900 Entrants, a €10,000 Target and a Safety Upgrade
A volunteer committee is running a charity 5 km on a closed 2.5 km loop of public park road. They expect 900 entrants at €15 each, and a local company has guaranteed €4,000 sponsorship. Budgeted costs are: insurance €650, road closure and steward signage €1,400, medical cover (two first aiders) €900, ten portable toilets €500, water and refreshments €350, printing and marketing €300, prizes €400 and chip timing €1,800 - €6,300 in total. The committee has promised the charity €10,000. Three weeks out, only 210 entries have been received. At the same meeting, the safety officer asks for an extra €1,600 for two additional first aiders with an AED-equipped bike, four more toilets and two extra stewards at the park-road junction. The race director wants to keep the chip timing because it will 'attract the club runners'.
1. Calculate the break-even number of entries on the budget as it stands, and the number of entries needed to hit the €10,000 target. Then assess the position at 210 entries.
Read the worked answer
Break-even Each entry contributes €15. Guaranteed sponsorship is €4,000. Break-even entries = (€6,300 − €4,000) ÷ €15 = 153.3, so 154 entries.
Entries needed for the €10,000 promise 15n + 4,000 − 6,300 = 10,000 → 15n = 12,300 → n = 820 entries.
Position at 210 entries
- Income: 210 × €15 = €3,150, plus €4,000 = €7,150.
- Surplus: €7,150 − €6,300 = €850, against a promise of €10,000.
That is the important number: break-even is not the test, the target is. The committee is roughly 610 entries short of its commitment with three weeks to go - the hardest three weeks, because entries usually arrive in the last ten days, but not usually quadrupling.
What that implies
- Most costs (insurance, road closure, signage, toilets) are committed before the day, so cancelling recovers little; the event must go ahead and be made to work.
- Options: a targeted marketing push through clubs, schools and workplaces; on-the-day entries with a hard cap set by the safety assessment, not by optimism; cutting prizes and printing; and finding a sponsor to cover chip timing or dropping it.
- Report to the charity early with a realistic figure. A surprise shortfall after the event damages the relationship far more than an honest interim number.
2. Advise the committee on the safety officer's €1,600 request versus the chip timing. Show the financial effect of your recommendation.
Read the worked answer
Fund the safety upgrade and drop the chip timing.
The reasoning
- Duty of care and insurance conditions come first. The public liability cover and the road closure permission will both assume first-aid provision proportionate to the number of participants. Two first aiders for 900 people on a 2.5 km loop with a single vehicle access point is thin, and a mass-start fun run mixes experienced club runners with first-timers - trips, collisions and a middle-aged cardiac event are exactly the incidents this cover exists for. If the insurer's conditions are not met, the committee's personal exposure is not a hypothetical.
- Must-have versus nice-to-have. Chip timing is a marketing and results feature. Its absence does not injure anyone; its presence cannot be defended if someone collapses at 4 km with one first aider on the far side of the loop.
- The numbers make the decision easy. Chip timing costs €1,800, which is 120 entrants' worth of margin - it is not free, it is 120 runners.
Financial effect
- Drop chip timing: costs fall to €4,500. Entries needed for €10,000: 15n = 10,500 → 700.
- Add the €1,600 safety upgrade: costs become €6,100. Entries needed for €10,000: 15n = 12,100 → 807.
- Keeping chip timing and refusing the upgrade needed 820 entries.
So the safe option is also the cheaper option: 807 entries rather than 820. Present it that way to the race director - this is not safety versus the charity's income, it is safety plus a lower target. If he still wants chip timing, the answer is a sponsor for it by name, not the charity's money.
3. List the checks you would sign off before the start gun, and explain what each one prevents.
Read the worked answer
Documentation
- Road closure order and Garda/road authority permission in hand, with the signed route map - an unsigned closure means runners on open roads with traffic.
- Insurance certificate naming the event, confirming participant cover and stating the minimum first-aid requirement - this tells you whether your medical cover is compliant or merely conventional.
On the course
- Written risk assessment with a named safety officer, an incident reporting procedure and a signed assembly point for emergency vehicles - so an ambulance is not stuck behind a bollard while someone tries to find a steward who knows the access code.
- Steward numbers and a briefing covering the park gates and the park-road junction, with hi-vis and a check that everyone has been fed and watered.
- A sweep marshal at the back of the field, so the last participant is not alone and unnoticed.
- Water at about 2.5 km and at the finish; kilometre markers and signage at every turn.
At the start
- Participant cap set by the risk assessment, not by hope. If on-the-day entries are allowed, the cap is enforced at the registration desk.
- Wave or staggered starts if the field is large and mixed-ability, to reduce the bunching that causes falls in the first 400 m.
- A briefing that says plainly: this is not a race for most of you, keep left, and if you feel chest pain or dizziness, stop and find a steward.
Each check exists to convert a foreseeable failure into a managed one.