David Hall and John Somers, director and associate director of Recreation at Quinnipiac University, explore their department’s club sports program and ways other campus rec pros can leverage club sports success.
Club sports have become a signature program area within many campus recreation departments across the U.S. This trend is especially apparent at smaller private institutions. As the landscape of collegiate athletics continues to evolve — alongside shifting priorities among prospective students — club sports have become a compelling option for high school graduates looking to remain competitive in their sport while balancing the academic and social demands of college life.
While participation in some campus rec program areas has stagnated, participation and interest in club sports have increased over the past five years — and higher education administrators have taken notice. Enrollment managers, vice presidents and presidents are dedicating time, attention and resources to club sports, giving rec professionals a seat at the table to advocate for their programs.
Assessment
At Quinnipiac University (QU), we recently completed a five-year analysis of our club sports program.
Club Sports Summary from 2020-2025
Since 2020, club sports at QU have experienced significant growth. Participation, engagement, connection to the university, retention and competitive success represent just a portion of the benefits students and the institution have seen. A comprehensive picture of this impact was captured in the university’s retention report from fall 2025. Below is a summary of the program growth from 2020 to 2025, along with opportunities for continued success:
| Year | # of Teams | Tryout Participants | Rostered Athletes |
| 2020 | 10 | 301 | 231 |
| 2025 | 23 | 1,105 | 603 |
| % Growth | 130.00% | 267.11% | 161.04% |
By the Numbers:
- QU invests approximately $350,000 annually in club sports, yielding an estimated $12.5 million in retained tuition revenue.
- Club sport athletes retain at rates 10% higher than non-participants, with statistically significant differences in first- and second-year retention.
- For the 2023 cohort, retention rates were 93.6% for club sport athletes compared to 81.2% for non-participants.
- Longitudinal data from 2017 to 2024 shows students not involved in club sports are the least likely to remain engaged in campus recreation.
- Club sport participants report higher satisfaction, a stronger sense of belonging and greater well-being support than their peers.
- These students are more socially engaged and more likely to stay on campus during weekends and participate in multiple clubs.
- Club athletes show strong academic preparation. They’re more comfortable engaging with faculty and more focused on academics and future goals.
- Many incoming students arrive on campus intending to join a club sport, making it the most common topic of conversations with students and parents at open houses.
The full report tells a compelling story of how club sports influence students’ decisions to choose QU — and why they remain enrolled once they arrive. This success is driven by a committed professional staff within campus recreation.
Leveraging Club Sports Success
Recreation directors and administrators must be intentional about leveraging growth in club sports participation when data indicates positive trends. Data collection and analysis should occur annually and be evaluated over time. Staff should plan for intentional assessment using both qualitative and quantitative measures and align findings with institutional priorities.
Benchmarking against peer institutions and partnering with offices such as institutional research can strengthen work. Reviewing campus surveys and assessment tools is a smart and efficient business practice.
Some data is hard to quantify. For example, it can be difficult to say with statistical confidence that a student chose a certain university solely because it had an equestrian team. That doesn’t mean we should give up trying to collect that data.
Post orientation survey questions or focus groups with first-year participants in club sports can yield great information. Other data — such as retention rates and budget impact — are easier to analyze and can be especially persuasive when advocating for future resource allocation.
This work requires time and planning. It’s important to stay the course because it will pay off. Recreation professionals can gain a deeper understanding of their programs and develop strong talking points for public events, open houses, orientations and year-end reporting.
Patience is also essential when communicating with administrators. We often get asked for data and statistics on short notice and with little context. Our department can often respond the same day and decipher what the administration wants to know, which has benefited us and others by being team players.
Resources and Support to Manage Club Sports Growth
Managing the growth and success of club sports programs can present many challenges and questions. Has the budget increased? How should funds be allocated equitably? Is there sufficient court space? How do we recruit, hire and retain qualified coaches, and what’s the appropriate compensation? And perhaps the largest issue many of us face — how do we provide athletic training services?
When speaking to university administrators, many of them are willing to assist our club sports program and know this program can move the needle in terms of recruitment and retention. Then I share the details: cost, risk reduction, the need for athletic training services, off-site facility costs for games and practices, coach pay, cost of transportation and more. Educating higher education administrators on these complex issues is critical to moving club sport programs forward.
Those who managed club sports programs 25 years ago — like myself — can hardly recognize what they’ve become. There’s no magic bullet to solve all these challenges. Campus rec professionals must conduct research, benchmark best practices, understand campus culture and present multiple options for decision-makers.
Develop a proposal that addresses athletic training coverage and costs from the best case to the bare minimum. Apply the same approach to coaching compensation by tiering the clubs appropriately for funding. Decide on a model of institutional support and student support via dues and fundraising.
QU’s Model
At QU, we use a four-tiered model for our club sports program. This tier system is modeled after a variety of other institutions, utilizing frameworks we thought were adaptable to QU.
The guiding principles of this system are simple: assist teams financially with the appropriate amount of resources and ensure there’s the right amount of buy-in from each team to justify the financial investment on behalf of the university.
Budgeting
QU received a lump-sum budget across 23 active club sports teams. This budget has remained flat for several years, allowing for predictable annual planning. Each team submits its proposed budget for the next fiscal year in April, which details anticipated expenses, dues revenue, fundraising and donations.
Our office reviews each budget to determine the essential operating costs for each team to function. This determines what tier a team slots into initially. The higher their essential operating expenses, the greater the amount of money they’re eligible for as part of the allocation process.
After this, there are a variety of other factors considered, including previous operating expenses, completion of annual tier requirements and meeting structural tier benchmarks.
Our team determines the initial allocations as a starting point and then presents them to our seven-member Club Sports Advisory Board without team names attached. The board deliberates, adjusts as needed and then votes to ratify the allocation for the fiscal year.
Tier System
Each tier in our model is broken down based on how much money it’s allocated from the university. The tier of teams that receive the most money from the university also has the strictest and largest number of requirements, as well as benchmarks to hit year after year.
Some of the factors we consider when slotting teams into tiers and evaluating their performance within a tier are:
- Operating expenses
- Roster size
- Competition requirements
- Athletic training needs
- Fundraised dollars
- Revenue generated (dues, donations, etc.)
- Community involvement
When evaluating the tier status of teams annually, we try to consider context and participation within the program as a whole. For example, QU’s Alumni Development office hosts an annual Parents & Families Fundraising Challenge highlighting club sports. Teams are given their own custom landing pages, toolkits, social media graphics, incentives and other tools they need to succeed.
If a team chooses not to take advantage of this day and later asks for a large increase in the operating budget, we must factor in their lack of participation in a day dedicated to raising funds. We also like to show the community that club sports teams contribute to the university ecosystem beyond just wins and losses by being good citizens and representing the campus in a positive light.
Conclusion
As higher education continues to evolve and competition for students intensifies, campus recreation professionals are uniquely positioned to demonstrate value. By highlighting participation trends, assessment data and student outcomes within club sports programs, recreation departments can play a meaningful role in recruitment and retention strategies.
