REVENUE PLANNING & FUNDING, LLC

 

NATIONAL PROBLEM

 

INITIAL CAUSE

Public and non profit park and recreation entities typically advertise procurement documents for large scale Acquisition Plans, Site Plans, Facility Plans, and Master Plans through a complex process. They negotiate, approve and contract the preparation of these important Plans to a variety of Planning, Architecture, Engineering or Landscape Architecture firms.

While these firms are sometimes required to address budget, maintenance, personnel and/or programming services, they are primarily charged with recommending future acquisition and/or development capital improvement projects for implementation by the contracting entities. The eventual success of these vital Acquisition Plans, Site Plans, Facility Plans, and Master Plans is often weakened from the very start because the individuals who advertised and contracted for the Plans did not also issue any procurement advertisements for in-depth accompanying and complementary Capital Improvements Revenue Plans that would be contracted to Revenue Planning firms.  

GROWING DILEMMA

An increasing number of public and non profit park and recreation entities are spending between $300,000 to $3,100,000 for each of their extensive Acquisition Plans, Site Plans, Facility Plans, and/or 200-500 page Systemwide Master Plans. These costly and lengthy Acquisition, Site, Facility, and Master Plans often recommend enormous financial investments ranging from $100,000,000 to more than $1,000,000,000 for a multitude of capital improvements projects in each single park, city, county, or state.  

Because (a) the initial procurement documents for the Aquisition, Site, Facility and Master Plans requested no or very little Revenue information and (b) the contracted service firms for these costly Plans don’t include any subcontracted Revenue firms on their teams, the resulting documents contain very limited and very general information, if any at all, about how to mobilize the millions of dollars of Revenues needed to fund the numerous recommended projects.  

INFORMATION VOIDS

Because no Revenue Specialists are utilized by the contracted Planning, Architectural, Engineering and/or Landscape Architecture firms, the lengthy and costly Acquisition Plans, Site Plans, Facility Plans, and Master Plans typically have the following information voids. They:

  1. Contain No Financial Information about any of the following primary Revenue Ingredients that must be strategized to fund the recommended projects.
    1. Revenue Resources
    2. Revenue Sectors, Sources & Segments
    3. Revenue Uses
    4. Revenue Classifications, Types & Techniques
    5. Revenue Methodologies
    6. Revenue Appeals
    7. Revenue Campaigns
     
  2. Contain No Personnel information about the various types of “pooled talent” Personnel needed to manage the (a) Planning, (b) Generation and (c) Administration of the abundant Revenues that are needed.
    3.  
  3. Contain No Work Plan information about the (a) Name, (b) Personnel Assignment, (b) Schedule or (c) Financial Amount of each necessary Revenue Pursuit.
    4.  
  4. Contain Very Little Revenue Relationships information about (a) Alliances, (b) Coalitions, (c) Networks or (d) Partnerships that can support the recommended projects.
 

NEGATIVE IMPACTS

  1. While a “pooled talent” approach that benefits from the engagement of both internal and external (a) entity personnel, (b) consulting personnel and (c) area citizen personnel is often utilized with the preparation of Acquisition, Site, Facility, and Master Plans, a limited input approach is then typically used by having just a few internal entity personnel attempt to identify a few Revenue Options that can fund a portion of the implementation of the expensive Plans.
    2.  
  2. While lengthy time periods of up to twelve (12) to twenty-four (24) months are normally allowed for the preparation of the expensive Acquisition Plans, Site Plans, Facility Plans, and Master Plans that call for huge financial investments, in the absence of an accompanying proactive Capital Improvements Revenue Plan that has been prepared in a thoughtful and reasonable timeframe, public and non profit entities often scramble to come up with some quick random Revenue ideas in an effort to figure out how to fund at least some of the recommended capital projects.
    3.  
  3. The overwhelming majority of lengthy and costly Park and Recreation Acquisition, Site, Facility and Master Plans only get partially fulfilled.
    4.  
  4. The citizens who participated in the public engagement processes for the Plans become disheartened.
    5.  
  5. The area public officials or non profit board members become upset with the Park and Recreation executives, administrators and staff members.
    6.  
  6. The local newspapers, television stations and radio stations become critical of the lack of timely implementation of the Acquisition, Site, Facility, and Master Plans.