Mathieu Marlier

Sport-for-development (SFD) has emerged as a prominent area, with diverse actors seeking to address complex social issues, including youth inclusion and improved public health. Within this field, c...

Cross-Sector Collaboration - 7

Community Sport Development Programs (CSDPs) that use an intersectoral capacity building approach have shown potential in reaching individuals in disadvantaged situations. This study has investigated how the application of capacity building principles in disadvantaged communities results in higher sport participation rates in these communities. A multiple case design was used, including six similar disadvantaged communities in Antwerp, Belgium; four communities implemented the CSDP, two communities served as control communities without CSDP. In total, 52 face-to-face interviews were held with sport, social, health, cultural, and youth organizations in these communities. Four key findings were crucial to explain the success of the CSDP according to the principles of capacity building. First, the CSDP appeared to be the missing link between sport organizations on the one hand and health, social, youth, and cultural organizations on the other hand. Second, shifting from a sport-oriented staff to a mix of sport staff, social workers and representatives of people in disadvantaged situations helped increase trust through a participatory approach. Third, CSDPs assisted sport clubs to deal with financial, organizational, and cultural pressures that arose from the influx of new members in disadvantaged situations. Finally, the CSDPs developed well-planned and integrated strategies focusing on reinforcing the existing local organizations already using sport to reach their goals. These capacity building principles were key in attaining higher sport participation for people living in disadvantaged communities.

Although local governments attempt to promote sports among all layers of society, people with a lower socio-economic status are still under-represented in grassroots sports. Previous studies indicate that inter-sectoral networks and joint efforts can contribute to an increase in sport participation among these groups, but a systematic analysis of the structure, coordination and interactions in the networks is still missing. Insight into networks to promote sport for disadvantaged people may help in designing effective networks. Therefore, we conducted a social network analysis to explore the network structure and characteristics of networks that promote sport participation among disadvantaged people in three Flemish cities. Our results show that the networks needed to be coordinated by a sport administrator, in the initial stage. Once the network is up and running, coordination can be shared so that the sport administration can rely on the experiences of other sectors. More sport initiatives and a better network structure were found in the cities with a community sport development program, through which the sport-for-all policy is implemented and coordinated, compared to a city without such a program.

Recent research has illustrated the need for cross-sector partnerships to tackle multidimensional problems such as health inequalities and sport and physical activity promotion. Capacity building is based on partnerships and has demonstrated effectiveness in tackling these multidimensional problems. This study aims to explain how cross-sector partnerships build capacity at the practitioner, organisational and partnership levels. The subject of this study is a community sport program (CSP) that aims to increase sport participation rates and physical activity levels. The study examined multiple cases in four disadvantaged communities in Antwerp, Belgium where the CSP was implemented. Forty-four face-to-face interviews were held with leaders from sport, social, health, culture and youth organisations that collaborated with the CSP. Thirteen elements of cross-sector partnerships were identified as critical to building capacity at each of the different levels. These include: process evaluation, trust, mutuality, policy support, partner complementarity and fit, diversity of activities and period of collaboration-time. Trust in turn was fostered by a longer period of collaboration-time, better personal contact, clearer coordination and an external focus. Policy support was developed by support of partners and establishing clear metrics of success. Insight into the key elements of cross-sector partnerships that build capacity is given and several practical recommendations are suggested for practitioners and policy makers.

The Health through Sport conceptual model links sport participation with physical, social and psychological outcomes and stresses the need for more understanding between these outcomes. The present study aims to uncover how sport participation, physical activity, social capital and mental health are interrelated by examining these outcomes in one model. A cross-sectional survey was conducted in nine disadvantaged communities in Antwerp (Belgium). Two hundred adults (aged 18–56) per community were randomly selected and visited at home to fill out a questionnaire on socio-demographics, sport participation, physical activity, social capital and mental health. A sample of 414 adults participated in the study. Structural Equation Modeling analysis showed that sport participation (β = .095) and not total physical activity (β = .027) was associated with better mental health. No association was found between sport participation and community social capital (β = .009) or individual social capital (β = .045). Furthermore, only community social capital was linked with physical activity (β = .114), individual social capital was not (β = -.013). In contrast, only individual social capital was directly associated with mental health (β = .152), community social capital was not (β = .070). This study emphasizes the importance of sport participation and individual social capital to improve mental health in disadvantaged communities. It further gives a unique insight into the functionalities of how sport participation, physical activity, social capital and mental health are interrelated. Implications for policy are that cross-sector initiatives between the sport, social and health sector need to be supported as their outcomes are directly linked to one another.

This research measures organizational capacity and organizational ambition in nonprofit and voluntary sports clubs. The organizational capacity dimensions of Hall et al.’s (The capacity to serve: A qualitative study of the challenges facing Canada’s nonprofit and voluntary organizations, 2003) multidimensional framework are completed with corresponding dimensions reflecting organizational ambition, and the human resources dimension is further detailed. Each dimension is adapted to be applicable in a sports clubs setting, resulting in the following organizational ambition and capacity dimensions: human resources (board, coaches, volunteers, youth coaches), accommodation, management, financing, and external orientation. Data obtained from a sample of 585 Flemish sports clubs were analyzed using exploratory factor analysis, revealing five types of sports clubs that are labeled ‘ambition,’ ‘coaches,’ ‘volunteers,’ ‘management,’ and ‘accommodation deficiency.’ The findings support the use of a multidimensional framework based on the dimensions organizational capacity and organizational ambition, and the usefulness of distinguishing among four types of volunteers.

Recent evidence showed that community capacity building is one of the key methods to reach health improvements within disadvantaged communities. Physical activity and sports participation are important means to reach health improvements. This study investigates a capacity building method which aims at increasing sports participation in the community, especially for individuals at higher risk of sports deprivation. The main aims of the present study, are the following: (1) to examine differences in sports participation between individuals living in communities implementing a sports-based capacity building program and individuals living in communities without such capacity building program and (2) to investigate if the community sports program reaches the individuals known to experience higher barriers to engage in sports. In Flanders, Belgium, five disadvantaged urban communities implementing the community capacity building program (program communities) and four without (control communities) were selected based on similarity of sociodemographic and environmental characteristics. Two hundred adults (aged 18–56 years) per community were randomly selected and visited at home to fill out a questionnaire on sociodemographics, sports participation, and the community sports program. A sample of 414 adults participated in the study. Results showed that adults from program communities reported on average 96 min/week more participation in sports than their counterparts living in control communities. Furthermore, 61.3 % of the individuals of program communities indicated to engage in sports, whereas in control communities, this was only 42.4 %. Respondents at higher risk of sports deprivation also engaged in significantly more sports participation in program communities than those in control communities. This difference was also noted for groups that are not related with sports deprivation. These results are promising and plead for a community capacity building approach to increase sports participation in disadvantaged communities.

To define key factors of effective evidence-based policy implementation for physical activity promotion by use of a partnership approach. Using Parent and Harvey’s model for sport and physical activity community-based partnerships, we defined determinants of implementation based on 13 face-to-face interviews with network organisations and 39 telephone interviews with partner organisations. Furthermore, two quantitative data-sets (n = 991 and n = 965) were used to measure implementation. In total, nine variables were found to influence implementation. Personal contact was the most powerful variable since its presence contributed to success while its absence led to a negative outcome. Four contributed directly to success: political motive, absence of a metropolis, high commitment and more qualified staff. Four others resulted in a less successful implementation: absence of positive merger effects, exposure motive and governance, and dispersed leadership. Community networks are a promising instrument for the implementation of evidence-based policies. However, determinants of both formation and management of partnerships influence the implementation success. During partnership formation, special attention should be given to partnership motives while social skills are of utmost importance for the management.