Ben Ludwig shares his strategies for how to best build a workforce at community rec centers while ensuring full-time employees are thriving.
We do meaningful work, we make a difference in our communities, and we serve those that are underserved. This feels impactful right? This should draw people to our mission and should keep those who align with passion around for years to come, shouldn’t it?
If that was the case, then why do most community rec centers struggle with staffing, volunteer draw and even keeping programs alive in some instances? The problem isn’t that we have lack of vision, lack of support or even lack of belief. The real problem lies in the fact that most depend on the mission to attract the right people and keep programs alive.
In the real world however, it’s more than that. There’s still a strong requirement for leadership, structure, and proper channels for employees to feel valued, taken care of and see progress for their careers. This is the “in-between” workforce challenge. It lives in the messy middle between seasonal staff, part-time team members, interns, retirees, aspiring young professionals and emerging frontline leaders. It’s not glamorous, but it’s one of the most important operating issues community rec must solve.
As a matter of fact, this is even more imperative in our line of work considering most centers don’t have the budget to simply pay more or provide better benefits. So, let’s dig into how we can better take care of our full-time leaders through proper channels of taking care of those they lead.
The Real Problem Isn’t Hiring, It’s Structure
When leaders talk about staffing shortages, the conversation usually centers on recruiting. How do we get more applicants? Where should we post jobs? How do we compete with other employers? The worst part is most program directors just send a mass email letting all the parents know that we “need coaches” or volunteers. Reality check: how many times do too many parents come beating down your door because of the email you sent? Likely none.
The deeper issue is many organizations don’t have a staffing architecture that helps people enter, grow and stay. They hire for immediate openings, onboard quickly to get the new team members in their roles and then do the same thing all over again next season.
In practical terms, that means a rec center may successfully fill a role today and still be right back in the same crisis three months later. A healthier staffing model isn’t just about filling slots — it’s seeking to create a sense of belonging.
Without these layers, every staffing issue feels like putting out a fire instead of building for the future:
- Easy entry points for new team members.
- Strong onboarding and training.
- Flexible pathways for part-time contributors.
- Clear next steps for high-potential staff.
- Leadership development that doesn’t rely entirely on one overwhelmed manager.
Where Most Rec Centers Are Breaking Down
The staffing pain many organizations feel is usually not random. It tends to show up in a handful of patterns:
Overreliance on a Few Key Players
Most community rec organizations have a small number of trusted people who hold everything together. They know the members, solve problems quickly, cover shifts, train new hires and protect the culture. They are the “go-to” people for everything.
At first glance, that can feel like a strength. In reality, it’s often a warning sign.
When too much of the operation rests on a few individuals, these people tend to take on more responsibility oftentimes without leadership even knowing they are doing more than expected. They become the ones every staff member goes to with questions or for help. Eventually they end up taking on more because these individuals are either very high capacity and want it, or have trouble saying no. What ends up happening is these people burn out.
Weak Onboarding
Many rec centers work hard to recruit, only to lose people because the first two weeks are chaotic. New hires are often handed a shirt, shown a few basics and then dropped into the flow of the operation. Training may vary wildly based on who happens to be working that day. Expectations are unclear. Processes are informal. Feedback is inconsistent.
When onboarding is weak, new employees do not just struggle with performance. They struggle with confidence and belonging. They start wondering whether they made the right decision to take the job at all. A great onboarding process does more than communicate tasks. It helps staff feel prepared, supported and connected to the mission.
A key piece to remember here is during the onboarding process many part-time staff members have already decided whether they want to stay or go within the first two weeks.
No Bench
Many centers do not have enough people who are “almost ready” for the next step. That means whenever a lead role opens, a full-time supervisor goes on leave, or an area needs more support, there’s no bench to pull from.
This creates a vicious cycle. Managers stay overloaded because they have no one to delegate to. Entry-level staff stay underdeveloped because no one has time to mentor them. And the organization keeps hiring externally for leadership needs that should have been built internally.
Building a bench is it must be intentional. Leaders don’t rise to the top all the time on their own. Many need to be called into leadership by those they follow. When looking intentionally for leadership characteristics, you’d be surprised who answers the call.
Unclear Ladders
One of the biggest reasons part-time and seasonal workers disengage is simple: they do not know where this could lead.
If a staff member cannot see a future beyond their current shift-based role, they are less likely to deepen commitment, invest in learning or stay through challenges. This is especially true for students, early-career professionals and ambitious part-timers who may want to grow in the field.
Not everyone wants a long-term career in community recreation, but many would stay longer and contribute more if they could clearly see a next step.
A staffing ladder doesn’t need to be complex. Your team simply needs to be aware it exists and have a plan of how they could step up.
Better Staffing Models for the “In-Between” Workforce
Community rec has a superpower that many other industries don’t. People from every walk of life can contribute at a rec center. Different populations bring different strengths, schedules and development needs. The goal to maximize this superpower is to intentionally design staffing models that make the most of each group.
1. The Seasonal-to-Part-Time Funnel
Seasonal hiring is often treated as temporary by nature. But it can become one of the best feeder systems for year-round staffing.
Summer camps, aquatics, sports leagues and special events often bring in high volumes of staff. Instead of viewing those positions as one-off labor, organizations should use them as extended tryouts for future part-time roles. The key is to identify top seasonal staff early, evaluate them consistently and invite the best performers into ongoing roles before the season ends.
This could look like:
- Giving standout staff first access to fall and winter openings.
- Offering cross-training during the last month of the season.
- Conducting end-of-season development conversations.
- Creating a “preferred rehire” or “emerging leaders” list.
Seasonal roles already provide a low-risk environment to observe attitude, reliability, communication and coachability. Centers that build a funnel from seasonal to part-time reduce future hiring pressure and improve staff quality over time.
2. Retiree Talent Pools
Retirees are often overlooked in staffing conversations, but they can be an excellent fit for many community rec needs. They often bring reliability, maturity, relational strength and a service mindset. While they may not want physically intense or high-volume roles, many are ideal for welcome desk coverage, member support, light supervision, event hosting, mentoring and administrative assistance.
The mistake organizations make is trying to fit retirees into the same job design used for college students or younger hourly workers. Instead, centers should create roles that match retiree strengths, which include — highly relational positions, consistent schedules, moderate pace, clear expectations and meaningful community connection.
Retirees can also become stabilizers within a team. They often help reduce chaos, model professionalism and provide calm support in environments where younger staff may still be learning the basics of communication and responsibility.
3. Student and Intern Pipelines
High schools, colleges and trade programs can become strategic talent partners if community rec leaders approach them intentionally. Too often, student labor is treated transactionally: fill a role, cover a season, move on.
A better approach is to build structured partnerships that create mutual value. Students gain experience, resume credibility and mentorship. The organization gains energy, staffing support and a pipeline for future hires.
The strongest student and intern pipelines include relationships with local schools and program leaders, defined learning outcomes, role clarity, a supervisor or mentor, exposure to real responsibility, opportunities to stay on after the internship.
This is especially effective in areas like youth programming, fitness, sports management, communications, event support and operations. A well-run internship can become a trial run for a part-time or full-time role later. The key is remembering students aren’t just extra hands. They are future talent.
4. Department Cross-Training
One of the most practical ways to strengthen the in-between workforce is to train people to contribute across multiple departments. Many organizations operate in silos, where staff can only function in one narrow lane. This is the main reason why many managers end up burning out or working well past their typical hours, due to “needs” that proactively could have been met.
Another thing to remember here is many part-time staff members desire more hours. What a great way to solve two problems. Cross-training doesn’t mean every employee needs to do everything. It means the organization develops enough overlap that operations are less fragile.
It also benefits staff. People gain new skills, see more of the organization and often feel more engaged because they are growing instead of repeating the same limited task set every shift.
Building a Frontline Leadership Ladder
A major reason full-time leaders burn out is too much leadership is concentrated at the top. If every problem, question, decision and training issue flows upward, managers become bottlenecks.
The answer is not to simply demand more from entry-level staff. It’s to create a real frontline leadership ladder. This ladder might include steps such as team member, senior team member, shift lead, area lead, assistant coordinator, coordinator or supervisor.
The titles matter less than the progression. Staff need visible steps that communicate, “Here’s how you grow.”
Each step should come with specific competencies, increased responsibility, simple leadership expectations, modest pay differentiation where possible, coaching and feedback. For example, a shift lead may not manage budgets or hiring, but they can open and close, handle basic issues, support training of new staff, monitor standards during the shift and communicate concerns upward.
That kind of role gives developing employees ownership while reducing the constant dependency on full-time managers. The strongest organizations don’t wait for someone to become a supervisor before they start teaching leadership. They build leadership in layers.
Training Systems That Reduce Manager Dependency
One of the clearest signs a staffing model is unhealthy is when every new hire requires enormous manager time to become functional. If managers must personally explain everything, solve every problem and retrain the same basics repeatedly, the system is too dependent on them.
Centers need repeatable systems that make learning more consistent and scalable. This doesn’t require a complex corporate learning platform. In many cases, it starts with simple clarity.
Helpful tools include:
- first-week checklists
- role-specific training guides
- short video demonstrations
- shadow schedules
- competency signoffs
- FAQ sheets for common issues
- simple performance rubrics for lead roles
A good training system should answer three questions for every new employee:
- What am I responsible for?
- What does good performance look like?
- Who can help me if I get stuck?
When those answers are clear, manager dependency decreases. Supervisors can spend more time coaching, developing and improving the team instead of constantly rescuing the operation.
What to Measure
If organizations want to improve staffing, they need more than anecdotes. They need a few practical measures that show whether the workforce pipeline is getting stronger.
Time to Productivity
How long does it take a new hire to become dependable and effective in the role? This is one of the best indicators of whether onboarding and training are working. If it takes too long, the system may be unclear, overly informal or overly dependent on one trainer.
90-Day Retention
Many staffing problems aren’t hiring problems at all. They are early-retention problems. Tracking how many employees stay at least 90 days gives leaders a valuable read on the quality of hiring, onboarding and job fit. If 90-day retention is weak, the issue usually begins well before performance reviews.
Shift Fill Rate
How often are you able to fill scheduled shifts without last-minute scrambling? This metric reveals staffing depth and scheduling resilience. If managers are constantly covering gaps or asking the same few people to save the day, the workforce model is too thin.
Internal Promotions
What percentage of lead and supervisory openings are filled from within? Internal promotions are one of the clearest signs that a pipeline is working. If every leadership role requires an outside hire, the bench is probably underdeveloped.
These metrics don’t need to become burdensome. The point is not to create reporting for reporting’s sake. It’s to measure whether the organization is becoming less reactive and more sustainable.
