YOUTH EMPOWERMENT & CONFLICT TRANSFORMATION THROUGH SPORTS:

The challenge of evaluating the success of youth & sports programs around the world
AnnMarie Fitzhenry
SIT PIM 72

A Capstone Paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for a Master

of Arts in Peacebuilding and Conflict Transformation at SIT Graduate Institute in
Brattleboro, Vermont, USA.
Capstone Seminar: May, 2014
Advisor: John Ungerleider

i
 CONSENT TO USE OF CAPSTONE
I hereby grant permission for World Learning to publish my capstone on its website and in any
of its digital/electronic collections, and to reproduce and transmit my CAPSTONE
ELECTRONICALLY. I understand that World Learning’s websites and digital collections are
publicly available via the Internet. I agree that World Learning is NOT responsible for any
unauthorized use of my capstone by any third party who might access it on the Internet or
otherwise.

Student Name: AnnMarie Fitzhenry Date: May 2, 2014

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

CONTENT PAGE NUMBERS

TITLE PAGE………………………………………………………………………..i

CONSENT TO USE………………………………………………………………..ii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS……………………………………………………..iv

ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………..5

PREFACE…………………………………………………………………………..6

INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………..7-9

CONTEXT……………………………………………………………………...9-32

CHAPTER 1: SPORTS, PLAY, & SDP…………………………………9-17

CHAPTER 2: SDP AND CONFLICT TRANSFORAMTION………...17-18
CHAPTER 3: YOUTH DEVELOPMENT.............................................19-28
CHAPTER 4: MONITORING & EVALUATION…………………….28-32

RESEARCH/PRACTITIONER INQUIRY DESIGN………………………...33-36

PRESENTATION & ANALYSIS OF DATA………………………………...36-45

CONCLUSIONS…………………………………………...............................45-46

BIBLIOGRAPHY……………………………………………………………..47-49

APPENDIX A…………………………………………………………………......50

APPENDIX B……………………………………………………………………..51

iii
 ABBREVIATIONS

CYE Critical Youth Empowerment

FIFA Fédération Internationale de Football Association

(International Federation and Association of Football)

IOC International Olympic Committee

M&E Monitoring and Evaluation

SDC Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation

SDP Sports for Development and Peace

SDP IWG Sports for Development and Peace International Working Group

UNOSDP United Nations Office of Sports for Development and Peace

WACO World Affairs Council of Oregon

iv
 ABSTRACT
In a world rife with conflict and violence, sports are one of the few transcultural activities

that maintain a worldwide popularity and naturally bring people together as a team. Because of

this inherent interest around the world the past decade has seen a significant escalation of

grassroots sports for development and peace (SDP) programs and governmental funding to

support them. These programs use sports as a way to empower young people and teach conflict

management skills, while simultaneously engaging the community surrounding them. This paper

will focus specifically on the following research question to address a challenge that has emerged

in the field: How is success defined and measured by international sports and peace programs

that empower youth?

First, this paper contextualizes the research question in the relevant fields of SDP,

Conflict Transformation, Youth Development, and Monitoring and Evaluation. The benefits of

SDP program will be aligned with Critical Youth Empowerment theory as well as conflict

management skills valuable to youth. Finally, primary research will be presented including three

unstructured interviews with Mercy Corps, The World Affairs Council of Oregon, and Partners

of the Americas in order to compare and contrast how each international organization addresses

the challenges of measuring success and impact. Conclusions of this research include the value

of creative approaches and the need for specific goals and objectives. These conclusions and

other information obtained will hopefully add to field literature and contribute various best

practices and lessons learned that other organizations and practitioners can benefit from.

Key words: sports, SDP, youth, conflict transformation, monitoring & evaluation

5
“Sport has the power to change the world. It has the power to inspire, it has the power to unite
people in a way that little else does. It speaks to youth in a language they understand. Sport can
create hope, where once there was only despair. It is more powerful than governments in
breaking down racial barriers. It laughs in the face of all types of discrimination.”

-Nelson Mandela

6
 Introduction

In a world rife with conflict and violence, sports are one of the few transcultural activities

that maintain a worldwide popularity and naturally bring people together as a team. Even in a

post-apartheid South Africa where tensions were extremely high, Nelson Mandela used the

Springbok professional rugby team, formerly a symbol of the white Afrikaners, to unite all South

Africans (Wolff, 2011). Sport can serve as an instrument to provide children and adolescents

(especially those directly affected by violence) access to pedagogically supervised programs in

which not only the pleasure and enjoyment of exercise and games are conveyed but also

humanitarian and social values (Schaub, 2006). The use of sports to advocate for social justice

and human rights is not a new concept, but the recent increase over the last decade in sports

programs that empower youth in an effort to transform various international conflicts suggest the

new era of such a role.

Throughout my work at both the Youth Leadership Programs through World Learning

and at the International Visitors Program of the World Affairs Council of Oregon, I noticed this

emerging trend within the field of using sports as a tool to empower young people. I was even

surprised to learn that for the past decade there has been a specific branch of the UN called the

UNOSDP dedicated to this exact cause. Many of the organizations that work with youth and/or

international development have a program that includes sports (Sport and Peace, Mercy Corps,

UNICEF, Women Win, Right to Play, Peace Players Intl, to name a few). Even USAID and the

State Department fund entire programs dedicated purely to utilizing the power of sports 1. In my

research I have discovered that not only is there a strong argument for the connection of

1
Such prominent efforts include The SportsUnited: International Sports Programming Initiative (ISPI) with themes
on: Sport for Social Change, Sport and Health, and Sport and Disability. Visit http://eca.state.gov/programs-
initiatives/sports-diplomacy/sports-grants for more information.

7
peacebuilding and sports in youth programs, but that there is a large gap in the organization and

evaluation of SDP programs. In 2005, Dr. Robert Henley of the Swiss Academy for

Development said “There is a compelling need for more research in the area of sport and

development, in order to validate that the psychological sport programs are truly being helpful

for children and how (Kvalsund, 2009)”. According to Amy Farkas, a former sport-for-

development specialist with UNICEF, “It’s a lot easier to simply justify your program’s

existence than to do the hard work of justifying the impact of the intervention. That’s why all

sport-for-development programs need rigorous monitoring and evaluation” (as cited in Wolff,

2011). Even in his detailed analysis of the historical context of SDP, Richard Giulianotti wrote

“researchers have yet to move past case studies to produce more analytical and generalized work

(2010)”. Various literature reviews by the SDP International Working Group (IWG) field have

stated that further research in the area of sport for peace is needed to guide or shape

programming and at a USAID panel discussion on measuring the Impact of Sports on Youth

Development, one Senior Alliance Officer said, “our panelists offered perspectives that show not

only the impact of the work on the communities that they serve but also helped bridge the gap

between observed impact and evidence-based outcomes that continue to challenge this industry

(Doherty, 2011)”. The need for evaluation of SDP programs has been a well-documented topic

and this paper seeks to address this gap; the specific challenge of evaluation being the

methodology. What specific tools should be used for evaluation either short term or long term to

guide these programs? And how are these tools decided upon? It can vary greatly as program

objectives are very diverse, but building relationships and integrating values within the sport

should be the focus, not the sport itself (Rookwood, 2011).

8
 This paper will focus specifically on the following research question: How is success

defined and measured by international sports and peace programs that empower youth? First, the

research question will be contextualized in the separate disciplines of Sports for Development

and Peace (SDP), Conflict Transformation, Youth Development, and Monitoring & Evaluation.

Then, after verifying the need for this research question within each of these fields this paper will

align the benefits of SDP programs with the dimensions of the Critical Youth Empowerment

Theory and necessary conflict management skills. Monitoring & Evaluation will be the last

chapter of contextual literature analysis in order to supplement its application to the other three

fields explored in the previous chapters. Finally, this paper will present the methodologies and

findings of the primary information collected via three semi-structured interviews with Partners

of the Americas, The World Affairs Council of Oregon, and Mercy Corps. Both a contextual

background in relative literature and primary research via interviews will be conducted so as to

gain relevant information and develop conclusions rooted in both theory and practice.

Context
Chapter 1: SDP, Sports, and Play

Before addressing the challenge of monitoring and evaluating sports programs it is

necessary to first contextualize and define sports within international development. The

UNOSDP describes sport as:

“first and foremost a fundamental right for all people. Sport is far more than a
luxury or a form of entertainment. It is much more than winning medals and
scoring. Access to and participation in sport and physical activity are human
rights and are essential for individuals of all ages to lead healthy and fulfilling
lives. And by ‘sport’ we mean all forms of physical activity that contribute to
physical fitness, mental well-being, and social interaction. These include play,
recreation, organized, casual or competitive sport, and indigenous sports and/or
games. Sport provides a forum to learn skills such as discipline, confidence, and

9
 leadership, and it teaches core principles such as tolerance, cooperation, respect,
and the value of effort (UNOSDP, 2014)”.

Yet, there are many strong criticisms of sports being used for development and peace initiatives.

The use of modern sports has no doubt been a catalyst for violent conflicts. Such

examples include the 100 hour war after a soccer match between Honduras and El Salvador in

1969, the rioting of a football match between Croatia and Serbia that foreshadowed the

Yugoslavian war, and the increase of tensions in Northern Ireland through separate football clubs

for Unionist-Protestant and Irish-Catholic communities (Giulianotti, 2010). The issue of

hooliganism and extremist fans rivaling against opposing fans and players is a very real concern,

as well. Furthermore, sports were an important tool used during European colonization to

establish social order. Not only were the current standards of soccer, which were established in

England, used to colonize in Asia and Africa, but baseball was also used in a similar neocolonial

capacity in Latin America by the United States (Guttman, 1994 as cited in Giulianotti, 2010) and

unfortunately in many ways this is still occurring. At SDP international conferences, delegates

from the developing world complain about Westerners who parachute in with things that aren’t

wanted nor needed (Wolff, 2011) and much of the current evaluation used shows signs of top-

down Western-led exercises, which displays culturally insensitive traits whilst ignoring broader

epistemological issues associated with programs like ensuring the gender and disability concerns

are addressed (SDP IWG, 2006 as cited in Levermore, 2011).

But, all of these criticisms are adaptations and are not inherent to how the game itself is

played. Basketball is still basketball if there are no screaming fans fighting in a local bar, but if

players do not follow the rules and all of them foul out, the game ends and suddenly spectators

have no one to cheer for. The socio-historical context should absolutely be included as part of

SDP program design, but it simply means that a different sport that is appropriate to the local

10
community or different approach to SDP altogether should be explored. In Jerusalem, multiple

sports programs exist within the city some of which use soccer, some of which use basketball

(Wolff, 2011). If sports motivation can be used to propel conflict and division, then why not re-

direct the significance of sports and play, and centralize the argument on the essential skills and

characteristics needed to play the game: dedication, communication, analytical skills and

feedback, self-confidence, respect for team mates, aggression and determination without

violence, etc.? In spite of these critiques there are also many historical examples of sports teams

used as a method to achieve peace and cooperation. For example, the international boycott of

sporting with South Africa directly led to the apartheid movement, and the Olympic Truce

established in the 1920’s was reestablished in 1992 to ensure peace. The positive effect and

popularity of sports teams is further verified by an entire genre of historical fiction and

nonfiction films and books in American pop culture devoted to the motivational and inspirational

stories of teammates coming together to overcome adversity. Sports have always been a

metaphor for relations, which is why the guidance of sports programs is essential.

The issue of having such a broad definition of sports is that it creates the challenge of

practitioners “not tying into more established development literature, and conducting sufficient

research into the efficacy of SDP programs (Scrag, 2012)”. A team that plays cricket is not the

same as a sports program that uses cricket to teach conflict management in order to achieve

community development. To effectively use sport as a peace building tool and control the impact

practitioners must know what they are doing. The implementation and how sport is being

preserved is the key not sport alone (Kvalsund, 2009). The history of colonialism and its

manipulation of sport means that SDP programs have that much more responsibility to respond

11
to the ethical and moral implications of the host community’s historical context. Over the last

decade the UN has been at the forefront of modeling such responsibility.

In 2001, the United Nations specifically appointed a Secretary-General to lead the new

UN Office of Sports for Development and Peace (UNOSDP, 2013). Consequently, the year 2005

was declared by the UN as the International Year of Sport and Physical Education and the SDP

International Working Group (SDP IWG) was established to pursue action plans to advocate for

policy changes towards the support of sports programs. The Secretary-General and the SDP IWG

focus and advocate for the positive role of SDP and not only confirm that should sports program

be used as an effective tool to reach the UN’s 8 Millennium Development Goals, but advocate

that the efficacy of these programs relies on articulating the purpose and focus of a given

program.

The SDP IWG focuses on five different thematic areas: 1) Sport and Child & Youth

Development 2) Sport and Gender 3) Sport and Peace 4) Sport and Persons with Disabilities 5)

Sport and Health (UNOSDP, 2013). Sport for peace, the third thematic group under the

UNOSDP, is often called the ‘slow child’ because it is a new field that meets progress in tiny

steps. These thematic areas can be combined if appropriate, but can only be achieved through the

flexibility of sports and a large, inclusive definition that allows for the use of any game or

activity that can successfully teach participants the core objectives including the use of creative

drills in practice. “It is clear, therefore, that although officially recognized soccer rules should be

applied in the majority of sessions, there are occasions in which implementing drills and games

where these rules are not applied can prove useful (Rookwood, 2011).” A variety of drills and

aspects of the game can be adjusted in order to fit the needs of the context. For example, referees

can be removed so that players can be encouraged to self-regulate as well as monitor their own

12
substitutions and provide limits so that equity is always present. The competitive element can be

high if the goal is to distract from life and harness focus, self-worth, and determination, or it can

be very low to provide as much inclusion as possible; public tournaments could be held so that

community members could watch the children of their community play, and perhaps even

participate in a variety of ways- be it selling concessions, or having an adult/family match for

adults to be involved directly. It depends on the philosophy of the program which is why the

flexibility of sports will only reach its optimum level if the sports program has a clear

understanding of its goals and objectives on a macro and micro scale. A drill with the objective

of improving communication among players will be different than a drill to practice strategy and

analyzing the game while playing it; a program in a post-war conflict seeking to bring conflicting

communities together will have different objectives than a program that faces a high

unemployment rate leading to young people joining gangs and street violence.

Although sports can be adapted to fit objectives, it can still be challenging to measure the

impact and progress of the program. “Various nongovernmental organization officials have also

commented on the difficulty of persuading most potential donors that the efficacy of projects is

hard to measure reliably. Funding is more secure when direct personal relations are cemented

between individual donors and SDP officials (Giulianotti, 2010).” With the UNOSDP and SDP

IWG working to build relationships and partnerships with governments and corporations and

advocate for the efficacy of SDP programs there is significant progress being made. Today the

field known generally as Sport for Development and Peace (SDP) attracts growing support from

foundations and corporations, while governments and international agencies are eager to serve as

partners to groups on the ground. As the effectiveness of programs is more precisely measured,

SDP’s value as a tool for good is becoming more widely acknowledged (Wolff, 2011). However,

13
the obstacle of satisfying funding requirements of individual grants is still an obstacle for many

organizations because impact is experienced differently across programs. “It is important to note

that empowering processes occur at multiple levels (individual, organizations, community) and

each level will have related outcomes. This is complicated by the fact that empowerment is not

experienced in the same way by individuals, organizations, and communities. Therefore, the

development of a global measure of empowerment is not an appropriate goal (Zimmerman, 2000

as cited in Jennings, 2006).” The question is if empowerment cannot quantitatively be measured

then how do organizations prove the efficacy and success of their programs so that funding and

support will continue? For this reason, information has been collected from current existing

literature and directly from current practitioners in how funding requirements and balanced with

the benefits of SDP programs.

The table below summarizes the ten most important benefits of SDP programs according

to the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) Conflict Prevention and

Transformation Division (Schaub, 2006) each of which has been supported with field literature.

These top ten benefits include: improvement of general well-being (intrinsic value of sports);

activity and distraction; experiencing self-esteem through the furthering of skills and capabilities;

exemplary training for reassurance and reconciliation in conflict situations; exemplary training

for the right dosage of aggressiveness; the feedback culture of sports strengthens the ability to

communicate; experience of belonging and of identity within the group; sport also mobilizes

spectators, the neighborhood and the village community; sport as a means for increasing

awareness, for disseminating information and for maintaining values; sport as a means of

communication that goes beyond the boundaries of language, gender and social class. These

benefits have all been previously referenced in this chapter and while the list is certainly not

14
exhaustive, the verification of this list begins to connect SDP programs into the field of

Peacebuilding and Conflict Transformation by exposing the greater themes and significance.

Table 1- Field Literature supporting the Most Important Benefits of SDP

Most Important Benefits Literature Support

1. Improvement of general well-being (intrinsic “Sport and games integrates an important part
value of sports) of the human being, which often gets forgotten
in peace building: the body and its emotions.
Sustainable conflict transformation means that
you address also the participants’ feelings
(Kvalsund, 2009).”
2. Activity and distraction “Sport—and particularly action sports (e.g.
surfing, skateboarding, mountain biking,
climbing)—may seem trivial pursuits in the
wake of a natural disaster. However, in the
weeks and months following a natural disaster,
as individuals and communities attempt to re-
establish familiar lifestyles and routines, sport
and physical activity can play an important role
in individual recovery and community
resilience… Participation also enables some to
regain a sense of normalcy (sportanddev.org,
2014).”
3. Experiencing self-esteem through the “Set high expectations, but also show
furthering of skills and capabilities compassion, creativity, and patience (Shenk,
2010).”
4. Exemplary training for reassurance and “Sport and games offer the space for joy, fun,
reconciliation in conflict situations creativity, and happiness, but also for rage,
sadness and frustration. The latter emotions
can be worked on by the coach (if necessary)
and be transformed (Kvalsund, 2009).”

“The regulatory component [of soccer] is a

useful method of disciplining players, as the
requirement to adjust to rules in certain
contexts can positively impact the likelihood of
players behaving appropriately in social
settings (Rookwood, 2008)”.
5. Exemplary training for the right dosage of “‘Conflict prevention’, preventing conflicts, is
aggressiveness meaningless. But ‘violence prevention’,
preventing violence, is extremely meaningful
and beneficial (Galtung, 2004).”
6. The feedback culture of sports strengthens “The feedback in sports is usually immediate
the ability to communicate and visible-does the ball go into the basket?-so

15
 that the athlete can change or repeat what she's
doing and figure out how to get better
(sportfordev.org).” Reflecting on individual
skills and the team’s skills teaches youth to
communicate and analyze.
7. Experience of belonging and of identity “When societies are more complex, when
within the group individuals have multiple avenues for meeting
needs for inclusion and distinctiveness,
intergroup comparisons along any particular
division are likely to be less competitive or
critical to member identities. Under those
conditions, the positive benefits of distinctive
in-group identities may be attained without the
costs of intergroup hostility and conflict
(Ashmore et al., 2001)”.
8. Sport also mobilizes spectators, the “Healing requires proximity that touches the
neighborhood and the village community web of community life, which includes both
the recent events and the lived histories of the
communities (Lederarch, 2005)”.
9. Sport as a means for increasing awareness, “Although it is often discussed in a negative
for disseminating information and for manner, hardship can be an important
maintaining values procedure one is required to go through in
order to facilitate image reconstruction. During
the F4P project, coaches often tried to cause a
conflict situation during coaching sessions so
that it could utilized as a “teachable moment”
to help the participants learn about positive
means of conflict resolution while in a safe and
controlled environment (Rookwood, 2008).”
10. Sport as a means of communication that “Play may be used as a form and forum for
goes beyond the boundaries of language, human interaction to enhance the joy that is
gender and social class experienced universally- when a truly human
connection is made among and between
individuals and groups (Yalowitz, 1995).”

The quotes used in the right column to support each of the ten benefits stem from experts

across their respective fields in SDP, Youth Development, and Conflict Transformation and have

been added to further authenticate these benefits. Each of these authors have contributed works

that will help contextual SDP programs within Youth Development and Conflict Transformation

in the subsequent chapters so that primary research can specifically focus on the challenge of

evaluating programs with applicable objectives. By creating Table 1 to supplement the original

16
list created by the SDC’s Conflict Prevention and Transformation Division SDP programs can

begin to be contextualized and depicted as a valuable role with Conflict Transformation.

Chapter 2: Sports and Conflict Transformation

Significant contributions have been made in aligning the SDP field with peacebuilding

and conflict transformation. In Lea-Howarth’s dissertation on Sport and Conflict (2006) he

compared the contribution of sports programs for peace to the theoretical frameworks of John

Paul Lederarch and Johan Galtung with a specific focus on the areas of building social networks,

addressing cultural violence, and the 3R’s of Resolution, Reconciliation, and Reconstruction. He

concluded that while sports and peace programs are not a panacea for a holistic conflict

transformation, they are very valuable in these specific areas and should be utilized with

contextual understanding and creativity. Mercy Corps, a leading international organization in

youth in conflict, has also found that sports provide a strong incentive for youth to participate in

conflict management trainings. “Youth in Liberia were much more likely to remember lessons

they learned through sports and were much more likely to finish the program if there was a

sports component (Mercy Corps Best Practices, 2011).” This natural buy-in of both young

participants and the greater community is one of the strongest arguments for why sports and

peace can successfully work hand in hand. Soccer, specifically, “is simple, relatively cheap and

easy to organize and manage, with minimal problematic cultural variations apparent. Soccer

serves as a team sport, which encourages human contact, engagement, and bonding, which are

important in order to avoid hatred and violence (Rookwood, 2011)”. People from conflicting

groups are often segregated from one another, having few relationships across conflict lines. In

situations where youth were born into conflicts, they may never have met someone from the

opposing group(s). Additionally, the majority of their information about others comes through
17
propaganda rather than personal experience (Mercy Corps Best Practices, 2011). Stereotypes can

be broken through repeated interactions of mixed sports teams with mentor and adult supervision

allowing an opportunity to build relationships. Furthermore, there is often a certain awkward and

distrustful tension between parties that have never or rarely interacted. By focusing on the

instructions of playing a sport or drill rather than putting pressure directly on the interactions

themselves, teambuilding will naturally develop and the experiences will bond them as they

achieve success and failures together. Suffice it to say, there is a presence of extreme popularity

in sports for both spectators and players in almost every culture around the world. It is in this

strategic role within global civil society that sports can be used as one tool in a holistic approach

to teach the next generation about conflict transformation and peacebuilding SDP programs are

using sports as a socio-cultural tool to promote reconciliation, begin teaching conflict prevention,

while simultaneously promoting health issues, gender equality, education, address economic

issues, and counter racism, stereotypes and intolerance (Giulianotti, 2010). Effective coaching in

team sports can simultaneously address interpersonal and community relationships through

teambuilding activities and drills, while also begin teaching new conflict management and

prevention material to redefine what it means to work together and achieve common goals so

long as the program is clear on their objectives and goals within the community.

Within Conflict Transformation the role of relationship building and interdependence is

critical. After all, the basic definition of a conflict, according to Johan Galtung, is an

incompatibility of goals pursued by two or more parties (2004), and the pursuit of those

incompatible goals forces a competing relationship between the parties. But what happens when

these multiple parties are literally put on the same team working towards a shared goal that is

separate from the roots of the original conflict? Humans are social creatures by nature and

18
having a safe environment where people can interact is half the battle. “While we tend to think of

achievement as an individual phenomenon, no human is an island. At its essence, humanity is a

social and competitive enterprise. We learn from one another, share from one another, and

constantly compare and compete with one another for affection, accomplishment, and resources

(Shenk, 2010).” In South Africa, there is the concept of Ubuntu: I am because we are. “Today

sporting Ubuntu extends from the street kid in Rio who, thanks to boxing, is transformed from

avenging tough into potential Olympian; to the African AIDS orphan who, thanks to soccer, has

a better chance of living long enough to raise children of her own; to the Arab girl in West

Jerusalem who, thanks to basketball, feels bound to the fortunes of a Jewish Israeli player in the

NBA (Wolff, 2011).” Sport by its very nature brings people together from all walks of life and

connects them together. If any team wants to win they must come together as a group with

individual strengths, mutual respect, and communication to score a common goal which is a

perfect metaphor to support and develop a culture of peace that supports youth empowerment

even off the field.

Chapter 3: SDP & Youth Development

Today over half of the world’s population of 7 billion is under the age of 30 and in many

developing areas struggling with conflict (such as Nigeria, Palestine, and Afghanistan) more than

sixty percent of the population in under the age of 25 (Nakana et al., 2013). There are more

young people in the world than ever before and they often do not have many constructive

avenues to influence the environment around them. Participation in a sports program can help to

highlight democracy and show how to incorporate multiple opinions into political policy and in a

sports context (Mercy Corps Best Practices, 2011). The sooner young people are empowered to

19
fix the critical issues facing the world the sooner solutions will be developed instead of violence

and apathy.

Through a participatory research study, Jennings et al (2006) determined that there are six

key dimensions for critical youth empowerment and that “it is important to note the interrelated,

dynamic nature of the six dimensions of CYE”. These key dimensions include a safe

environment, meaningful participation, equitable power-sharing with adults, critical reflection,

participation in sociopolitical processes, and empowerment on both an individual and community

level. These dimensions can be directly applied to any sports program for development and

peace.

1. Welcoming and safe environment. In sports programs, in youth development, and in

life it is inevitably that people will make mistakes. Learning takes place when one learns the

lessons of their mistakes, but this can only happen if an environment is created where chances

can be taken and mistakes are processed through rather than internalized. Daniel Yalowitz

describes his guidelines for developing a welcoming and safe environment as The Law of the

Seven C’s of Play: caring (thoughtful), control (defend the rules & players), creative

(vulnerability), connected (bonded/interdependent), cooperative (use of sportsmanship),

collaborative (use of teamwork), and community (connecting families and community members

to the program as well) (1995). This is arguably the most important part of developing any youth

program or sports program. Participants must feel safe and respected in order for any teaching

and relationship building to take place.

Another critical element for the success of sports programs is inclusion of everyone in the

community. This can prove difficult because one of the limitations of sports programs is that not

everyone likes sports. “The Western phenomenon known as “choosing sides” occurred when

20
most of us as children experienced our first hurts and humiliations around being the last and

penultimate person chosen to one team or another by ‘bigger and better’ team captains

(Yalowitz, 1995).” However, creating a safe environment of respect and inclusion and even

deemphasizing the competitive nature can seek to recruit more youth in participating that may

otherwise have opted out. Even if there are youth that still chose not to participate, the doors

should always remain not just open, but welcoming should they change their mind. Today, more

and more steps are being taken to add more inclusion to sports as a whole. “In March 2012, the

International Football Association Board (IFAB) decided to allow women to wear safe

headscarves in FIFA-regulated matches and competitions. In the same month the International

Valley Federation (FIVB) also changed their dress code rule for beach volley players. Players

can now wear shorts of maximum length 3cm above the knee with sleeved or sleeveless tops or a

full body suit (UNOSDP, 2013).” This is a great example of how a welcoming and safe sports

environment can be created by including cultural sensitivity.

2. Meaningful participation and engagement. Similar to the idea of inclusion, a

program is only as successful as its willing participants. Engagement in every activity, practice,

and game has to be meaningful and genuine. Authentic participation is a representation of the

commitment a participant has made to their team and the program. Therefore, in a team sport

where players are interdependent with their teammates it is important to ensure that everyone is

fully participating so that their efforts are making the team stronger. “One way to understand

cycles of violence and protracted conflict is to visualize them as a narrative broken (Lederarch,

2005)”. When players meaningfully contribute to their team they are continuing their narrative

and writing their story, but it takes effort and thought to get the pen to move. Teams write their

stories together from different perspectives and if a few players refuse to fully engage it can

21
unravel the program and make other participants hold back as well. The narrative each

participant brings to the first day of the program and to every practice must be respected and

taken in account by developing a safe environment, but then it must be built upon by gently

pushing their comfort zone and continuing that narrative.

3. Equitable power-sharing between youth and adults. This third dimension can often

be culturally sensitive, but beneficial and adaptable none the less. “Inclusion of youth in project

design and implementation provides youth with the self-esteem, connection to peers and

communities, and a positive self-identity, all of which reduce vulnerability to joining violent

movement. The most successful youth programs with the guidance and support of adult mentors

(Mercy Corps Best Practices, 2011).” This does not imply that youth should be in charge of the

programs or be making administrative decisions. The emphasis here is on power-sharing and

modeling a community of diverse opinions. Creating leadership positions where players and

participants can state their wants and needs is a critical part of teaching them to do that exact

process in the real world. One example is the use of team captains as team representatives.

Certain decisions can be made democratically as a team, what to do for the last ten minutes of

practice, for example, and leadership positions can be built in as well, such as captains talking to

a referee on the field about a debatable call or participating in the coin toss. Adults must be

willing to share decision making power in order to truly practice what they preach and prepare

these young people for active participation and decision making in the future.

4. Critical reflection of interpersonal and sociopolitical processes. As previously

stated, it is crucial to reach participants of a sports program in terms of their own lived

experiences because every day they enter the program with unique skills, experiences and

knowledge. “Critical pedagogies propose that it is important to assess each student’s historicity

22
and build upon the wonderful backgrounds, legacies, skills, and knowledge students bring with

them (Souto-Manning, 2010).” The only way for connections to be drawn between skills learned

in a curriculum and know-how participants already have is via critical reflection, not only on

relevancies to their own knowledge and experiences, but reflection on greater sociopolitical

processes, as well. For example, a player may quickly realize that the environment they practice

basketball in is inclusive and supportive, but the political arena that makes important decisions

that affect society at large is often quite the opposite. Is this how it should be? Is this how it is

done elsewhere? Critical reflection will lead to questions and more learning as they answer their

own questions.

5. Participation in sociopolitical processes to affect change. In any conflict, a person or

group of people who feel that their basic needs are not being respected and understood will find a

way to make their voice heard and it is the same for young people. “Youth who do not feel

represented or supported by any political party are two- to three-times more likely to join violent

movements, voluntarily or involuntarily (Mercy Corps Best Practices, 2011).” Critical reflection

of sociopolitical processes is important, but the next step is to engage young people and teach

them to participate so that change and conflicts can be managed before they lead to violence.

Giulianotti (2010) argues that “agencies running peacemaking SDP projects must engage more

consistently with new social movements and relatively radical governments and community-

based organizations, particularly Global South institutions based in conflict or post-conflict

zones”. Many programs that provide youth programs fall short in reducing violence because they

neglect other factors that drive youth towards violence such as unemployment (Mercy Corps

Best Practices, 2011). SDP programs and critical youth empowerment must directly connect

learnings to everyday life through experiential participation in the decisions that affect young

23
people. One potential solution could be developing a participatory curriculum with a sports

component that empowers young people to address current issues they face in their community

and to learn and join those political processes. Many sports programs, such as the A Ganar!

program at Partners of the Americas, often couple sports with job training or an educational

curriculum. Grassroots Soccer, for example, uses activities with soccer balls to explain

HIV/AIDS and the consequences of having many sexual partners (Wolff, 2011) “The impetus

that drives restorative approaches is not one that awaits the policy and decision from the highest

level, nor assumes that its particular action provides a comprehensive response to system wide

problems. Rather these efforts paint a different canvas of social change, which depends on the

practice of accessibility, reconnecting people in actual relationships, and local responsibility

(Lederarch, 2005)”. If young people are being taught they can make a difference then they must

be taught how exactly to actively participate and be part of the change they wish to see.

6. Integrated individual and community level empowerment. One of the greatest

benefits of sports is the motivation and enthusiasm shared by not just players and participants,

but by spectators and families as well. There is a reason that college and high school sports are

just as popular as professional sports. Fans feel a strong relationship and connection to the

players and experience failures and losses with these players as they watch; they are not

distanced by the pedestal of a professional and elite standing. As young people learn and

transform, spectators and fans will too. Families of players have the potential to positively

impact more people in the community that may not have otherwise been supportive or interested.

“If these families and communities are fully aware of potential activities and see them as

important and safe and not intended to disrupt social structures, then young people will be much

more able to participate and fully embrace the proposed objectives. Furthermore, endorsement of

24
youth activities by the community enhances respect for and self-esteem of young people. These

factors will lead to greater sustainability for the projects in the long run (Mercy Corps Best

Practices, 2011).” Their experiences and involvement will be different than the players, but their

involvement can lead to empowerment on various levels.

This is why SDP efforts are illegitimate unless dictated and planned by locals rather than

international groups (Schrag, 2012). The community engagement is not only ethically necessary

to stay accountable to beneficiaries of the program; the lack of engagement will undermine the

future of the program. Much of the violence in the world today is exacerbated by heightened

social identities that define themselves as ‘us versus them’ (Ashmore et al., 2001). Sports

programs that are not well thought out and contextualized in the local community can contribute

to the conflict, rather than transform it. However, by creating new social identities as valued

members of a sport they enjoy, participants can begin to expand the circumstances of the conflict

and therefore become empowered to redefine their role in the community.

With these six dimensions for critical youth empowerment, an additional conceptual

theory according to Schell-Faucon (2001) outlines the following as the personal, social, conflict

management skills that should be taught to youth.

• Self-esteem
• Tolerance of frustration and ambiguity
• Self-awareness, awareness of others and empathy
• Communication and interaction skills
• Awareness of personal and cultural attitudes to conflict behaviors in conflict situations
• Ability to analyze and evaluate conflict
• Practical skills to manage and overcome conflicts

Schell-Faucon argues that youth and education work cuts across various disciplines and should

fall into all fields of activity relevant to conflict transformation (2001). A similar argument is

also made in the SDP field. “In the sports for peace arena, its researchers and advocates may not

25
even be aware of other knowledge bases (Schrag, 2012)”. Clearly, there is a need to strengthen

the intersection of conflict transformation, youth empowerment and SDP.

The following table shows that when the Critical Youth Empowerment theory, the

benefits of SDP according to the SDC used in Table 1, and Schell-Faucon’s basic conflict

management skills are put side by side there is an incredible amount of overlap and similarity.

Each color block corresponds to the general themes that are present and necessary across all

three disciplines. The light blue signifies general safety and acceptance, dark blue signifies self-

esteem, pink is communication & collaboration skills, orange is critical reflection & awareness,

purple is individual and community connections, and brown is specific conflict management

skills. There are obviously several squares that can be placed in more than one category; for

example, in the Personal, Social and Conflict Management skills column “self-awareness,

awareness of others and empathy” can have multiple themes of critical awareness & reflection,

and individual & community connections. Like the 6 dimensions of CYE, there is an interrelated

and dynamic relationship between these themes which goes to show that not only are these fields

very much related in both theory and practice, but that SDP programs hold the potential to

critically empower and transform conflict by purposefully incorporating these skills and

dimensions.

26
Table 2- Themes between SDP, Critical Youth Empowerment, & Conflict Transformation
Personal, Social,
Most Important Benefits of SDP 6 Dimensions of CYE Conflict Management
(SDC) (Jennings et al.) Skills
(Schell-Faucon)
1. Improvement of general well- 1. Welcoming and Safe Self-esteem
being (intrinsic value of sports) Environment
2. Activity and distraction 2. Meaningful participation Tolerance of
and engagement frustration and
ambiguity
3. Experiencing self-esteem 3. Equitable power-sharing Self-awareness,
through the furthering of skills between youth and adults awareness of others
and capabilities and empathy

4. Exemplary training for 4. Critical reflection of Communication and

reassurance and reconciliation in interpersonal and interaction skills
conflict situations sociopolitical processes

5. Exemplary training for the 5. Participation in Awareness of

right dosage of aggressiveness sociopolitical processes to personal and
affect change cultural attitudes to
conflict behaviors in
conflict situations
6. The feedback culture of sports 6. Integrated individual and Ability to analyze
strengthens the ability to community level and evaluate conflict
communicate empowerment

7. Experience of belonging and Practical skills to

of identity within the group manage and
overcome conflicts
8. Sport also mobilizes
spectators, the neighborhood and
the village community

9. Sport as a means for

increasing awareness, for
disseminating information and
for maintaining values

10. Sport as a means of

communication that goes beyond
the boundaries of language,
gender and social class

27
 The overarching themes highlighted in Table 2 expand on Table 1 concerning the

benefits of SDP across the fields of SDP, Youth Development and Conflict Transformation. In

Table 2 the potential role of sports and peace programs is supported by providing connecting

themes and relevance across all three of these theories (and by extension their respective fields of

study); but as always, execution and specific circumstances of a program are critical to evaluate.

Table 2 also shows how many different directions and objectives a sports program can have, as

well as the many adaptations that can be made. Any one of these themes could be the goal of a

sports program, just as the SDP IWG separates into their five different thematic areas: 1) Sport

and Child & Youth Development 2) Sport and Gender 3) Sport and Peace 4) Sport and Persons

with Disabilities 5) Sport and Health (UNOSDP, 2013). Since SDP programs are relevant to

multiple fields of study, there are many options and aspects to consider during their design and

implementation. In order to discover how success is defined and measured these themes need to

be contextualized within the field of Monitoring and Evaluation of international development

programs and more specifically for sports and peace programs.

Chapter 4: Monitoring & Evaluation

Now that context has been developed in SDP programming, Conflict Transformation, and

Youth Development the challenge of monitoring and evaluating these programs can be fully

introduced. First, a general vocabulary and understanding must be developed within the field of

M&E after which limitations and creative approaches will be presented.

The OECD’s definition of monitoring is data collection throughout the life of the project

to track the specific objectives and activities taking place to see if they are going as planned

(2002). Typically, there is no judgment or value system placed on assessments and monitoring,

28
rather the purpose is to gather information about current activities that can potentially contribute

to an evaluation that will assess the implication at a later time. Monitoring is conducted

internally by field staff and is meant to be helpful in successful management rather than a

burden, although it is not always perceived this way.

The definition of evaluation is to determine the project’s worth or significance. There are

three main forms of evaluation: a formative evaluation that focuses on improved performance

during implementation, a summative that focuses on consequences after a program, and a

prospective or ex-ante that measures the value of the future of the project to determine its

validity before it is implemented (Athukorala, 2013). The standards for any evaluation include

relevance, effectiveness, efficacy, impact (both short term and long term), and sustainability.

Organizations are held accountable to these standards primarily by funders who often will

conduct their own evaluation process, or at least define the specific standards by which the

project will be measured in order to continue funding the project. Evaluations can be conducted

periodically, pre-implementation, or post.

There are several general approaches to program evaluation including; logical,

participatory, and critical. Logical frameworks, or logframes, are often criticized as being a top

down approach that are much too rigorous to account for all relevant factors, such as the

reflection of satisfactory interpersonal skills of staff which are vital to these programs. Logical

frameworks focus on outputs and although they hold decision makers of the project accountable

to questions, assumptions, and risks, it is often difficult to adapt a logframe as needs for changes

arise throughout the life of the program (Athukorala, 2013). Participatory methodology collects

data based on the active participation of beneficiaries that are directly or indirectly impacted by

the program in order to develop a more holistic and qualitative understanding of the project. An

29
example is the Rapid Appraisal Method (RAMs) which combines informal discussions, semi-

structured and open interviews, focus groups and direct observation (OCDE, 2002; Levermore,

2011). Criticisms of this method include the inevitable subjectivity of both the interviewer and

the interviewee, the lack of random sampling, and even the continued use of a top-down

approach since evaluators are still in control of the process rather than the impactees. This is why

all M&E plans should include a front-end analysis prior to choosing any method of evaluation. A

front-end analysis includes assessing the context, developing project objectives and activities,

creating a stakeholder analysis, a log frame analysis, a monitoring plan, and developing a project

M&E plan as a managerial tool all of which are prior to project implementation (Athukorala

2013). Essentially, it means gathering as much data as absolutely possibly before any decisions

or plans are implemented, the comprehensive nature of which is frequently affected by the

resource limitation of many organizations.

With these obstacles and criticisms of the various evaluation approaches, practitioners are

often bogged down by the question of how to measure success and impact? When considering

the goals and objectives of the program, what is the best way to prove there is a positive impact

on the beneficiaries of the program, both participants and greater community members?

“Peace education has a long term focus and is undermined by the need to achieve
rapid successes in order to safeguard follow-up funding. This impedes the
development of local initiatives and leads to dependence on and decision-making
by, outside actors. The pressure to achieve quick successes also leads to a focus
on ‘visible and viable’ aspects such as rapid integration into employment. Holistic
approaches need a longer timeframe, and their impact is difficult to quantify
(Schell-Faucon, 2001).”

Funding often requires calculated statistics and outcomes to prove results, but often traditional

monitoring and evaluation techniques are considered too rigid for this field. Outcomes are

30
usually the focus of traditional M&E, ignoring the inputs or general impact in the community,

especially in the long run.

According to Jennings et al, “Development and evaluation of effective community-based

practice and research is a promising and critical opportunity to further the goal of CYE to

promote participatory processes” (2006). In 2012, the UNOSDP held their first Youth

Leadership Programs in Qatar, Germany, and Switzerland bringing youth ages 18-25 from all

over the world to meet with industry leaders to improve and develop their skills in sports for

peacebuilding. The facilitation team led by Right to Play included Liverpool Football Club, the

International Basketball Federation (FIBA), the International Judo Federation (IJF), the

International Table Tennis Federation (ITTF), Kick4life, InspiraSports, Women Win, Project Air

Rwanda, Boxgirls and SwimSports to name a few (UNOSDP, 2013). While these youth

programs were considered a success, it is the follow on projects and “the work after the Camp

which will affect the communities that these youth serve”. The UNOSDP has recognized the

importance of long term data collection in order to measure impact and efficacy. Therefore “the

UNOSDP plans in 2013 to develop a new Monitoring & Evaluation system which will track the

participants after their participation in the Camps and provide support to ensure that the legacy of

these Camps lasts through the years”. In the words of Wilfred Lemke, the current Special

Advisor to the UN Secretary-General on SDP, “I hope that the YLP will develop into a best

practice for how SDP can have a concrete impact and I am confident that the young participants

will become role models and multipliers in their local communities”.

In Levermore’s third article on evaluating sport-for-development M&E approaches

(2011), his research states that considerable evaluation is being conducted by organizations

through a positivistic logframe either by itself or as part of a combined approach that may

31
include participatory methods well. One of the main limitations of monitoring and evaluation

practices is that the majority (if not all of its approaches) are from a western, global north bias.

According to Paulo Freire in The Pedagogy of the Oppressed, “many political and educational

plans have failed because their authors designed them according to their own personal views of

reality, never once taking into account (except as mere objects of their action) the woman/man-

in-a-situation towards whom their program was ostensibly directed (1970).” It is a similar

criticism of M&E; how can youth & sports organizations evaluate the impact their programs

have in the local, host community if their measurement standards by which the impact is

determined are developed from a foreign culture? From another perspective, the need of

evaluation is challenged by many organizations “because the evaluation process can be

expensive, time-consuming, require technical expertise outside of staff, findings arrive too late

and/or go unread, don’t always answer the ‘right’ question, lack analytical rigor and have access

to limited quality of data (Baker, 2000; Bornstein, 2006; Cracknell, 2000 as cited by Levermore,

2011)”. Furthermore, many SDP organizations fear an evaluation process that would tarnish the

project or organization’s reputation which leads to a lack in transparency.

Several efforts have already been made to creatively respond to evaluating the impact of

SDP programs. A critical evaluation, for example, would concentrate on obtaining a cross-

section of views from all stakeholders about their interpretation of what is being evaluated and

also reflects on the subjectivity of the evaluator in this process. This addresses the need to

provide wider context beyond outputs highlighted by specific programs and still includes

funders’ needs in the assessment. “A core characteristic of critical evaluation is the aim for

empowerment, where wider political and social meaning of the elements of the program

32
evaluated need to be ascertained (Taylor and Balloch, 2005 as cited in Levermore 2011).”

Another creative approach is the Most Significant Change (MSC) technique.

“Essentially, the process involves the collection of significant change (SC) stories
emanating from the field level, and the systematic selection of the most
significant of these stories by panels of designated stakeholders or staff. The
designated staff and stakeholders are initially involved by ‘searching’ for project
impact. Once changes have been captured, various people sit down together, read
the stories aloud and have regular and often in-depth discussions about the value
of these reported changes. When the technique is implemented successfully,
whole teams of people begin to focus their attention on program impact (Davis,
R.; Dart, J, 2005).”

According to its creator, Rick Davies, the MSC technique is a unique participatory approach that

was created in an attempt to meet some of the challenges associated with monitoring and

evaluating a complex rural development program in Bangladesh, which had diversity in both

implementation and outcomes. With this contextual understanding of the definitions, limitations,

challenges, and even creative approaches to M&E, further primary research will determine if any

number of other creative evaluation methods has been adapted by the organizations interviewed,

and how these international organizations are defining and measuring success in the first place.

Research/Practitioner Inquiry Design

Primary research was conducted through the interviews of three international

organizations using sports programs to address youth empowerment and peacebuilding: Partners

of the Americas, the World Affairs Council of Oregon, and Mercy Corps. These organizations

were chosen for the being leaders in the field and for their enthusiasm to participate. First the

selection of each organization will justified, and then the culture of inquiry will be described.

For the past 30 years, Partners of the Americas has led sport-related exchange programs

involving thousands of youth and coaches from all over the Western Hemisphere, connecting

33
them with counterparts in different US states. Partners has emerged as a global leader in Sport

for Development and Youth Workforce Development especially through the A Ganar! Alliance.

Over 13,000 young people have participated in the A Ganar! youth workforce development

training that uses the lessons from sport in over 16 countries in the Americas. After graduating

from the training, 70% of youth find jobs, start their own business, or return to school. In

essence, A Ganar! is a youth employment program wrapped inside of a ball. At-risk youth, ages

16-24, acquire marketable job expertise by building on six core sport-based skills: teamwork,

communication, discipline, respect, a focus on results, and continual self-improvement. In 7-9

months, youth learn life and vocational skills and complete internships with local businesses.

They learn to bring the best values of sport and apply them to the workplace (Partners of the

Americas, 2014).

The World Affairs Council of Oregon has a strong and successful mission of connecting

Oregonians to the rest of the world. Since 1950, their International Visitor Program (IVP) has

fostered meaningful connections between Oregonians and young leaders from over 120 countries

through government programs. The IVP receives more than 600 visitors from around the world,

with an excelling reputation for youth programming (WACO, 2014); in March, 2014 alone the

Council had 15 different visitor programs that were simultaneously being conducted. The World

Affairs Council was the sponsoring organization of this capstone paper as both the site of my

second practicum where I worked as a program coordinator intern, and as an organization

looking to expand their programming in youth programs that empower through sports.

Mercy Corps is a well-known organization in the field of international development and

is known around the world for their sustainable and empowering practices. Sport for Change is

the umbrella term for all Mercy Corps programs that use sports and games to help young people.

34
Their programs promote health awareness, speed psychological recovery in places affected by

conflict and disaster and improve social inclusion and cohesion. They take advantage of the

natural appeal and convening power of sport to young people and their communities, bring

diverse groups together and teach valuable life skills in a way that’s participatory and

transformative. In the past five years, Mercy Corps has implemented over 40 sport-related

projects in 25 countries, reaching more than 50,000 youth [and] each program is specially

customized to meet local needs (Mercy Corps Best Practices, 2011).

The culture of inquiry for this research was developed through semi-structured

interviews, one with each organization, so as to develop a baseline of questions from the

information obtained in current literature and the field while still allowing for flexible follow-up

questions to receive the most authentic and pertinent answers possible. While initial contact was

attempted with various organizations, a minimum of three interviews was maintained for

sufficient triangulation and data analysis. Interviews with the World Affairs Council and Mercy

Corps were conducted in person at their respective offices in Portland, OR. The interview with

Partners of the Americas was conducted over the phone. The interviews with Mercy Corps and

Partners of the Americas were both individual interviews, whereas the World Affairs Council of

Oregon interview was a focus group with both Amy Barss and Andrew Neal present together, at

their request.

The questions were open ended with content focused on how the programs evaluate their

success and the methodologies developed to achieve the programs’ objectives, as well as

obstacles and challenges (see Appendix A for list of baseline questions). The participants signed

an informed consent form in which they were made aware of all their rights to keep their

programs anonymous (to ensure no risk of providing honest and detailed responses), rights to ask

35
questions, or to withdraw at any point in time (see Appendix B for consent form). No

participants wished to remain anonymous and all signed and understood the informed consent

form, and also received a list of interview questions prior to the interview. Participants received a

copy of each draft of this capstone paper to protect and verify the participant’s ownership of

quotes and an accurate representation of primary information obtained through the interviewing

process.

There are a few limitations that have been accounted for in this research. First, a selection

bias was present not only because it depended on voluntary participation, but also because only

selected organizations received an initial invitation to participate based on previous connections.

Another limitation includes the lack of recording during only the interview with Partners of the

Americas. Because it was conducted over the phone and an alternative recording device was not

available transcription was conducted during the interview so there may be less detailed

documentation of responses when compared to the other two interviews.

Presentation & Analysis of Data

The presentation and analysis of the data collected through these three interviews with

Partners of the Americas, the World affairs Council and Mercy Corps will be displayed first

through a Table to compare and contrast responses. Second, the data will be analyzed through

patterns and common themes. Third, specific quotes are provided to draw attention to the

similarity between interview responses and obstacles mentioned within M&E literature. Finally,

a subsection will be included to discuss and summarize the data presented here.

Each hour long interview covered the following main areas of content: overarching goals

of program; necessary elements for success; definition of success; lessons learned/

36
recommendations; M&E data collection tools; how impact should be measured; accountability &

legitimacy; and biggest obstacles and challenges (for an explicit list of Interview questions see

Appendix A). These topics were compiled based on the review of current literature in SDP,

Conflict Transformation, Youth Development, and M&E (previously evaluated in chapters 1-4,

respectively) and the topics were adapted as necessary since the interviews were semi-structured.

The following Table summarizes the overall information collected from each interview:

Table 3- Capstone Interview Responses

Partners of the World Affairs Council Mercy Corps

Americas of Oregon

1. Transforming
vulnerable youth 1. Excellence in 1. Peacebuilding &
and giving them programming conflict management
Overarching opportunities 2. Maximize local impact 2. Psychosocial support
2. Engage youth in 3. Leadership Training post-conflict or disaster
goals of
their communities 4. Civic Engagement 3. HIV prevention
program? 3. Community 5. Mutual Understanding 4. Phys. Ed. & Leadership
buy-in
Sustainability over time,
Front End Analysis, Environment for shared using existing local
Necessary be flexible, experiences, experiential structures, well-designed
Elements for experiential learning cycle, curriculum, dynamic and
learning cycle, opportunities to show engaging training, post-
Success?
M&E learning, connecting wider training support for
social issues coaches, good
relationships between
coaches and participants.
Depth and Breadth: Multiplier effect, Depends on project. M&E
How many students sustainable program, local plan for peacebuilding
Definition of are we reaching and impact, will include interpersonal
Success. how well do we foundation/infrastructure, relationship, perception
reach them? take participant culture into indicators, etc.
account
High quality materials for
Knowing best practices of curriculum and training;
youth leadership, civic high energy, high
Lessons Set a firm engagement and education efficient training; ongoing
foundation, develop outside of our industry; support for coaches; how
Learned/
strong M&E plan have a good infrastructure; to reach cohorts after
Recommendat evaluate what’s right for program finishes,
ions? your organization capacity building of local

37
 NGOs, critical reflection
as an organization.
Post-program data Statistics, collecting Pre- & post-surveys tools,
collection through stories, internal video-based evaluation,
M&E Data local organizations. evaluations, E-evaluations participatory videos,
collection Gather stats of in future?, verbal feedback, attendance records,
youth after observations from partners, observational surveys,
Tools?
program. experiential learning cycle, focus group discussions,
questionnaires classroom observations.
More synchronization over
project phases with various Co-design indicators of
How should How changes in partners, focus on broader success with
impact be behavior are taking goals, post-program beneficiaries, donors and
place. observations, feedback, industry experts.
measured?
more funding built in for
the end of a project.
Include
1. Engage communities/beneficiaries
Accountability beneficiaries in Feedback and evaluations in project implementation
& design from community, and design, participant
2. pre-screening resources, and participants feedback, ask key
Legitimacy?
informants as participants
and within community,
critical reflection.
M&E, Does M&E info get Synchronicity throughout
Resources: Time, applied, lack of funding, a program, time
Biggest Funding. Looking infrastructure required for constraints, getting the
obstacles and to enhance M&E liability, not being able to right coaches/mentors &
evaluate the whole process supporting them,
challenges?
ourselves, time limitations, measuring a more
peaceful society.

The responses above were analyzed for patterns and commonalities. There were 14 common

themes mentioned in the answers of all three interviews:

1. Funding limitations
2. The importance of pre-screening and developing a program foundation
3. The use and need for creativity
4. The utmost importance of the non-sport objectives
5. Limitations of project length
6. The importance of sustainability and how to achieve it
7. The importance of building capacity at a local level
8. The importance of training staff/facilitators/coaches
9. The need to better measure impact as a network/industry
10. The importance and challenge of measuring post-program impact
11. The Experiential Learning Cycle
12. The collection of qualitative data

38
 13. The collection of quantitative data
14. “It depends”/ “It varies from program to program”

There were also 7 common themes mentioned in two of the three interviews:

1. The challenge of synchronization as a program transitions to different agencies and

staff in different phases of the program
2. The need and importance of a feedback culture
3. The need for organizations to critically reflect on their programs & efforts
4. The importance of a strong M&E plan
5. The importance of engaging beneficiaries and participants in the design of the program
6. The value of multiple perspectives in the implementation and design process.
7. The importance of communication between partnering organizations.

When asked about the goals of their respective programs, both Partners of the Americas

and the World Affairs Council of Oregon mentioned civic engagement and community buy-in.

“There’s that level of making sure that we meet deliverables;

budget, health and safety, etc. And there’s getting people’s
subjective evaluations of their experiences either as a participant or
as like an ELL escort or host or professional resource. It’s
typically, more like verbal feedback to evaluate whether students
and visitors are getting those broader goals of mutual
understanding, leadership goals, and an understanding of civic
engagement. I think those are the big goals and how they express
that comes out a lot of different ways (Neal, 2014).”

Both organizations also explicitly mentioned the experiential learning cycle and Mercy Corps

similarly described the importance a well-designed curriculum, dynamic training, and good

relationships between coaches and participants. All three organizations include impact and

quality (depth of reaching participants, local impact, and interpersonal relationship) within their

definition of a successful program and additionally, Partners of the Americas and the World

Affairs Council of Oregon also mentioned the quantitative impact of how many children are

reached. For lessons learned and recommendations, Partners of the Americas and the World

Affairs Council both mentioned the need to develop a firm foundation and infrastructure prior to

39
the program. The World Affairs Council also mentioned the importance of critical self-reflecting

as an organization, as did Mercy Corps.

For questions regarding monitoring and evaluation, specifically the data collection tools

used, all three organizations mentioned the use of quantitative collection methods to gather

statistics, such as questionnaires, surveys, etc. The World Affairs Council and Mercy Corps also

mentioned collecting qualitative data and stories. Mercy Corps even shared an example of a

participatory video method in one of their programs as a creative response to measure the impact

of their soccer program after the post-election violence in Kenya.

“I would say the most standard tools are pre- and post-
survey tools. We were able to get a bit more creative through one
program. It was a post-conflict program in Kenya using sport and
that was a documentary video. A group called InsightShare out of
the UK came we basically hired them to do a video based
evaluation. And what it was very participatory and the students or
the young people in the program were taught how to go out and
make documentary film and act it out; what they thought were the
most significant change-stories as a result of their participation in
that program. I think that was complemented with a more
traditional survey too (Streng, 2014).”

When asked how they believed impact should be measured Fernando Maldonado, from

Partners of the Americas, stated he would like to impact measured by behavior changes that are

taking place in participants and how that is occurring. Amy Barss and Andrew Neal from the

World Affairs Council said they would like to see impact measured with better synchronization

among partners, more feedback, a focus on broader program goals, and more allocated funding

post-program evaluations. While, Matt Streng from Mercy Corps said in an ideal setting that

impact would be measured by a set of indicators that were co-designed by beneficiaries, donors,

and program experts together.

40
 “I think there needs to be a lot more work to engage community,
engage intended beneficiaries and have them co-design those
indicators and maybe have some of your indicators be of industry
standards so you could speak to a technical field, whether that’s
health/peacebuilding &conflict/or food security, depending on
what that might be. And donors, that’s an important stakeholder
audience and I think it is critical that agencies from outside the
community are accountable to those communities and set up what
they will be accountable to at the beginning (Streng, 2014).”

Partners of the Americas and Mercy Corps both stated that they maintained accountability to

their beneficiaries and participants by engaging them in the implementation and design of the

program, and the World Affairs Council and Mercy Corps stated that they used feedback after

the program.

Finally, when asked about the biggest challenges and obstacles they faced in the field all

three organizations mentioned the inherent limitations of a short term program (be it 30 days,

nine months, or one year2). Partners of the Americas and the World Affairs Council also both

mentioned the lack of resources and funding for their programming as a challenge, and their

M&E approaches in general.

“We are currently looking to enhance this part of our program, but
we rely heavily on the partners we have in the host country.
Primarily, we work with grassroots organizations for implementing
training and collecting various forms of data. We also track a
number of youth registered with the programs. How many
graduate? How many drop-out? How many of those are getting
jobs? Comparing output driven methodology as opposed to
outcomes is important; it requires a certain level of rigor for
outcomes. We’re often engaged in this uphill battle in recent years,
where there’s been a huge emphasis, with good reason, on M&E
for numerous reasons but part of the challenge is you need
resources (Maldonado, 2014.”

2
These were specific examples of program length provided during the interviews. Mercy Corps mentioned a nine
month program, the World Affairs Council mentioned a typical program of 30 days included post-program reunions,
and Partners of the Americas mentioned having programs that last 1-2 years.

41
Amy Barss, the Director of the International Visitors Program at The World Affairs Council of

Oregon, furthermore explained how from a local organization’s perspective, they are constrained

by the requirements of grant funding and lack of communication with government partners that

provide the funding.

“We don’t always get completely filled in on the complete

program goals that they may have… It would be good to have
more funding built in to the end of the project. It’s been
acknowledged too that this is very difficult to get grant funding for.
A story is great, but funders want to be able to see that you’ve
demonstrated impact through your programs (Barss, 2014).”

Both the World Affairs Council and Mercy Corps mentioned the challenge of communication

with partners. Andrew Neal from the World affairs Council explains:

“I think there needs to be more synchronization across the different

partners because you may have the folks in D.C. at the State
Department E.C.A. conceiving of a project; then you have U.S.
embassies abroad recruiting participants; then you have a national
agency administering the whole program; then, us and another
local organizations doing a smaller component of that; then there’s
the follow-on projects after. I think that there needs to be more
synchronization looking at the whole program not just looking at
your individual component (Neal, 2014).”

Maintaining a fluid transition with other staff and agencies as the program advanced through its

various stages is a notable challenge and often one that is intertwined with other obstacles, such

as resources and funding. All three programs advocated the relevancy of this practitioner inquiry,

and stated that there was room for improvement.

“I’m a big believer that there’s always room for improvement. I

would be inclined to invest more in changes in behavior and why
certain things change. How decisions change and how change
actually takes place. The sociology aspect of it and what triggers it;
look at the actual outcomes not just outputs (Maldonado, 2014).”

42
This quote from Fernando Maldonado of Partners of the Americas brings full circle the idea of

linking theory and practice. Literature and research should be rooted in challenges practitioners

face in the field, while practice should begin with the theories and arguments made by experts in

the field.

DISCUSSION & SUMMARY

Since responses in all three interviews indicated that monitoring and impact evaluation is

indeed a challenge it can be conclusion is verified that there is a call for “a paradigm shift in

measuring social worth of sport to allow and celebrate richer/deeper interpretations using

qualitative/participatory methods alongside quantitative measure” (Levermore, 2011)”. I would

argue since it was a common theme within all 3 interviews that this paradigm shift should be

taken one step further in searching for creative approaches to ethically satisfy both funders and

beneficiaries. The purpose of a sport for development program that critically empowers youth in

order to transform conflict is to respond to the needs of the beneficiaries that will be impacted.

Funders are often put in the driver’s seat, which is not necessarily negative, but this research

concludes that it is important to acknowledge the funders and donors as one of many

stakeholders. One conclusion that can be drawn is that there is not one approach or one single

solution to creatively combining qualitative and quantitative monitoring and impact evaluation

techniques. The adaptability of sports programs is just as important as the adaptability of

evaluation methods.

By far, the most common theme and answer given was “it depends” or that “it varies

from program to program”. Between all three interviews and all four persons interviewed these

statements were made a total of 13 times. The popularity of this response means the organization

43
and program is acknowledging that its beneficiaries will not experience empowerment the same

way, and the organization is therefore realizing that it is important to contextualize the entire

youth program, whether through sports or any other, within the local cultures of those

participating. It also means that the program is built around the specifics of the program and

there may be commonalities, but not a sweeping, general approach. “There is too much pressure

for ‘easy empirical generalization’ to be made in order to justify that sport can be applied

unilaterally for development, without really taking into account cultural nuances (Levermore,

2011).” All of the organizations interviewed regularly mentioned the importance of knowing

their limitations be it time, funding, or otherwise. Being aware of these limitations allows these

organizations to focus on the common themes that were developed in Table 2: general safety and

acceptance, self-esteem of participants, communication & collaboration skills, critical reflection

& awareness, individual and community connections, and specific conflict management skills.

These themes determined by the skills and dimensions of youth development, and the

benefits of SDP programs support the overall conclusion of this research which is that in order to

evaluate the successful impact of a program the definition must indeed be purposefully

determined so that the evaluation techniques can appropriately match the design, preferably with

the input of beneficiaries in the inception phase. All three organizations spoke to using creativity,

the use of quantitative M&E methodologies, and the value of balancing that with community and

qualitative impact. The bottom-line is that if the sport itself is not the focus of the program then

the program must be very clear about what the focus is. This means having staff that are

thoroughly trained in the necessary competencies of the program goals, knowing how the success

of the program will holistically be evaluated, and reinforcing local capacity so that the program

goals are sustainable. Perhaps, one lesson that can be taken away from these interviews and the

44
contextual research of these paper is that SDP programs need the all the same competencies they

are teaching to their participants.

Conclusion

The contributions of this capstone consist of an inquiry process that compiles various

techniques, methods and pedagogy used to evaluate the success of sports and peacebuilding

programs so that other organizations can learn from past and current practices. “Given the field’s

relative infancy, researchers have yet to move seriously beyond these case-studies to produce

more analytical and generalized work (Giuliantti, 2011).” The anticipated outcome is that this

primary research contextualized in the cross-discipline fields of SDP, Conflict transformation,

Youth Development, and Monitoring and Evaluation will provide an insight and connection to

how leading organizations are addressing these challenges of measuring impact and success. In

the words of Simon Norton and John Ungerleider during the 2013 SIT course on Youth Program

Leadership and Design, “we didn’t learn how to be youth leaders by reading about it” (2013); it’s

a field of work that requires practice, adjustment and a very hands-on approach. Yet, hopefully

by critically reflecting and learning from these best practices relative to SDP programs the

dialogue will continue and more creative solutions will develop.

Recommendations for further research include the use of social media to contact and

monitor long term impact after the life of an SDP program. “U.S. Embassies need to track former

IVLP participants consistently over the long-term in order to measure more effectively the effect

of the program…Areas for further research includes IVLP alumni associations and the role of

social media (Mock, 2012).” Beneficial research could also be conducted with governmental

organizations such as USAID, the State Department, and the World Bank to learn how decisions

45
and policies are made around program M&E. Also, further research could be beneficial in

gathering best practices of other leading SDP organizations such as Peace Players international,

Grassroots soccer, the UNOSDP Youth Programs and Right to Play.

46
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Athukorala, K. (2013, March). OECD Standards. Monitoring and Impact Evaluation. Lecture
conducted by SIT Graduate Institute, Brattleboro, VT.
Nakana, Steven; Matuko, Mary; Wolffe, Rebecca. (2013, November). Stories From the Field.
Youth in Conflict. Lecture conducted by Mercy Corps, Portland, OR.
Dart, J. & Davies, R. (2005, April) The ‘Most Significant Change’ (MSC) Technique. Retrieved
from SportforDev.org: http://www.mande.co.uk/docs/MSCGuide.pdf
DiBenedetto, A., & Ungerleider, J. (1997). Empowering students to address current issues: The
Vermont governor’s institute on public issues and youth empowerment. In J. A. Boccia
(Ed.), Students taking the lead: The challenges and rewards of empowering youth in
schools (pp. 58-78). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Doherty, C. (2011, March 10th). Measuring the Impact of Sports on Youth Development.
Retrieved from USAID.gov:
http://blog.usaid.gov/2011/03/measuring-the-impact-of-sports-on-youth-development/

Freire, Paulo. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder.

Galtung, J. (2004). Transcend & transform: An introduction to conflict work. Boulder, CO:
Paradigm Publishers.
Giulianotti, R. (2010). Sport, peacemaking and conflict resolution: A contextual analysis and
modelling of the sport, development and peace sector. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 34(2),
207-228.
Glossary of Key Terms in Evaluation and Results Based Management. (2002). Paris: OECD.
InsightShare. (2003-2014). Retrieved from: Insightshare.org
Jennings, L., Parra-Medina, D., Messias, D., & McLoughlin, K. (2006). Toward a critical social
theory of youth empowerment. In B. Checkoway, & L. Gutierrez (Eds.), Youth
participation and community change. Pp. 31-55. The Haworth Press.
Kidombo, H. J. (2013). The role of sport in peace-building. Centre for Peace and Reconciliation
(CPRS), Coventry University).1-9.(M21 ISS; Research Methods).
Kvalsund, P. (2009). Sport and Peace Building.
Lea-Howarth, J. (2006). Sport and conflict: Is football an appropriate tool to 47tilize in conflict
resolution, reconciliation or reconstruction? (Contemporary War and Peace Studies MA
Dissertation., University of Sussex.).
Lederarch, J. P. (2005). The moral imagination: The art and soul of building peace. New York:
Oxford University Press.

47
Levermore, Roger. (2011) Evaluating sport-for-development: approaches and critical issues.
Progress in Development Studies. 11(4), 339-53. Sage Publications, Ltd.
Maldonado, F. (2014, March 20). Partners of the Americas: Success in A Ganar! Sports
Programming. (A. Fitzhenry, Interviewer)
Mercy Corps Youth and Conflict: Best Practices and Lessons Learned. (2011). Portland, OR:
Mercy Corps.
Mock, J. (2012). Impact and evaluation of the international visitor leadership program.
(Unpublished The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy)
National Council of International Visitors. (2000). A Salute to Citizen Diplomacy: A History of
the Natonal Council for International Visitors. Washington D.C.: National Council for
International Visitors.
Neal, A., & Barss, A. (2014, April 2). World Affairs Council of Oregon: Success in Youth
Programming. (A. Fitzhenry, Interviewer)
Norton, S.; Ungerleider, J. (2013, February). Basics of Youth Leadership Programs. Youth
Program Leadership and Design. Lecture conducted by SIT Graduate Institute,
Brattleboro, VT.
Open World Leadership Center. (2013). Open World Program Overview. Retrieved October 9,
2013, from Open World:
http://openworld.gov/docs/openworld_program_overview.pdf?PHPSESSID=86b3524229
70a8fbc410c43d1cbe8ee4
Rookwood, J. (2008). Soccer for peace and social development. Peace Review: A Journal of
Social Justice, 20, 471-479. Doi:10.1080/10402650802495072
Schaub Reisle, M. (2006). Sport as a tool for peace building. (CSPM). Bern: Swiss Agency for
Development and Cooperation, SDC Conflict Prevention and Transformation Division,
COPRET. (E 24.1.06)
Schell-Faucon, S. (2001). Berghof handbook for conflict transformation conflict transformation
through educational and youth programmes. Berlin: Berghof Research Center for
Constructive Conflict Management.
Schrag, M. J. (2012). The case for peace-building as sports’ next great legacy: A literature
Review, assessment, and suggestions for applying the ‘slow child’ in the emerging field of
sport for development and peace. (Master of Science in Kinesiology, University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign).
Shenk, D. (2010). The genius in all of us: New insights into genetics, talent and IQ. New York:
Anchor Books.
Social identity, intergroup conflict, and conflict reduction (2001). In Ashmore R. D., Jussim L.
and Wilder D. (Eds.). New York: Oxford University Press.

48
Souto-Manning, M. (2010). In Kincheloe J. L., Steinberg S. R. (Eds.), Freire, teaching and
learning. New York: Peter Lang.
Sport and Play at Mercy Corps. (2013). Portland, OR: Mercy Corps.
Sport for development and peace: The UN system in action. (2014). Retrieved December, 2013,
from www.un.org/sport
SportandDev.org. (2014). Retrieved January, 2014, from http://www.sportanddev.org/
Sporting for Peace. (2013, November). New African,100.
Streng, M. (2014, April 10). Mercy Corps: Success in Sport and Play Programs Worldwide. (A.
Fitzhenry, Interviewer)
Swanson, K. (2014, March 17). A Ref Wouldn’t Let This Girl Play in Her Hijab — Here’s How
Her Team Responded. PolicyMic. Retrieved March, 2014, from:
http://www.policymic.com/articles/85471/a-ref-wouldn-t-let-this-girl-play-in-her-hijab-
here-s-how-her-team-responded
UNOSDP annual report 2012: The year of the youth leadership programme. (2013). (Annual
Report 2012). Geneva: UNOSDP.
UNOSDP: Office on Sport for Development and Peace. (2014). Achieving the objectives of the
united nations through sport. Retrieved January, 2014, from www.un.org/sport
Wolff, A. (2011). Sports saves the world. Sports Illustrated, 115(12), 62-70.
World Affairs Council of Oregon: Connecting Oregonians to the World… (2014). Retrieved
September, 2013, from worldoregon.org/international-visitors
Partners of the Americas: A Ganar Alliance. (2014). Retrieved February, 2014, from:
http://www.partners.net/partners/Overview13.asp
Partners of the Americas. (2014). A Ganar Alliance Program Facts. Retrieved April, 2014 from
www.aganar.org
Yalowitz, D. (1995). Play: A form and forum for community building. Interspectives:
Educational Content in Intercultural Exchange Programmes for Young People, 13, 26-
30.

49
 Appendix A

Initial Capstone Interview Questions

Background Information

1. Please state your name, organization and the responsibilities of our position/department.

2. What are the goal(s) and specific objectives of each program?

3. What do you use for monitoring and evaluation tools?

“Success”

4. In your experience, what are the necessary elements for a successful sports program for youth?

5. How would you define success of these programs?

6. How is success and participant impact measured? How do you think it should be measured?

Challenges & Context

7. What are the biggest obstacles and challenges in the field?

8. How do programs maintain accountability and legitimacy? Is participant and community

feedback collected and used?

10. What kinds of training and competencies do coaches and field implementers need to have in
successful sports for development program?

Lessons Learned

11. What lessons have you learned and what recommendations would you give to other similar
programs?

12. Is there anyone else you feel has an important perspective and therefore should be
interviewed for this research?

13. Final comments and/or questions?

50
 Appendix B

INFORMED CONSENT FORM

SIT Graduate Institute

Title of Capstone: Sports for Development and Peace (SDP): How to measure success of youth programs
Researcher: AnnMarie Fitzhenry, Master’s Candidate in Peacebuilding and Conflict Transformation
Advisor: John Ungerleider, Professor of Peacebuilding and Conflict Transformation
Sponsoring Organization: World Affairs Council of Oregon (WACO)

DESCRIPTION OF RESEARCH: You are invited to participate in a research study on the monitoring
and evaluation techniques of peacebuilding and youth development programs that use sports. The
purpose of this study is to understand how various organizations evaluate their programs and define the
success and progress in order to address ethical considerations and achieve the programs’ objectives.

RISKS AND BENEFITS: There are minimal to no risks in participating in this study. While there will
be no compensation or payment, participants will benefit by having the opportunity to reflect and assess
the monitoring and evaluation techniques of their programs and will be able to collaborate on possible
approaches and solutions of how best to monitor the success of youth programs in Sports for
Development and Peace.

DATA STORAGE TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY: The data collected in your interview in

relation to your identity and the organization you represent will be kept as confidential files and no one
other than me, AnnMarie Fitzhenry, will have access to them. At your request, the information you
provide will be coded and anonymity will be maintained, and only general, non-identifiable data will be
shared. *Please only sign and date the line below if you wish to remain anonymous:

SIGNATURE: DATE:

TIME INVOLVEMENT: Your participation will take approximately one hour and interviews will take
place during the spring of 2014, at your convenience.

HOW WILL RESULTS BE USED: The information gathered during interviews will be used in the
Capstone paper and presentation of the researcher, AnnMarie Fitzhenry, at the SIT Graduate Institute. If
you wish to read and approve the final research before it is submitted and published, I will happily
provide a copy upon request.

PARTICIPANTS RIGHTS: Your participation in this project is completely voluntary and you have the
right to withdraw your consent or discontinue participation at any time. You also have the right to refuse
to answer particular questions and are able to ask questions at any point before, during or after the
interview. Your individual privacy and confidentiality, as well as that of your organization, will be
maintained in all published and written data resulting from the study.

SIGNATURE DATE

51