Trends in Aquatic Facilities

A Look at Trends in Aquatic Facilities

From the high school pool where teens compete to the park district's aquatic complex complete with lazy river, splash play area and poolside lounges, facilities that feature aquatics are fairly common in the recreation, sports and fitness industry. Aquatic facilities require more than careful attention to detail, with their complex systems for disinfecting water and lifeguards and other staff to ensure safety. Aquatic facilities suck up a lot of budget dollars, and require a well-trained crew knowledgeable about everything from the nuances of balancing the pool's water to how to know when a swimmer is in trouble.

In this section of the Industry Report, we take a deep dive into the answers from those survey respondents whose facilities include aquatic elements. This includes any respondent who has at least one indoor or outdoor pool, splash play area, waterpark or hot tub.

Fewer respondents in 2022 included aquatic features in their facilities than in 2021. Some 49.9% of respondents in 2022 said their facilities include aquatics, down from 54.6%. More than half (51.1%) of respondents did not include aquatics. (See Figure 34.)

For the first time, indoor swimming pools were more common than outdoor pools for aquatic respondents to the Industry Report. Some 62.2% of aquatic respondents said they currently have at least one indoor pool, up from 59.2% in 2021. And 60.4% currently have at least one outdoor pool, down from 67.2% in 2021. Splash play areas were found among 42.3% of aquatic respondents' facilities, down from 49.8% in 2021. More than a third (35.7%) of aquatic respondents said they currently have a hot tub, spa or whirlpool, down from 37.2%. And 15.7% of aquatic respondents said they currently have a waterpark down from 17% in 2021. (See Figure 35.)

As you might expect, indoor aquatic facilities were more common in colder climates. They were most commonly found among respondents from the Midwest, where 69.3% of aquatic respondents said they currently have indoor aquatic facilities. They were followed by the Northeast, where more than two-thirds (67.3%) of aquatic respondents said they include indoor aquatic facilities. In the West, 59.2% of aquatic respondents have indoor facilities. And smaller numbers in the South Atlantic region (56.1%) and South Central region (50%) said they currently have indoor aquatic facilities.

The trend reverses for outdoor pools, with those in the southern regions more likely to include outdoor aquatics. More than three-quarters (78.1%) of South Central respondents and 64.3% of South Atlantic respondents said their facilities currently include outdoor aquatics. They were followed by the West, where 57.1% of aquatic respondents said their facilities include outdoor pools. More than half of aquatic respondents in the Northeast (55.6%) and the Midwest (54.3%) currently include outdoor aquatic facilities.

Splash play areas were also more commonly found in the southern states. Half (50%) of South Central aquatic respondents and 48.6% of South Atlantic respondents said they currently feature splash play areas. They were followed by the Midwest, where 43.5% have splash play areas, the West (40.9%) and the Northeast (32.6%).

Hot tubs, spas and whirlpools were most common in the West, where 50% of aquatic respondents said they currently include them. They were followed by the South Atlantic region, where 37.1% of aquatic respondents have hot tubs, spas or whirlpools. Around a third of respondents in the Midwest (33.8%) and South Central (33.3%) regions currently have hot tubs, while just 21.4% of Northeastern aquatic respondents feature hot tubs, spas and whirlpools among their facilities.

Finally, waterparks were most common in the Midwest, where 22.2% of aquatic respondents have them. They were followed by the West (19.5%) and South Central region (17.9%). Fewer aquatic respondents in the South Atlantic region (12.9%) have waterparks, while very few in the Northeast (2.5%) said they currently have a waterpark.

As with regions, it stands to reason that certain types of owners are more likely to build specific types of aquatic facilities. For example, you'd be more likely to expect schools and Ys to build indoor aquatic facilities, while parks might be more likely to build splash play areas, and health clubs might be more likely to add hot tubs.

In fact, 100% of aquatic respondents from schools said they currently had an indoor aquatic facility, and 97.1% of aquatic respondents from colleges had indoor pools. Ys also were highly likely to be home to indoor aquatics, with 89.2% of aquatic respondents from Ys indicating they currently have an indoor aquatic facility.

Outdoor pools, on the other hand, were most common at camps, where 85.2% of aquatic respondents said they currently have an outdoor aquatic facility. They were followed by parks (77.2%) and rec centers (58.8%).

Splash play areas were most commonly found among park respondents' facilities. In fact, more than two-thirds (67.8%) of aquatic respondents from park districts and departments said they currently have a splash play area. They were followed by rec centers (50%).

Hot tubs were indeed most common for health clubs. Nearly three-quarters (72.7%) of aquatic respondents from health clubs said they currently have a hot tub, spa or whirlpool. They were followed by Ys (57.6%) and colleges and universities (51.7%).

Finally, waterparks were most common for park respondents. Nearly a quarter (24.4%) of aquatic respondents from park districts and departments said they currently have a waterpark. They were followed by camps (15.4%).

As always, the vast majority of aquatic facilities are used for recreation and leisure, and some of them mix in competitive activities. More than half (51.9%) of respondents said their aquatic facilities offer up both recreational and competitive programming. Another 45.9% said their pools are used just for leisure and recreation, and 2.2% said their pools are for competition only. (See Figure 36.)

Only respondents from schools and colleges had competition-only pools. Some 29.4% of aquatic respondents from schools and 2.7% of aquatic respondents from colleges said their pools were only used for competition.

Schools also were among those most likely to combine recreational and competitive uses of their facilities. Ys led the way here, with 71.4% of Y respondents indicating their pools are used for a combination of recreation and competition. They were followed by schools (64.7%) and parks (62.8%).

Camps were by far the most likely to report that their aquatic facilities are used only for recreation. Some 96.4% of camp respondents said their aquatic facilities are for recreation and leisure. They were followed distantly by health clubs, with 54.5% indicating their aquatic facilities are for recreation.

Pools & Budgets

Aquatic and non-aquatic respondents saw similar changes to their overall operating budgets from 2020 to 2021. In 2021, aquatic respondents spend 79.2% more on their operating costs, on average, compared with non-aquatic respondents. However, both reported around a 3% decrease from 2020. Aquatic respondents reported a 2.9% decrease to their overall operating budgets from 2020 to 2021, from an average of $2,400,000 to $2,330,000; and non-aquatic respondents saw a 3% decrease, from $1,340,000 in 2020 to $1,300,000 in 2021.

Looking forward, aquatic and non-aquatic respondents also projected similar increases to their operating costs. Aquatic respondents expect their overall operating costs to grow to $2,690,000 in 2023, an increase of 12.1% from 2020's average. In that same time frame, non-aquatic respondents projected a 12.7% increase, to an average of $1,510,000 in 2023.

While aquatic respondents reported a 2.9% decrease to their overall operating budgets from 2020 to 2021, they reported a slightly larger decrease to their aquatic operating budgets. From 2020 to 2021, aquatic operating costs fell 4.4%, from an average of $450,000 to an average of $430,000. Looking forward, aquatic respondents expect their aquatic operating budget to increase 16.3%, from $430,000 in 2021 to $500,000 in 2023. (See Figure 37.)

As usual, respondents from Ys had the highest average aquatic operating cost in 2021, at $690,000. They were followed by parks ($490,000) and rec centers ($360,000). The lowest average aquatic operating costs were found among respondents from schools ($190,000) and colleges ($250,000).

From 2020 to 2021, respondents from parks and schools reported no change to their average cost for aquatic operations. The greatest decrease from 2020 to 2021 was seen among rec center respondents, who reported a 46.3% drop to their average aquatic operating cost, from $670,000 to $360,000. Decreases were also reported by health club respondents (down 12.1%, from $330,000 in 2020 to $290,000 in 2021) and Y respondents (down 10.4%, from $770,000 to $690,000).

Respondents from colleges reported a 4.2% increase to their average aquatic operating cost from 2020 to 2021, from an average of $240,000 to an average of $250,000. Camps were an outlier, reporting a 220% higher aquatic operating cost in 2021 than in 2020 ($320,000 vs. $100,000). That said, camp respondents in 2021 reported an 8.6% lower cost than in 2019, when their average aquatic operating cost was $350,000.

Looking forward, respondents from Ys were expecting the sharpest increase to their aquatic expenses from 2021 to 2023. Y respondents projected a 26.1% increase to their average operating cost in that time frame, from $690,000 in 2021 to $870,000 in 2023. They were followed by rec center respondents, who projected a 22.2% increase, from an average of $360,000 in 2021 to $440,000 in 2023. Double-digit increases were also projected by parks (up 14.3%, from $490,000 to $560,000), schools (up 10.5%, from $190,000 to $210,000) and health clubs (up 10.3%, from $290,000 to $320,00). Camp respondents expect their average aquatic operating cost to climb 6.3%, from $320,000 in 2021 to $340,000 in 2023. College respondents projected no change.

The pandemic had a major impact on aquatic facility revenues, with 61.4% of aquatic respondents indicating that their revenues fell in 2020, and only 9% reporting an increase in revenues for 2020. As with many other areas of the study, the data for 2022 reflects the beginning of a recovery. From 2020 to 2021, 42.1% of aquatic respondents said their revenues had increased. This compares with just 31.1% of respondents in last year's survey who expected such an increase. Another 32.2% reported no change, and more than a quarter (25.7%) reported a decrease. Y respondents were the most likely to have seen an increase in aquatic revenues in 2021 (54.3% reported an increase). They were followed by camps (48.1%) and parks (46.7%).

In 2022, respondents expect an even more positive change, with just 2.7% expecting their aquatic revenues to be lower than in 2021. Some 46.7% are expecting aquatic revenues to increase, and 41.7% expect their aquatic revenues to remain the same in 2022 as they were in 2021. Rec centers (68.8%), Ys (61.1%) and parks (56.7%) were the most likely to expect their aquatic revenues to increase in 2022.

Looking forward, 45.3% of aquatic respondents are expecting their revenues to be higher in 2023, while 4.1% expect a decline, and around half (50.6%) expect no change.

2022 saw a jump in the number of aquatic respondents who report that their aquatic revenues support their aquatic operations. Some 25.3% of aquatic respondents said their aquatic facilities and programs generate the revenues to support their operations, up from 19.5% in 2021. Another 68.5% said their aquatic facilities are subsidized via funding from other sources. (See Figure 38.)

Respondents from rec centers, Ys and parks were the most likely to report that their aquatic costs are paid for via aquatic revenues. Some 30% of rec center respondents, 29.3% of Y respondents and 28.4% of park respondents said their aquatic revenues covered their aquatic costs.

Respondents from schools were the most likely to report that their aquatic operating costs are subsidized via funding from other sources. Some 72.2% of school respondents said their operations are subsidized, down from 78.6% in 2021.

The most commonly shared source of funding for aquatic facilities was membership and admission fees. Some 75.9% of aquatic respondents said that fees for membership or admission were a source of revenue for their facilities. This compares with 47.8% of non-aquatic respondents. Other more common sources of funding for aquatic facilities included rentals and private events (69.7%, vs. 49.3% of non-aquatic facilities); tuition and fees (46.4%, vs. 32.1% of non-aquatic facilities); individual donations (43.1%, vs. 32.1% of non-aquatic facilities); and government grants (32.8%, vs. 27.6% of non-aquatic facilities). (See Figure 39.)

Respondents with aquatic facilities were far more likely than those with no aquatics to report that they had taken action to reduce their expenditures over the past several years. More than nine out of 10 (90.1%) aquatic respondents said they had taken such action (down from 93.3% in 2021), compared with 77.4% of non-aquatic respondents (down from 86.4%). Aquatic respondents were more likely than non-aquatic respondents to have taken every type of action to reduce expenses covered by the survey. The most common measures taken by aquatic respondents include: reducing their hours of operation (50.5%, compared with 30.2% of non-aquatic respondents); reducing staff (46.2% vs. 36.6%); increasing fees (44.3% vs. 35.8%); cutting programs or services (40.7% vs. 24.5%); and putting construction or renovation plans on hold (35.2% vs. 24.5%). (See Figure 40.)

Programming

Well over nine out of 10 (95.5%) aquatic respondents reported that they provide aquatic programming of some kind, up from 93.3%. This could include anything from learn-to-swim and water safety programs to sports like water polo. A full 100% of aquatic respondents from colleges and health clubs said they include aquatic programming at their facilities. Ys were also among those most likely to provide such programming, with 97.3% of Y respondents indicating they do. They were followed by camps (96%), rec centers (95%), schools (94.4%) and parks (93.6%).

The top 10 most common aquatic programs at aquatic facilities include:

1. Leisure swim (87.7%)
2. Learn-to-swim for children (74.3%)
3. Lap swim (72%)
4. Lifeguard training (70.1%)
5. Aquatic exercise programs (64.9%)
6. Learn-to-swim for adults (54.9%)
7. Water safety programs (54.1%)
8. Swim meets and competitions (50.7%)
9. Youth swim teams (50.4%)
10. Special needs aquatic programs (34%)

The program showing the most growth from 2021 to 2022 was special needs aquatic programs, which saw an increase of 4.8 percentage points. Other programs that saw year-over-year growth include: leisure swim (up 4.7 points); swim meets and competitions (up 4.5 points); and aquatic exercise programs (up 3.4 points).

Interestingly, Ys lead the way when it comes to programs related to water safety and learning to swim, while schools and school districts offer the most competitive-type programs, and health clubs are most likely to provide programs related to fitness.

Aquatic respondents from colleges and universities were the most likely to have leisure swim, diving programs and diving teams, and water polo programs.

Aquatic respondents from schools and school districts were the most likely to offer swim teams of every kind (youth, adult and school/collegiate), as well as special needs programs, and swim meets and competitions.

Aquatic respondents from health clubs were the most likely to include aquatic exercise programs, lap swimming and aqua-therapy programs.

Aquatic respondents from Ys were the most likely to offer learn-to-swim programs for children and adults, as well as water safety programs and lifeguard training.

A little more than one-fifth (21%) of aquatic respondents said they were planning to add more aquatic programs to their facility's lineup over the next few years. This is down slightly from 21.9% in 2021 and 23% in 2020, but still higher than 2019, when 19.8% had such plans.

Respondents from Ys were the most likely to be planning to add more aquatic programs at their facilities. Some 29.7% of Y respondents said they would be adding aquatic programs (up from 27.5% in 2021). They were followed by rec centers (28.6%, down from 34%); colleges (24.3%, up from 21.2%) and parks (21%, down from 22.1%). Fewer respondents from health clubs (18.2%, no change) and camps (6.7%, down from 19.4%) had plans to add aquatic programs at their facilities, and no schools said they had such plans, a big change from 2021, when 21.4% of school respondents were planning to add aquatic programs.

The 10 most commonly planned aquatic programs include:

1. Special needs aquatic programs (planned by 25.4% of those who will be adding programs, down from 33.7%)
2. Learn-to-swim for children (23.7%, up from 16.3%)
3. Adult swim teams (22%, up from 14.5%)
4. Learn-to-swim for adults (20.3%, up from 16.3%)
5. Aquatic exercise programs (20.3%, virtually unchanged from 20.5%)
6. Lifeguard training (16.9%, up from 15.1%)
7. Water safety programs (15.3%, down from 16.3%)
8. Youth swim teams (11.9%, virtually unchanged from 12%)
9. Aqua-therapy (11.9%, down from 15.7%)
10. Water polo (11.9%, up from 10.2%)

As in 2020 and 2021, aquatic respondents from rec centers were the most likely to be planning to add the most different types of programs, including: school and collegiate swim teams; special needs aquatic programs; aqua-therapy; swim meets and competitions; diving and diving teams; and lifeguard training.

Aquatic respondents from colleges and universities were the most likely to be planning to add learn-to-swim for children, learn-to-swim for adults, youth swim teams, and aquatic exercise programs.

Aquatic respondents from Ys were the most likely to be planning to add adult swim teams and water polo. Aquatic respondents from parks were the most likely to be planning to add lap swimming, while those from health clubs were the most likely to be planning to add water safety programs.

Aquatic Facility Construction & Features

Industry Report survey respondents whose facilities included aquatic elements were much more likely than those without aquatics to report that they have plans for construction over the next several years. Nearly three-quarters (74.4%) of aquatic respondents said they are planning construction, up from 65.5% in 2021. This compares with 66.7% of non-aquatic respondents.

Aquatic respondents were more likely to be planning to build new facilities or renovate their existing facilities, while non-aquatic respondents were more likely to be planning additions. Some 32% of aquatic respondents said they had plans to build new facilities and 61.2% had plans for renovations, compared with 27% and 45% of non-aquatic respondents, respectively. When it comes to additions, 30.1% of non-aquatic respondents said they had plans to add to their existing facilities, compared with 28.1% of aquatic respondents. (See Figure 41.)

Aquatic respondents were planning to spend 13.8% more on their construction plans than non-aquatic respondents in 2022. Aquatic respondents said they planned to spend an average of $4,460,000 on average, while non-aquatic respondents were planning to spend $3,920,000.

From 2021 to 2022, aquatic respondents saw a slightly bigger decrease in their planned construction budgets than non-aquatic respondents. For aquatic respondents, construction spending fell 18.9%, from an average of $5,500,000 in 2021 to $4,460,000 in 2022, while non-aquatic respondents saw a 16.8% decrease, from an average of $4,710,000 to $3,920,000.

The top 10 features covered by the survey that are most commonly found among aquatic respondents' facilities include:

1. Automatic chemical feeders (found among 66.8% of aquatic respondents' facilities, down from 71.3% in 2021)
2. Pool lifts and accessibility equipment (63.4%, down from 70.3%)
3. Diving boards (43%, up from 41.6%)
4. Waterslides (35.5%, no change from 2021)
5. Zero-depth entry (32.8%, down from 38.2%)
6. Water play structures (27.9%, down from 32.2%)
7. UV disinfection (23.8%, up from 23%)
8. Splash pad (20.4%, down from 27.1%)
9. Variable frequency drive (16.2%, up from 14.9%)
10. Pool inflatables (16.2%, up from 15.6%)

Aquatic respondents from park facilities were more likely than others to include: zero-depth entry, lazy rivers, waterslides, water play structures, poolside cabanas, splash pads, surf machines, wave pools, pool inflatables, and poolside climbing walls.

Aquatic respondents from schools were the most likely to include diving boards, solar pool heating systems, and variable frequency drives.

Aquatic respondents from health clubs were the most likely to include ozone systems, automatic chemical feeders, saline chlorination systems, pool lifts and accessibility equipment, and variable speed pumps.

Aquatic respondents from Ys were the most likely to include UV disinfection systems, and pool obstacle or ninja courses.

Finally, aquatic respondents from rec centers were the most likely to use advanced oxidation process, or AOP systems.

Some 23.8% of aquatic respondents said they had plans to add features to their aquatic facilities over the next several years, up from 22.2% in 2021. Aquatic respondents from parks, Ys and camps were the most likely to have such plans. Some 27% of aquatic respondents from parks, 27% from Ys and 26.7% from camps said they were planning to add features at their facilities. They were followed by those from rec centers (23.8% had plans to add features to their aquatic facilities), colleges (21.6%) and health clubs (18.2%). Aquatic respondents from schools were the least likely to be planning to add features at their aquatic facilities, with 11.1% indicating they would do so.

The most commonly planned addition in 2022, as in 2021, was splash pads. Nearly three out of 10 (29.9%) aquatic respondents with plans to add features at their facilities said they would be adding splash pads, up from 27.4% in 2021. In addition, 25.4% were planning to add UV disinfection (up from 22.6%), 17.9% were planning to add pool lifts and accessibility equipment (up from 13.7%), 17.9% were planning to add zero-depth entry (down from 19%), and 17.9% were planning to add poolside cabanas (up from 17.3%). (See Figure 42.) RM