Sweet Briar Ropes CourseKelsey Barta, Kate Fanta, Allison Hassard

Project Concept

Our project was to assess the viability of providing a Ropes course on campus to provide SBC athletics, the outdoors program, and various clubs and organizations an opportunity to enhance team building, and also to add an enjoyable outdoor activity. A ropes course would add value to the campus similar to the boathouse and outing cabin.

Our initial analysis indicates that this would enhance several of our current programs and attract more people to campus, at little additional cost to the college.

Project Vision

- Mixture of high and low ropes course elements on SBC’s campus

- Focus on corporations, with retreat packages available that include use of the Conference Center

- Adding the course under the management of the Outdoors Program

- Year-round use of the course

- Course staffed by students

Agenda

Market Research

Interviews

Benchmarking

Surveys

Proposed Solution

Operations Plan

Financial Analysis

Questions

Market Research: Interviews

SBC Interviews -

Joan Lucy (Leadership Program):

-very knowledgeable about ropes courses -referred us to Inner Quest for construction -LCP would use the course regularly

-LCP students would be encouraged to help with course operations

Rich Myers (Physical Plant): - Discussion of insurance for corporations, students, summer camps, etc.- Physical Plant

would have limited interaction with course construction/maintenance- Suggestion that funding might come through OP or Co-Curricular Life

Market Research: Interviews

SBC Interviews

Tasha Gillum (Outdoor Program): - Outdoors Program would have little to no interest in course usage/construction - Expressed concern that students would quickly lose interest in course - To be competitive with other courses, SBC should “Go big or go home”

- Overall conservative input

Dori Baker (Chaplain’s Office):- Very optimistic about the course

- Thought it would be a good resource for programs on campus - Expressed concern that although local churches may use the course,

it would not be on a regular basis

Market Research: Interviews

Non-SBC Interviews

Rich Harris (at JMU, built LC ropes course): - Course is re-certified every six months as it is a living course (i.e. using trees as

supporting structures). - For revenue generation, uniqueness counts:

-- Could place a wooden plaque with the sponsor’s name next to the element

- Promote corporate retreats featuring time for strategic planning and vision including experiential learning.

-- This kind of retreat covers the operating expense for your student and civic groups.

Market Research: Interviews

Non-SBC Interviews

Ben Mayhew (Lynchburg College):

- LC course took 1 week to complete - Inner Quest was contracted to construct the course

- More users in warmer months than colder months -- Approximately 60-75 groups per year.

- To choose which obstacles to build, developed teambuilding and training goals and developed obstacles that would help reach these goals.

- No decline in course usage has occurred over the years.

Market Research: Benchmarking

Benchmarking

VMI

Lynchburg

JMU

Washington & Lee

Local Vendors:Inner QuestExperiential Systems

Market Research: Surveys

• 57 responses to student survey

• If Sweet Briar built a ropes course would you use it?

o 84% answered yes, 16% answered no

• Which clubs on campus that you’re involved with would utilize a ropes course?

o Leadership Certificate Program, Outdoor Program, Sweet Peas, Resident Advisors, SAAC, SGA, Riders, Sweet Spirits, Cross Country, Common Ground, Judicial Committee, Campus Christian Fellowship, Engineering, Tap Clubs

Results Discussion

- Surveyed students were very positive about course. Is this a “false positive”?

- While there were many concerns about starting a course, the reviews of existing courses were positive. Is SBC’s situation too dissimilar to other schools for a useful comparison?

Results Summary

Pros:

• Provides value to college

• Provides team building exercise for many campus groups

• Experiential learning opportunity for students running course

• Would attract off-campus groups

Cons:● Required funding

● “Competition” with other local ropes courses

● Students may get burned out easily because of overlap participation between campus groups

Revised Vision- Low ropes course elements only

-- Research on local vendors showed that some high course elements can cost up to $100,000

- Focus shifted to include Students, Corporations, Summer Camps, and Youth Groups-- A low-only course can be used by a younger demographic

- The course will be independent of the Outdoors Program-- Removes conflicts in OP’s programming

- Course staffed by students-- Students employed by the FAC may opt for course training

- Year-round use of the course-- Students already working on campus during the summer may opt for

course training

BenefitsIn Summary:

The new project goal is not to focus on creating a money-making fixture on campus, but to view the ropes course strictly as an additional form of enrichment for Sweet Briar students.Paying users function as a necessity to keep the course in up-keep.

Proposed Solution: Low Ropes Course

Whale Watch: The group attempts to balance a large teetering platform.

Proposed Solution: Low Ropes Course

T.P. Shuffle: Each half of the group attempts to switch sides with the other while balancing on a low log.

Proposed Solution: Low Ropes Course

Blind Maze: The group is blindfolded, lost in a rope maze, and must work together to escape.

Proposed Solution: Low Ropes Course

Mohawk Walk: This problem involves moving the entire group from one spot to another on a series of tight-wires using each other for support and balance.

Proposed Solution: Low Ropes Course

Nitro Crossing: The group must cross a "moat" on a swinging "vine" and take along a can of "nitro glycerine" without spilling it.

Additional Considerations

Course Operations:

• Approximately 10 student workers will be hired to run the course

• Shifts will generally be 2 hours long

• Open 7 days a week 10:00 am to 4:00 pm

• Would be open year round weather permitting

• Reservation through e-mail run by student worker

• Location

Financial Analysis: Initial Costs

Course Element Building Costs:

-Whale Watch $1,210

-T.P. Shuffle $745

-Blind Maze $620

-Mohawk Walk $820

-Nitro Crossing $735

Total Estimated Initial Cost: $4,130

Financial Analysis: Operating Costs

Item Cost Quantity Subtotal Source:

Student staff $8/hr 2 staff, 2-hr use, 80 uses/year (40 SBC, 40

non-SBC)

$2,560/ yr LC benchmarking, Rich Harris

Insurance $5,000 Annual $5,000/yr Rich Meyer

Inspection $425/inspection

2 inspections/year $850/yr InnerQuest

Staff training $1,000/ training

1 training sessions/yr $1,000/ yr InnerQuest

Total Estimated Operating Cost/Year: $9,410

Financial Analysis: Revenue

Estimated number of groups/year:

80 groups (20 non-SBC groups/20 outside groups)

Typical group estimated to have 10 people (via Ben Mayhew)

Total Estimated Revenue/year: $5,500

Type of User Rate Estimated number of users/year

Revenue/year

SBC Students Free -- --

College Students(non-SBC)

$12.50/person 20 groups $2,500

Outside Users (non-students)

$15.00/person 20 groups $3,000

Estimated Overage/Shortfall

ESTIMATED REVENUE: $5,500

ESTIMATED OPERATING COSTS: $9,410

NET SHORTAGE: (-$3,910)

Estimated Funds

Initial Costs ($4,130 - onetime):US Department of Education Grants (Physical Education Programs, PEP, Grants)Learning & Leadership GrantsThe National Education Association FoundationDonations

Maintenance Costs ($3,910/year):FundraisersDonationsSale of Name Plaques (one-time)Club Funding

Questions