tasked with either collecting parking fees or monitoring beach badges, in addition to lifeguards. These departments are often self-supported. See Appendix A for full breakdown. 4 Both the City of Asbury Park (NJ) and the Borough of Allenhurst (NJ) have organized lifeguard services under their Public Works departments. These two lifeguard services make up one percent of the total population of 194 agencies. 5 “The United States Lifesaving Association is America's nonprofit, professional association of beach lifeguards and open water rescuers. USLA works to reduce the incidence of death and injury in the aquatic environment through public education, national lifeguard standards, training programs, promotion of high levels of lifeguard readiness, and other means” (USLA, 2012). 6 Local government refers to both cities (as previously defined) and counties. 7 The County of Maui (HI) and the City of Orange Beach (AL) are both moving into their jurisdiction’s fire departments in 2012. 8 Population size of the municipality or county was excluded because it was thought to have a weak relationship to spending per employee. For example, a small beach town with few residents may swell significantly during the summer months, and support a relatively large lifeguard service. Conversely, due to jurisdictional boundaries, a larger city may only control a small section of coastline. Moreover, counties may either provide service to their entire coastline or simply to unincorporated areas or county parks on the coast. The length of the area served was also excluded, also because it too was thought to have a poor relationship to the spending. Some larger agencies may provide service to short, crowded beaches (usually with adjacent parking areas), but a small agency might watch over a long coastline, primarily through roving patrols. 9 Several local governments have outsourced lifeguard service operations. OC Parks, Orange County’s parks department (CA), contracts for lifeguard services through OC Lifeguards, formerly U.S. Ocean Safety, at its county-managed beaches. The City of Hallandale Beach’s Department of Parks and Recreation (FL) contracts with Jeff Ellis & Associates for lifeguard services on city beaches. Virginia Beach (VA) contracts with the Virginia Beach Lifesaving Service to provide lifeguard services to a portion of city beaches. These private lifeguard services were included in the population, as they are funded by local governments. 10 Oceanfront is defined as land bordering an ocean. This study excluded agencies on lakes, rivers, bays, sounds, estuaries, and all agencies in the state of Connecticut. 11 Two cities identified have two separate municipally funded lifeguard services (as defined by this paper): Panama City Beach (FL) and Virginia Beach (VA). Panama City beach operates both the Beach and Surf Patrol through the Police Department (which offers mobile patrols) and the (stationary) Lifeguard Service at Russell-Fields City Pier through the Parks and Recreation Department. Virginia Beach has supported the Virginia Beach Lifesaving Service (an independent contractor), as well as the Lifeguard Services Division of the Department of EMS. The respective lifeguard services in Virginia Beach provide service to different areas of the city.

8

12 The USLA’s list of certified agencies was a helpful start, but only 44 of 94 lifeguard services, 47 percent of the sample (81 of 194 in the population, 42 percent) were currently listed as certified. Identification of other services was accomplished through queries of known providers, mapping software, and other Internet research. While budgets are often publicly available, questions regarding service capabilities proved more challenging, especially with seasonal services, given the data collection period from October to December 2011. 13 Though the City of Asbury Park (NJ) responded, their specific agency information was not used in the regression analysis due to their organizational placement in public works. Other statistics are based on the full sample of 94 respondents. 14 While common in Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa, volunteer lifeguard services have never caught on in the United States. Only one local government in the United States uses volunteers. In Jacksonville Beach (FL), the volunteer American Red Cross Volunteer Life Saving Corps (ARCVLSC) provides lifeguards at City beaches on Sundays and holidays, whereas the City provides paid staff on Mondays through Saturdays during the season. A majority of lifeguards both volunteer for the ARCVLSC and work for the City concurrently.

9

REFERENCES

Abromowitz, Pomerantz, and Coffey, P.A., “Five Million Dollar Settlement in Miami Beach Drowning Case,” (February 9, 2011), Accessed September 23, 2011 at http://www.floridainjurylawyers.com /personal-injury/five-million-dollar-settlement-in-miami-beach-drowning-case/. Atlantic City Beach Patrol (2012). Main website. Accessed January, 20, 2012 at http://www.acbp.org/ acfame.html. Branche, Christine M., and Steven Stewart, eds., Lifeguard Effectiveness: A Report of the Working Group. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 2001, http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreational Safety/ Water-Safety/lifeguard.html. Brewster, B. Chris, ed., Open Water Lifesaving: The United States Lifesaving Association Manual, 2nd Ed. Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing, 2003. Brewster, B. Chris, October 21, 2009 (4:55pm), reply comment on Aaron Levy (guard 1051) posting, “Rec vs Fire Rescue,” USLA Guard-to-Guard Forum (online message board), accessed February 17, 2011, http://www.usla.org/forum/b.asp?m=4261. Brock, Ed, “Budget problems force cuts to public safety: A loss of officers leads cities to make difficult choices,” American City and County 125, no. 9 (September 2010): 10. Clemons, Josh, “Florida Municipalities Have Duty to Protect Beachgoers: Rip Current Warnings a Must at Some Public Beaches,” Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Legal Program at the University of Mississippi (2005), Accessed September 23, 2011 at http://masglp.olemiss.edu/Water%20Log/WL25/25.1rip.htm. Edwards, Chris, “Public Sector Unions and the Rising Costs of Employee Compensation,” The Cato Journal 30, no. 1 (Winter 2010): 87-115. Edwards, Linda N., & Franklin R. Edwards, “Public Unions, Local Government Structure and the Compensation of Municipal Sanitation Workers,” Economic Inquiry 20, (July 1982): 405-425. Greenhalgh, Sgt. John R., “Special Rescue Teams: Flood/River Rescue,” USLA Lifeguard Library, (1997), accessed January 19, 2012 at http://www.usla.org/resource/resmgr/lifeguard_library/flood_rescue.pdf. Griffin, Les, October 24, 2009 (3:08pm), reply comment on Aaron Levy (guard 1051) posting, “Rec vs Fire Rescue,” USLA Guard-to-Guard Forum (online message board), accessed February 17, 2011, at http://www.usla.org/forum/b.asp?m=4265. Hayward, Phil, “Fiscal Blues: Park and recreation agencies begin the difficult process of redefining how they serve the public,” Parks and Recreation 46, no. 4 (April 2011): 48-57. Kaczynski, Andrew T., and John L. Crompton, “Financing Priorities in Local Governments: Where Do Park and Recreation Services Rank,” Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 24, no. 1 (2006).

10

Kearney, Richard C., & David R. Morgan, “Unions and State Employee Compensation,” State & Local Government Review 12, no. 3 (Sept. 1980): 115-119. Lankford, Samuel, Jill Lankford, and Dan Wheeler, An Introduction to Park Management, 3rd Ed. Champaign, IL: Sagamore Publishing, 2011. Moses, Pat, October 23, 2009 (2:37pm), reply comment on Aaron Levy (guard 1051) posting, “Rec vs Fire Rescue,” USLA Guard-to-Guard Forum (online message board), accessed February 17, 2011, at http://www.usla.org/forum/b.asp?m=4265. Peterson, James A., Bruce B. Hronek, and James R. Garges, Risk Management for Park, Recreation, and Leisure Services, 5th Ed. Champaign, IL: Sagamore Publishing, 2008. Rigg, Nancy J., “Water Rescue,” Fire Chief (September 1, 2007), http://firechief.com/ rescue/firefighting_water_rescue/index.html. United States Lifesaving Association (2012), Main Website, accessed December 15, 2011. Wilmoth, Janet, “Into the Deep,” Fire Chief (March 1, 2011), http://firechief.com/rescue/miami-water-rescue-training-201103/index.html.

11

APPENDIX A POPULATION Table 4: Local Government Supported Lifeguard Services (continued on following page) State Agency Agency Classification State Agency Agency Classification

AL City of Gulf Shores* Parks and Recreation MA Town of Nantucket Parks and Recreation

AL City of Orange Beach* Parks and Recreation MA Town of Orleans Parks and Beaches

CA City of Capitola PS (Police) MA Town of Plymouth* Parks and Recreation

CA City of Carpinteria Parks and Recreation MA Town of Rockport* PS (Police)

CA City of Coronado* PS (Fire) MA Town of Scituate* Parks and Recreation

CA City of Del Mar* Parks and Recreation MA Town of Swampscott* Parks and Recreation

CA City of Encinitas PS (Fire) MA Town of Truro* Stand-Alone (Beach)

CA City of Huntington Beach* Parks and Recreation MA Town of Wellfleet* Stand-Alone (Beach)

CA City of Imperial Beach* PS (Public Safety) MA Town of West Tisbury Parks and Recreation

CA City of Laguna Beach* Stand-Alone MA Town of Weymouth Parks and Recreation

CA City of Long Beach PS (Fire) MA Town of Yarmouth Parks and Recreation

CA City of Los Angeles* Parks and Recreation MD Town of Ocean City* Parks and Recreation

CA City of Morro Bay* PS (Harbor Patrol) ME City of Biddeford* Parks and Recreation

CA City of Newport Beach PS (Fire) ME City of Saco Parks and Recreation

CA City of Oceanside* PS (Fire) ME Town of Kennebunk* Parks and Recreation

CA City of Pismo Beach* PS (Fire) ME Town of Ogunquit PS (Fire)

CA City of Port Hueneme Parks and Recreation ME Town of Old Orchard Beach PS (Fire)

CA City of San Clemente* Stand-Alone ME Town of Wells PS (Fire)

CA City of San Diego* PS (Fire) ME Town of York Parks and Recreation

CA City of Santa Barbara* Parks and Recreation NC Town of Atlantic Beach* PS (Fire)

CA City of Santa Cruz* PS (Fire) NC Town of Carolina Beach* PS (Police)

CA City of Seal Beach* PS (Public Safety) NC Town of Corolla* PS (Fire)

CA City of Solana Beach* PS (Public Safety) NC Town of Duck (and Southern Shores) Stand-Alone

CA County of Los Angeles* PS (Fire) NC Town of Emerald Isle* PS (Fire)

CA County of Orange (Contract: OC Lifeguards)* Parks and Recreation NC Town of Kill Devil Hills PS (Fire)

CA County of San Louis Obispo* Parks and Recreation NC Town of Kitty Hawk PS (Fire)

CA County of Santa Barbara* Parks and Recreation NC Town of Kure Beach* PS (Fire)

CA County of Ventura* PS (Harbor Patrol) NC Town of Nags Head PS (Fire)

DE City of Rehoboth Beach Stand-Alone NC Town of Wrightsville Beach* PS (Fire)

DE Town of Bethany Beach Stand-Alone NH Town of Rye PS (Fire)

DE Town of Dewey Beach Stand-Alone NJ Borough of Allenhurst Public Works (Beach Club)

DE Town of Fenwick Island Stand-Alone NJ Borough of Avalon* PS (Public Safety)

DE Town of South Bethany Beach Stand-Alone NJ Borough of Avon-by-the-Sea Stand-Alone (Beach)

FL City of Atlantic Beach Stand-Alone NJ Borough of Barnegat Light* Parks and Recreation

FL City of Boca Raton* Parks and Recreation NJ Borough of Beach Haven Stand-Alone

FL City of Boynton Beach Parks and Recreation NJ Borough of Belmar PS (Police)

FL City of Clearwater* Parks and Recreation NJ Borough of Bradley Beach* Stand-Alone

FL City of Dania Beach* Parks and Recreation NJ Borough of Cape May Point* PS (Public Safety)

FL City of Deerfield Beach Parks and Recreation NJ Borough of Deal Stand-Alone (Beach)

FL City of Delray Beach Parks and Recreation NJ Borough of Harvey Cedars Stand-Alone

FL City of Destin* PS (Fire) NJ Borough of Lavallette Stand-Alone

FL City of Fernandina Beach PS (Fire) NJ Borough of Longport Stand-Alone

FL City of Flagler Beach* Parks and Recreation NJ Borough of Manasquan Stand-Alone (Beach)

FL City of Fort Lauderdale* PS (Fire) NJ Borough of Monmouth Beach* Stand-Alone (Beach)

FL City of Hallandale Beach (Contract: Jeff Ellis) Parks and Recreation NJ Borough of Sea Bright Stand-Alone (Beach)

FL City of Hollywood PS (Fire) NJ Borough of Sea Girt Stand-Alone (Beach)

FL City of Jacksonville Beach / ARCVLSC* Parks and Recreation NJ Borough of Seaside Heights Stand-Alone

FL City of Miami Parks and Recreation NJ Borough of Seaside Park Stand-Alone

FL City of Miami Beach* PS (Fire) NJ Borough of Ship Bottom Parks and Recreation

FL City of Neptune Beach PS (Police) NJ Borough of Spring Lake Stand-Alone (Beach)

FL City of Panama City Beach* PS (Police) NJ Borough of Stone Harbor* Stand-Alone

FL City of Panama City Beach Parks and Recreation NJ Borough of Surf City* Stand-Alone

FL City of Pompano Beach PS (Fire) NJ Borough of Wildwood Crest* PS (Public Safety)

FL City of Riviera Beach Parks and Recreation NJ City of Asbury Park* Public Works

FL City of Sunny Isles Beach Stand-Alone NJ City of Atlantic City PS (Public Safety)

FL City of Vero Beach* Parks and Recreation NJ City of Brigantine Beach PS (Public Safety)

FL County of Bay PS (Sheriffs) NJ City of Cape May Stand-Alone

FL County of Brevard PS (Fire) NJ City of Long Branch* Parks and Recreation

FL County of Indian River Parks and Recreation NJ City of Margate PS (Public Safety)

FL County of Manatee* PS (Public Safety) NJ City of North Wildwood PS (Public Safety)

FL County of Martin PS (Public Safety) NJ City of Wildwood PS (Public Safety)

FL County of Miami-Dade* PS (Fire) NJ County of Monmouth* Parks and Recreation

FL County of Okaloosa PS (Public Safety) NJ Long Beach Township Stand-Alone

FL County of Palm Beach Parks and Recreation NJ Sea Isle City Stand-Alone

FL County of Pinellas* Parks and Recreation NJ Town of Ocean City* PS (Fire)*

FL County of Santa Rosa* Parks and Recreation NJ Township of Berkeley* Parks and Recreation

FL County of Sarasota* PS (Emergency Management) NJ Township of Brick Parks and Recreation

FL County of St. Lucie* PS (Public Safety) NJ Township of Toms River Parks and Recreation

FL County of Volusia* PS (Public Protection) NJ Upper Township Stand-Alone

FL County of Walton (South Walton Fire Dist.)* PS (Fire) NJ Ventnor City PS (Public Safety)

FL Town of Lantana Parks and Recreation NJ Village of Loch Arbour Stand-Alone (Beach Club)

FL Town of Palm Beach* PS (Fire) NY City of Long Beach Stand-Alone (Beach)

12

State Agency Agency Classification State Agency Agency Classification

FL Town of Surfside Parks and Recreation NY City of New York Parks and Recreation

FL City of Jacksonville / Duval County PS (Fire) NY County of Suffolk* Parks and Recreation

FL County of St. Johns PS (Fire) NY Town of East Hampton Parks and Recreation

GA City of Tybee Island PS (Fire) NY Town of Hempstead* Parks and Recreation

GA County of Glynn* Parks and Recreation NY Town of Islip (Fire Island) Parks and Recreation

HI City and County of Honolulu PS (Public Safety) NY Town of Southampton* Parks and Recreation

HI County of Hawaii PS (Fire) NY Village of Atlantic Beach Stand-Alone

HI County of Kauai PS (Fire) NY Village of Ocean Beach Stand-Alone

HI County of Maui* Parks and Recreation NY Village of Quogue Stand-Alone (Beach)

MA City of Beverly Parks and Recreation NY Village of Westhampton Beach* Stand-Alone

MA City of Gloucester Parks and Recreation OR City of Cannon Beach* PS (Police)

MA Town of Barnstable* Parks and Recreation OR City of Seaside* PS (Fire)

MA Town of Chatham* Parks and Recreation RI City of Newport* Parks and Recreation

MA Town of Chilmark Stand-Alone (Beach) RI Town of Charleston Parks and Recreation

MA Town of Dennis* Stand-Alone (Beach) RI Town of Little Compton* Stand-Alone (Beach)

MA Town of Duxbury Parks and Recreation RI Town of Middletown* Parks and Recreation

MA Town of Edgartown Parks and Recreation RI Town of Narragansett* Parks and Recreation

MA Town of Falmouth* Stand-Alone (Beach) RI Town of New Shoreham (Block Island) Parks and Recreation

MA Town of Harwich* Parks and Recreation RI Town of South Kingston Parks and Recreation

MA Town of Hingham Stand-Alone (Beach) RI Town of Westerly* Parks and Recreation

MA Town of Kingston* Parks and Recreation SC City of North Myrtle Beach PS (Public Safety)

MA Town of Manchester-by-the-Sea* Parks and Recreation SC County of Charleston* Parks and Recreation

MA Town of Marblehead* Parks and Recreation TX City of South Padre Island* PS (Fire)

MA Town of Marshfield PS (Police) VA City of Virginia Beach* PS (EMS)

MA Town of Mashpee* Parks and Recreation VA City of Virginia Beach (Contract: VLBS) Stand-Alone

* Indicates agency included in sample. The author wishes to thank all agencies that responded.

13

APPENDIX B REGIONAL MAP

Figure 1: Regional Map

Regions Northwest (Santa Cruz and points north): Gray Southern California: Coral Hawaii: Light Blue Gulf Coast and Florida: Red South Atlantic: Green Mid Atlantic: Blue New England: Tan

14

APPENDIX C

EXCLUSIONS Table 5: Oceanfront Lifeguard Service Providers Excluded from this Research

Type of Organizations Representative Examples

State Parks

California State Parks

Maryland State Parks

Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation

National Parks

Cape Cod National Seashore, MA

Cape Hatteras National Seashore, NC

Gateway National Recreation Area, NJ/NY

Privately-Managed Agencies Not Receiving Local Government

Funding (HOAs or Other Nonprofits)

Middlesex Beach Patrol, South Bethany Beach, DE

Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association, Ocean Grove, NJ

Sea Colony Beach Patrol, Bethany Beach, DE

Trustees of Reservation, Ipswich, MA

YMCA Camp Surf, Imperial Beach, CA

Private Commercial Rental Companies*

Huggins Beach Service, Myrtle Beach, SC

John’s Beach Service, Myrtle Beach, SC

Lack’s Beach Service, Myrtle Beach, SC

Myrtle Beach Lifeguards, Myrtle Beach, SC

Shore Beach Service, Hilton Head, SC

Port Districts Port Canaveral, FL

Port San Luis Harbor District, Avila Beach, CA

State-Chartered Tourism Boards Galveston Island Park Board of Trustees, TX (Galveston Island Beach Patrol)

Santa Rosa Island Authority, FL (Pensacola Beach Lifeguards)

Special Rescue Teams**

Lauderdale-By-The-Sea Volunteer Fire Dept. Beach Patrol, FL Ocean Shores Police Surf Rescue Team, Ocean Shores, WA Ventura City Fire Department Ocean Rescue Program, Ventura, CA

Military Bases Camp Pendleton Lifeguard Service, Oceanside, CA

North Island Lifeguard Service, Coronado, CA

* These typically also function as beach equipment rental companies, and pay a portion of their proceeds to their respective local government for the license to engage in this commercial activity. ** Coastal cities sometimes train other emergency responders (non-lifeguards) in ocean rescue. These special rescues teams may respond to emergency calls and participate in rescue and recovery actions. They are excluded because their members’ primary responsibility is not water observation and patrol, but instead rescue response and recovery. These types of providers are not stationed directly on waterfront areas, and do not regularly patrol these areas. They may use the same techniques and equipment as lifeguard services.

15

APPENDIX D DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENT This email was used as a template for research collection nationwide. Good morning (Department Director), My name is Jake Pflepsen and I am a Master of Public Administration student at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. As part of the requirements for the MPA degree, I am currently working on a comprehensive national research paper examining the budgetary implications of the organizational placement of local (city or county) ocean lifeguard services, and factors that may affect the budget. Departments usually fall under either Parks and Rec. or Public Safety (often Fire-Rescue), but occasionally operate as stand-alone agencies. I have served as a seasonal ocean lifeguard for the past nine years, working for a department in the mid-Atlantic (under Parks and Rec.) and a department in Southern California (under Fire-Rescue). I appreciate you taking the time to answer the following questions, or forwarding this to the appropriate person. I realize some may not be applicable for your department, but hope that you will be able to provide this information in order to help me paint a full picture of the status of these services in the United States. 1. What is the total FY 2012 Operating Budget for the (Name of City) Lifeguard Service? 2. How many permanent, year-round uniformed personnel does the Lifeguard Service have in FY 2012? 3. How many seasonal uniformed personnel does the Lifeguard Service have for FY 2012? 4. What is the average length of the summer season?* 5. Of the seasonal personnel for FY 2012, how many regularly work less than 40 hours per week (part time or reserve status)?** 6. Are any of your personnel unionized or have the option to join a union? 7. What is the basic level of medical training for entry-level personnel? (First Aid, First Responder, EMT, Other) 8. Does the Lifeguard Service require and/or pay for higher levels of medical training for some personnel? 9. Do any members of the Lifeguard Service have law enforcement powers (citation and arrest)? 10. Are any personnel paid and trained to provide swiftwater rescue? 11. Are any personnel paid and trained to provide SCUBA rescue? 12. Are any personnel paid and trained to provide cliff rescue? 13. Do any personnel operate a rescue vessel (non-PWC)? *If so, does that rescue vessel have marine firefighting capabilities? 14. Does the Lifeguard Service operate an in-house Junior Lifeguard program? 15. Operationally, what department does the Lifeguard Service fall under the control of? I appreciate your consideration, and look forward to hearing from you. Thanks, -- W. Jacob Pflepsen III Master of Public Administration Candidate, Class of 2012 The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill * Variable collected but not used due to difficulty in measurement. The regional variable was substituted as a proxy variable for length of

seasonal operations. ** Variable collected but not used due to extreme variation. Almost all agencies increase staffing due to seasonal demand. Many agencies

require all their personnel to work full time (40-hour work weeks) during the primary season. Others allow for varying levels of part time scheduling. Further complicating this, many agencies employ smaller numbers of seasonal personnel on reduced schedules during the spring and fall. A few employ part-time personnel year round. Full Time Equivalents (FTEs) would be an ideal measurement of this concept, but was deemed impossible to collect without access to individual hourly records.

16

Appendix E LINEAR REGRESSION RESULTS Table 6: SPSS® Output

Model Summary

R R Square

Adjusted R

Square

Std. Error of the

Estimate

.917a .841 .796 7691.9494335

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 2.094E10 19 1.102E9 18.627 .000a

Residual 3.964E9 67 59166086.087

Total 2.490E10 86

Unstandardized Coefficients

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig. B Std. Error Beta

(Constant) 10397.502 5528.898 1.881 .064

Parks & Rec/Not P&R* -4448.426 2232.728 -.131 -1.992 .050

Stand Alone/Not Stand-Alone -1140.544 3096.760 -.023 -.368 .714

% Permanent* 448.353 57.655 .659 7.776 .000

Union* 5998.446 2702.920 .156 2.219 .030

USLA 3496.855 2416.870 .103 1.447 .153

City/County 1273.236 2607.751 .030 .488 .627

Entry Level Medical Training -745.543 2486.286 -.025 -.300 .765

Advanced Medical Training -155.104 539.276 -.017 -.288 .775

Law Enforcement 3978.708 2765.137 .095 1.439 .155

Motorized Rescue Boat 3255.666 2315.698 .084 1.406 .164

SCUBA Rescue Team* 6867.394 3116.129 .174 2.204 .031

Cliff Rescue Team -3625.441 4357.848 -.062 -.832 .408

Swiftwater Rescue Team -663.720 3609.480 -.014 -.184 .855

Junior Lifeguard Program -2765.760 2123.515 -.081 -1.302 .197

Region Northwest -6039.367 5902.701 -.065 -1.023 .310

Region Southern California -932.662 3420.473 -.022 -.273 .786

Region South Atlantic -5707.798 3941.754 -.092 -1.448 .152

Region Mid Atlantic -2822.123 3379.423 -.066 -.835 .407

Region New England -1846.830 3487.013 -.046 -.530 .598

*Statistically Significant

17

Appendix F

Table 7: Frequencies of Interval Variables in Sample

Budget Budget/Guard Seasonal (#) Total Staff (#) % Permanent

N Valid 88 88 93 93 93

Missing 6 6 1 1 1

Median $347,334.00 $7,885.29 29 34 .5%

Range $2,638 -

34,996,000

$263.80 –

76,666.84

0 - 745 3 - 902 0 - 100

Percentiles

25% $100,721.78 $4,901.39 12 15 .00%

50% $347,334.00 $7,885.29 29 34 .5%

75% $897,028.19 $20,731.04 49 67 6.60%

18

APPENDIX G

1. Unionization

Table 8: Unionization by Region

Union

Total No Union Yes Union

Organizational Placement

Public Safety 27 10 37

Parks and Recreation 33 11 44

Independent 9 3 12

Public Works 1 0 1

Total 70 24 94

2. SCUBA Rescue Team

Table 9: SCUBA Rescue Team by Region

SCUBA Team

Total No SCUBA Team Yes SCUBA Team




Independent 10 2 12

Public Works 1 0 1

Total 71 23 94

3. USLA Agency Certification: The USLA Lifeguard Agency Certification Program sets national standards for agency certification, at both the Certified and Advanced Certified level. Recognized agencies are published on USLA’s website. For this paper, agencies were listed if they were recognized on USLA’s website on December 15, 2011.

Table 10: USLA Certification

USLA Certification

Total No USLA Certification

Yes USLA

Certification




Independent 9 3 12

Public Works 1 0 1

Total 50 44 94

19

4. City or. County: The relationship between city provided services was not found to be statistically significant.

Table 11: City or County

City/County

Total County City




Independent 0 12 12

Public Works 0 1 1

Total 18 76 94

5. Minimum level of medical training for entry-level lifeguards: “Lifeguards have always provided first aid as well as rescue. Cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and general first aid training are standard requirements for most lifeguards. In addition, many lifeguards are now both trained and certified to use advanced lifesaving tools such as the external defibrillator and portable oxygen” (Branche & Stewart, eds., 2001, p. 4). This medical training is on top of the ocean rescue training received by all lifeguards. Many agencies conduct medical training in-house, and therefore do not require applicants to have preexisting certifications. This variable explains the level that entry-level lifeguards are either certified to, or required to hold as part of the job requirements. The following primary levels of medical training are used by lifeguard services in the United States.

Table 12: Entry-Level Medical Training

Entry Level Medical Training

Total First Aid

Emergency/

First Responder

Emergency

Medical

Technician

Organizational

Placement

Public Safety 16 19 2 37

Parks and Recreation 31 12 1 44

Independent 9 3 0 12

Public Works 0 1 0 1

Total 56 35 3 94

6. Incentivized advanced medical training: Almost half of agencies in the sample either require or pay incentives to have personnel go beyond the minimum required medical certification. Pay is either done as an added percentage (e.g. a 5 percent pay differential) or an additional amount per unit worked (e.g. an additional $1 per hour or $50 per pay period). Others require a higher level for promotion. This variable does not capture personnel who have advanced certifications beyond what is either required or paid for.

20

Table 13: Advanced Medical Training

Advanced Medical Training

Total

No Advanced

Medical

Certification

Emergency

Medical

Technician Paramedic

Yes,

Unspecified

Organizational

Placement

Public Safety 10 22 3 2 37

Parks and Recreation 28 14 0 2 44

Independent 9 2 0 1 12

Public Works 1 0 0 0 1

Total 48 38 3 5 94

7. Law Enforcement Powers: “Should an organization fail to protect people using their facilities from the offensive behavior of other participants or guests, then the organization or agency may be subject to lawsuits” (Petersen et al., 2008). Mindful of this, a number of jurisdictions have given lifeguard personnel some level of law enforcement powers. These range from the ability to write citations, to limited arrest powers, to full law enforcement authority similar to police officers. Respondents were asked whether any personnel had any of these statutory authorities, though typically only permanent personnel or senior officers have law enforcement powers, when applicable. Responses were neither broken down by level of authority provided, nor how many lifeguards in a certain agency possessed this authority. Several respondents indicated these powers were seldom (or never) used, even when statutorily granted. Virtually all lifeguard services prefer to defer to police when possible.

Table 14: Law Enforcement

Law Enforcement

Total No Law Enforcement Yes Law Enforcement




Independent 9 3 12

Public Works 1 0 1

Total 74 19 93

8. Motorized Rescue Boats: Rescue boats offer advanced capabilities. Two lifeguard services, the City of San Diego and Los Angeles County, even have marine firefighting capability on at least some of their rescue vessels. Personal watercraft (PWCs) were not surveyed due to their ubiquity. Table 15: Motorized Rescue Boat

No Motorized Rescue

Boat Yes Motorized Rescue

Boat Total




Independent 11 1 12

Public Works 1 0 1

Total 71 23 94

21

9. Cliff Rescue Team: in certain areas of the country, rocky shorelines and steep cliffs characterize coastal areas. Eight responding jurisdictions have made coastal cliff rescue a function of their lifeguard service.

Table 16: Cliff Rescue Team

Cliff Team

Total No Cliff Team Yes Cliff Team




Independent 11 1 12

Public Works 1 0 1

Total 86 8 94

10. Swiftwater Rescue Team: Swiftwater rescue encompasses river and flood rescue. “Experts in the field of aquatic rescue consider swiftwater rescue as one of the most dangerous water emergencies” (Greehalgh, 1997). Jurisdictions around the country support swiftwater rescue teams, typically composed of firefighters. Coastal municipalities have begun to incorporate lifeguards into these teams after appropriate training, recognizing the superior water skills of professional lifeguards. As Congressman Brian Bilbray (R-Calif.), a former lifeguard, remarked in Congressional hearings in 2000 focusing on the aftermath of Hurricane Floyd flooding: “You don’t expect a firefighter to show up in full turnout gear and get in and around a water environment. As a lifeguard, I cringe at the threat to their safety doing that… This is not a program that you just take people off the shelf and have them go do a river rescue… You do not put a rescue vest on someone and make them a lifeguard or a river rescue person” (Rigg, 2007).

Table 17: Swiftwater Rescue Team

Swiftwater Team

Total No Swiftwater Team Yes Swiftwater Team




Independent 11 1 12

Public Works 1 0 1

Total 81 13 94

11. Junior Lifeguard Program: Junior Lifeguard Programs are common offerings of lifeguard services. These programs teach children basic water rescue skills, in addition to incorporating workouts and engaging games. Programs are typically marketed as an alternative to summer camps or other recreational programs offered by local governments. Junior Lifeguard Programs also serve as recruitment tools, developing future employees by exposing them to existing personnel, policies, and procedures. Some local governments break out the budget for the junior lifeguard program in a separate line item. In these cases, budgets were combined with the operating budgets to obtain the overall budget number used for the primary spending per employee calculation.

22

Table 18: Junior Lifeguard Program

Junior Lifeguards

Total No Junior Lifeguards Yes Junior Lifeguards




Independent 4 8 12

Public Works 1 0 1

Total 38 56 94

Sink, Swim, or Float? Pflepsen.pdf · 1 Sink, Swim, or Float? Budgetary Implications of the Organizational Placement of Lifeguard Services in Local Government By W. Jacob Pflepsen

Documents