Laureus Sport for Good Foundation
Global Summit 2012
Impact Report
Ecorys UK
March 2013
Contents
1.0 Introduction ...............................................................................................1
1.1 The Laureus Sport for Good Foundation ................................................................. 1
1.2 The Global Summit 2012 ............................................................................................ 2
1.3 The purpose and scope of the Summit report ......................................................... 3
2.0 Report on Summit Activities ....................................................................4
2.1 Opening address ........................................................................................................ 4
2.2 Speed Networking Session ....................................................................................... 4
2.3 Maximising the impact of sport for social change .................................................. 5
2.4 Sport based demonstrations ..................................................................................... 5
2.5 Workshops ................................................................................................................ 10
2.6 Reflection and Collaboration Sessions .................................................................. 18
3.0 Impact findings ...................................................................................... 20
3.1 Effectiveness of the Summit ................................................................................... 20
3.2 Project interaction levels ......................................................................................... 22
3.3 Comparison with the Laureus Global Summit 2011 .............................................. 28
4.0 Case Studies........................................................................................... 31
4.1 Virreyes Hockey ....................................................................................................... 31
4.2 I Challenge Myself .................................................................................................... 32
4.3 Peace Players International ..................................................................................... 33
5.0 Conclusion and Recommendations .................................................... 34
5.1 Overall effectiveness of the Summit ....................................................................... 34
5.2 Key lessons .............................................................................................................. 35
Annex One: ................................................................................................1
1
1.0 Introduction
1.1 The Laureus Sport for Good Foundation
The Laureus Sport for Good Foundation promotes sport for development by investing in “more
than 140 projects, which use the power of sport to provide coaching and education to young
people in some of the most challenging and deprived environments around the world”1. Laureus
achieves its vision not only through sport, but also by measuring its impact and through
developing the evidence behind it2.
The community sports based programmes that the foundation supports around the world deal
with a variety of important issues, such as: social exclusion; peace and reconciliation; health;
education; community integration; and gun and gang violence. The way the foundation supports
them is through gaining access to funding, training for measuring and using sport as a tool for
social impact, knowledge sharing Summits, forums and membership of a global network of
grantees.
The foundation has gone from strength to strength in recent years, expanding globally and
scaling up its impact. The keys to this success according to Edwin Moses, Chairman of the
Laureus Foundation, have been the development of its global network and its advocacy strategy
though the Laureus World Sport Academy. The former has allowed the foundation to develop
global expertise that has resulted in the use of more strategic partnerships, to the benefit of its
members. The latter has helped promote the foundation and give it a voice in the world of sport
for development.
1 www.laureus.com
2 See For example ‘Sport Scores: the Costs and Benefits of Sport for Crime Reduction’, and other research reports at
http://www.laureus.com/publications
2
1.2 The Global Summit 2012
Riding on this wave of success, the foundation organised its second Global Summit, which was
to take place in the famous Camp Nou stadium, home to FC Barcelona, in November 2012. The
Summit welcomed representatives from over 100 sports-based community projects, from 34
countries around the world. Laureus-funded projects and associates came together at this three
day event to enjoy networking, training and knowledge sharing opportunities.
Laureus Academy members and staff with Barcelona FC President Sandro Rosell
The aims of the Summit were to:
facilitate the sharing of knowledge and good practice in the use of sport as a social and educational tool;
strengthen and unite the global network of Laureus funded projects;
put concrete plans in place with Laureus projects that will continue to deepen the social impact of Laureus in 2013 and beyond; and
create a platform to spotlight the worldwide impact of the Laureus Sport for Good movement.
The Summit activities included:
inspirational talks from the Laureus academy;
sport based sessions showcasing the latest good practice in the use of sport as a social tool;
interactive workshops on a range of themes that projects themselves requested including leadership, innovation, and collaboration; and
networking opportunities with fellow participants and members of the Laureus academy.
3
The Summit built upon the success of the Laureus Global Summit in 2011 and various other
initiatives that Laureus has delivered over the years (including training courses, youth
exchanges, Summits, project twinning and retreats), all of which have enabled Laureus and the
projects it supports to deliver better social impacts through sport.
1.3 The purpose and scope of the Summit report
Ecorys was commissioned by Laureus to carry out an evaluation of the impact of the Laureus
Sport for Good Global Summit 2012.
1.3.1 Aims and objectives
The Summit report covers the following areas:
1. Impact on participants, including:
Summary statistics on how they ranked the Summit’s effectiveness.
Examples of key learning that participants took away with them and used to influence project delivery in country.
Examples of new partnerships built.
2. Impact on Laureus network of grantees including:
Measurements of the increase in project-to-project collaboration taking place as a result of the Summit.
Example of new exchanges, partnerships and collaborations occurring as a result of connections established at the Summit.
3. Impact on profile of Laureus including:
Measurement of the increase in awareness of the Laureus Global Summit and its projects through social media.
4. Provide a summary of the event including:
What took place, and the key learning items coming out of each workshop
1.3.2 Key evaluation questions
This evaluation sets out evidence to answer the following questions:
How effectively did the Summit meet its core goals?
What key learning emerged and what aspects could be improved?
What did participants and Laureus Academy members think of the event?
On balance, is the Summit a useful investment for Laureus?
4
2.0 Report on Summit Activities
This section of the report summarises the Summit, looking at the sessions and events in turn
and shows what participants thought of them. This report follows the chronological order of the
Summit over the course of the three days.
2.1 Opening address
The Summit opened with an inspirational
talk from Edwin Moses, which set a positive
tone for the rest of the Summit. This was
followed by a talk from the young Peace
Players Area Coordinator in South Africa,
Nasiphi Khafu. One project participant said:
“What a great inspiration Nasiphi Khafu
was. What a fantastic job Laureus is doing
in helping organisations to nurture and
shape such young minds and souls. Hearing
about the impact we are making on them
inspires us to work harder and do more for
these young people”.
The opening address was warmly received by all participants, with 87% of Summit feedback
survey respondents rating it highly.
2.2 Speed Networking Session
The opening address was followed by
an interactive networking session to
energise participants, get them
engaged and at the same time
introduce the key themes of the
Summit. It definitely broke the ice,
allowing everyone present the chance
to meet each other in a fun, friendly
and fast paced environment. The
process was informal with participants
being allowed two or three minutes to
meet a fellow project representative
and find out as much as they could
about them and their projects before
moving on to the next person.
Connections were nurtured and relationships triggered, for further follow-up during the Summit.
5
83% of survey respondents rated the session as either “excellent” or “good”. A few people
mentioned that the session may have been too informal and that effective communication was
restricted due to the noise generated by the session. However, the overall impression was very
positive. A few of respondents’ comments included:
2.3 Maximising the impact of sport for social change
This morning session on the first day was focused on project representatives sharing problems
that they face in their countries and trying to problem-solve by harnessing the global knowledge
network.
Overall, 78% of respondents ranked this interactive session as “good” or “excellent”, with the
majority providing a “good” rating. Most of the comments given on the session suggested that
although it was a good concept, the session was limited by time constraints, and it would have
been better if there had been more structure to its implementation. This would have allowed for
more direction and focus to the session, preventing it from becoming too descriptive.
2.4 Sport based demonstrations
During the afternoon of day one, project representatives donned their Laureus shirts and were
taken to the Llars Mundet Sports facility in Barcelona to see how sport is being used to tackle
specific social problems worldwide. The four ‘Sport for Good in Action Sessions’ were delivered
by some of the leading Laureus-funded projects.
Overall, respondents thoroughly enjoyed the sports demonstration aspect of the Summit, as
figure 2.1 below shows.
- “Very good. It enabled us to interact with many partners in a very
short space of time”
- “An effective tool to introduce and meet cohort”
- “It took me out of my comfort zone and it was good for me”
6
Figure 2.1 Percentage of respondents who rated the demonstrations as “excellent” or “good”
The sports based demonstrations were ranked “excellent” or “good” by 92% of respondents
overall, ranging from 91.2% to 97.3%, a very positive result. The only slight drawback to the
sessions was identified as a lack of time, which in some cases led to sessions possibly not
being explained clearly enough. Nevertheless, feedback was very positive, as demonstrated by
the general comments below, and the sessions should be considered a great success in terms
of participants’ satisfaction.
Key examples of feedback along with brief summaries of the four activities are provided below.
- “Fun and good evidence on the quality of leaders in the various projects”
- “Entertaining and engaging. I would have liked to have had another session on
day two!”
- “A nice relaxed start to the conference, not to much pressure to work"
7
Figure 2.2 Key feedback from sports based demonstrations
2.4.1 Disability Inclusion through Sport (with the National Paralympic Committee of
Rwanda)
During this session participants had a chance to try out sitting volleyball with
Dominique Bizman, President of the National Paralympic Committee of
Rwanda. Sitting volleyball is one of fastest-growing sport for inclusion of
people with and without disabilities. Participants were taught four key skills
used in sitting volleyball: the pass; the attack-hit; the block; and the serve. The
session was fully inclusive and highlighted the challenges faced by people with
disabilities, generating empathy among the participants, but also the ability to
overcome adversity through sport.
According to survey respondents, Disability Inclusion through Sport received
the most positive feedback of any of the sessions over the Summit, with the
highest average rating of 4.6 out of 5.
Disability Inclusion
through Sport
"Fun and informative"
"A brilliant example of
Laureus' work" Life Skills
through Sport
"Great ideas and
practical
examples" Peacebuilding
through Sport
"Good to see the
elements of 'inclusion'
and 'exclusion'
through sport"
Drug Prevention
through Sport
"Delivered
professionally and
effectively”
“Excellent”
8
2.4.2 Drug Prevention through Sport (with Coaching For Hope)
The session began with an inclusive warm-up activity to encourage
communication and team working skills. Participants were given numbers and
then divided into four zones and then had to pass the ball in the numbered
order. There were several different levels to this game to keep people engaged.
The main activity revolved around a normal game of football except that there
were four ‘clarity zones’ which only one team could use, as they were given
less players. Eventually the ‘clarity zones’ are reduced, which was used to
demonstrate how young people can be encouraged to discuss their fears and
coping mechanisms, identify risks and safe areas and what happens when
those are challenged. It was highlighted that this exercise has the potential to
uncover highly sensitive issues in young people’s lives.
Cla
rity
Zo
ne
Cla
rity Z
on
e
Clarity Zone
Clarity Zone
9
2.4.3 Life Skills through Sport (with Waves for Change)
2.4.4 Peace Building through Sport (with PeacePlayers International)
Waves for Change hosted a practical workshop demonstrating life-skills
education through sport. The session used an adapted lifeguarding exercise to
educate and combat the stigma attached to men with few sexual partners in
Xhosa communities - 'Isishumane'. The session demonstrated the practical
difficulties associated with achieving one’s life goals when attached to too
many partners. The exercise is also part of the Waves for Change HIV
education curriculum.
PeacePlayers International hosted this basketball skills session to
demonstrate how using a relaxed and interactive format can help to build trust
to reach children even when discussing sensitive topics, such as HIV/AIDS
prevention, gender roles, and drugs and alcohol awareness. The session also
demonstrated the negative effects of excluding individuals within the
community, through a basketball game where one team was not allowed to
pass to their captain.
10
2.5 Workshops
Over days two and three, Summit delegates participated in leadership and innovation
workshops. They chose two out of four leadership workshops to attend and two of the five
innovation workshops. The workshops were facilitated by leading experts from across the world,
representing a wide range of topics and fields. These included many experts from projects from
within the Laureus network.
Overview of the workshops and delivery partners
Leadership Innovation
Measuring Success
(Acumen Social Technologies and Ten Monkeys)
Moving beyond the cheque
(Mercedes Benz USA and Laureus USA)
Leading Yourself and Others
(Impact Consulting)
Best practice in international development: importing and exporting learning to the sector
(Martin Kalunga)
Scaling Up
(Magic Bus)
Diversifying your revenue
(Kick 4 Life)
Collaborating in a competitive arena
(Streetfootballworld and Laureus)
Unlocking innovation from young people
(Laureus, PeacePlayers International and Indigo Youth Movement)
Embedding Innovation in Communications and Advocacy
(Caj Sohal)
When considering the workshop sessions overall, 88.5% of respondents rated them as either
“good” or “excellent”, with a strong average rating of 4.1 out of 5. Interestingly the overall rating
is higher than for any of the individual workshops, as shown in Figure 3.2 below. This suggests
a positive bias effect from perception of the Summit as a whole, reflecting well on its
organisation and methodology.
This section of the Summit also had the highest levels of variation among ratings, ranging from
68% to 86.7% for individual sessions. The results imply that it would be worth considering the
merits of individual workshops. ‘Scaling Up’ and ‘Unlocking Innovation from youth’ received the
highest scores.
11
Figure 2.3 Percentage of respondents who rated the workshops as “excellent” or “good”
From a qualitative perspective respondents’ comments were very positive about the workshops,
although a few people mentioned that there appeared to be a trade-off between how in-depth
and time-constrained the sessions were, given the variety and amount of sessions that were on
offer. This seems only natural given the diverse schedule of the Summit, and rather than
altering significantly the structure of the workshop element we would recommend looking to
enhance individual workshops, in order to improve the overall level of quality.
The boxes below provide more detailed reports of the 9 workshops that were on offer.
- “The workshops were so practical and full of ideas, or idea stimulating, that
can be applied in our organisations”
- “Excellent subjects, delivered enthusiastically by knowledgeable specialists”
- “Generally interactive, creative, stimulating and inspirational”
- “Needed more time in each [and] I would love to have attended more than three
sessions”
12
2.5.1 Leadership workshops
2.5.2 Measuring Success
2.5.3 Leading Yourself and Others
This session explored how organisations can create simple user-friendly
systems to track and communicate their impact. The session focused on what
makes good monitoring and evaluation and how organisations can improve
upon what they are already doing.
Of those who participated 81% rated the session as “good” or “excellent”, and
the average rating was 4 out of 5, although there was significant variation in
the scores received. Participants provided the following comments:
-“Very practical and useful activity”
-“Really opened my eyes and showed us how to work with youth in
organisations”
-“Just what we needed”
Attendees of this workshop learnt about what it takes to be an inspiring leader
through the idea that leadership is a special kind of action, not a special kind
of person. The session gave straightforward insightful advice on what it means
to act, and what leaders can do to get the best out of themselves and those
they work with.
The session was given a rating of “good” or “excellent” by 82% of
respondents, with an average score of 4.4 out of 5. This is reflected in the
following comments:
-“Great workshop. Have just learnt that leadership is behaviour, not the role.
Helps put a lot of things into perspective”
-“Incredibly useful materials, discussions and activities”
-“Entertaining and refreshing”
-“Too much content in the time delivered”
13
2.5.4 Scaling Up
2.5.5 Diversifying your Revenue
This session looked at the story of Magic Bus and how it has managed to
successfully scale-up its operations rapidly in recent years. As scaling up
means different things to different people, discussions were centred on how
organisations can grow their operations yet maintain quality at the same time.
Scaling Up received one of the highest ratings of any workshop and an average
rating of 4.3 out of 5. Respondents were very positive about the workshop
overall, with an apparently infectious enthusiasm to learn more about this topic
partly generated by the speaker, Pratik Kumar:
-“Pratik is a special guy. I truly believe he will reach 1 million kids”
-“Fantastic – this should be packaged and offered to groups outside of the
meeting”
-“Excellent, I think people would love to tap into Pratik’s knowledge more”
The aim of this workshop was to discover how Kick4Life and others are
embracing Social Enterprise with ‘out of the box’ thinking to create innovative
products and services. There was also a chance to explore and share
opportunities to develop enterprises and discuss how the network can help push
forward this area. The workshop recommended information sharing, project
visits, provided case studies and a list of available resources, and the idea of a
Laureus Social Enterprise network was discussed.
This session was rated 4 out of 5 by most participants and 75% rated the
workshop as “good” or “excellent”. Some examples of the comments received
included:
-“Absolutely inspiring”
-“Inspiring, informative and informal delivery served to enhance the information
transfer”
14
2.5.6 Collaborating in a Competitive Arena
This interactive session included an interview with Tom and Maja on the
partnership that Laureus and Streetfootballworld have built over the last two
years. Their partnership aims to help projects around the world measure and
communicate their social impact. This includes developing a package of support
for grassroots NGOs called InFocus, which is a set of M&E tools and software
designed to track the progress of projects over time. The group discussion drew
on people’s experiences and perspectives of partnerships, focusing on three key
areas of partnership: principles; processes; and pitfalls.
Although this workshop was rated the lowest by respondents in terms of the
percentage of “excellent” or “good” responses, the average score was still 4 out
of 5. This suggests quite similar scores between respondents, which presents an
opportunity to address common issues to improve upon the workshop further.
For example, one person mentioned that the development of a toolkit to take-away
would have been useful. Comments overall were nonetheless positive:
-“It was fantastic to go through the list of guidelines which can help to develop
collaborations”
-“A good mix of presentation and discussion, helpful best practices as take-
always”
15
2.5.7 Innovation workshops
2.5.8 Moving Beyond the Cheque
Moving beyond the cheque looked at how Laureus USA successfully engaged with
their corporate funder Mercedes Benz USA to maximise the benefits for both
Laureus USA and Mercedes Benz USA. The session covered key issues such as
how to build a long-lasting relationship with the funder; how to deal with
challenges of pitching to a corporate funder; and how to effectively engage a
corporate funder in your project. The group discussion asked projects what can be
done to connect with corporate funders to help them move beyond the cheque.
Moving beyond the cheque was rated “good” or “excellent” by 71.4% of
respondents, although it received the lowest average score among the workshops
of 3.7 out of 5. This is still a very positive score but shows rooms for improvement.
Respondents made it clear that this was a useful workshop, but perhaps was too
focused on larger organisations, as the comments below illustrate:
-“Some useful ideas; maybe not totally relevant to all”
-“Could have been a little more interactive after a long day beforehand. Very
informative and highly professional”
-“Innovative partnership and engaging facilitation – it would have been good to
have had more concrete examples at the smaller investment level”
16
2.5.9 Best Practice in International Development: importing and exporting learning to
the sector
In this session Martin Kalunga explored different techniques to help release
creativity and innovation in all of us and gave everyone the opportunity to
practice this. It looked at case studies from other organisations that are doing
good things through collaboration with other organisations and new ideas of
different ways of working. There was also an opportunity for everyone to discuss
how innovation and creativity happens in their own organisations.
Looking at the number of respondents who attended workshops, this appears to
have been the least popular, with only 13 of the 54 having attended. Of these 13
there was wide variation in ratings given, although 85% gave the session a rating
of “good” or “excellent” on average. Comments from the session were full of
praise:
-“Compelling and insightful. A great personal experience”
-“Really inspiring and emotional”
-“This is so much better than it said on the tin”
17
2.5.10 Unlocking Innovation from Young People
2.5.11 Embedding Innovation in Communications and Advocacy
2.5.12 Dinner with Sean Fitzpatrick
It should be noted at this point that on the schedule there was a pre-dinner interview planned
with Sean Fitzpatrick for the evening of day two. However, the event had to be cancelled, with
one participant noting that they were “very disappointed”.
During this session participants examined how organisations can share
knowledge and tap into the innovation and fresh thinking that youth can bring to
a sport for good programme. By fostering youth participation from a project’s
inception in the right type of environment, not only does innovative thinking
arise, but young people can also benefit from participation. It helps give young
people confidence and allows them to take control of their lives. Youths can face
a multitude of barriers to development which highlights the importance of
encouraging participation, whilst at the same time brining benefits to the
organization through fresh ideas.
This was the second least popular session of the conference in terms of
attendance, with only 15 respondents having attended. However, of those who
went, 87% rated it as “good” or “excellent” and gave it an average rating of 4.3
out of 5.
This session was delivered by communications expert Caj Sohal. It looked at
how organisations can use innovative communications and advocacy initiatives
to increase their creditability, profile and impact.
This workshop was rated by 74% of respondents as either “good” or “excellent”
and given an average score of 4 out of 5. One respondent disliked the fact that it
was of exactly the same format as last year, but feedback was generally very
positive as reflected in the following comments:
-“Brilliant presenter, succinct and extremely helpful advice and tips – great flow
to an engaging session”
-“Great facilitation and practical application”
18
2.6 Reflection and Collaboration Sessions
2.6.1 Collaboration Session
On the morning of the final day after the repeat
of the workshop sessions, the Summit
participants came together for an interactive
session that provided them with a chance to
structure their own meetings and identify
potential collaborators that they could work with
beyond the Summit. The aim of the session was
to strengthen the Laureus network.
As participants could only attend half of the
workshops on offer, there was an opportunity
during the collaboration session for participants
to meet the presenters of other workshops if they wanted to find out more about a particular
topic they had missed. Alongside this there were regional meetings to discuss collaboration
opportunities for African, Latin American and Australian project participants. Laureus staff were
also on hand to offer participants a chance to share ideas and Laureus’ social media team were
there to offer their expertise on Facebook, Twitter and how to use social media.
Of the 52 respondents, 83% of them gave the session a rating of “good” or “excellent”
highlighting its success. This is reflected in some of the comments that attendees gave:
2.6.2 Feedback Session
This session provided an update on the Foundation’s strategy and looked at how the Summit
fits in with the future direction of the Foundation and where it will be in years to come. The
strategy has three principles and it simple terms embraces the following:
1. To maximise the impact on young people around the world;
2. To gather better information on how they are making a difference to young peoples’ lives;
3. To effectively communicate this so that funders, governments, and businesses understand
the value of their work and will invest in the sport for global change sector.
-“Great process and at the right time in the programme”
-“After a long week and overloaded it still worked well”
-“Great addition to the conference. Good format to have tables and
open space”
19
There was a lot of feedback on how useful it was to see Laureus’ strategy, and overall 71%
rated this session as “good” or “excellent”, as reflected in the following comments:
2.6.3 Reflection and Action Planning
This session was designed as a springboard for post-Summit collaboration. Participants were
given action planning questions, asking them to reflect on what they had taken from the Summit
and how they will now go about putting this into practice. The questions were as follows:
1. What are the most useful ideas you have heard at the summit?
2. What can you take away from the summit and apply?
3. How will you engage your organisation with these actions?
A personal journal was provided for
participants in the packs given to them at the
beginning of the Summit.
Overall, 60% of survey respondents rated this
session as “good” or “excellent”. As this
session came at the end of 3 days there was
mixed reviews about it due to energy levels;
some thought it was a bit too long or tiring,
while other thought it was brilliant. As one
respondent sums up in the following words
as:
“Appreciated overview of strategy and opportunity to give feedback
on meaningful initiatives”
“It was good to learn what direction Laureus is heading towards”
“It was great to realise how much more focused we all were in my
group after the 3 days of packed communication”
20
3.0 Impact findings
This section analyses the main results from the survey of project representatives at the Summit.
The results were gathered from two sub-surveys, one of which evaluated the Summit and the
other which was a network consultation which generated a baseline for later comparison. There
were 54 and 51 respondents for each survey respectively, a more than sufficient quantity to
make statistical inference from. Three months after the Summit, a follow-up survey was carried
out to compare interaction levels pre- and post-Summit.
Most of the survey questions asked project representatives to respond to each question with a
rating between 1 and 5, which is interpreted to mean “bad” or “very little”, to “excellent” or “very
high” depending on what was being asked. For feedback on what themes respondents would
like to see more of, and how they feel that they could contribute to the Laureus network see
Appendix 1. The key findings from the Summit are as follows.
3.1 Effectiveness of the Summit
3.1.1 Participant feedback
In terms of participant feedback, the Summit was deemed to be a great success, with 100% of
respondents rating the Summit overall as between “good” and “excellent”. Roughly 96% of
participants rated the overall organisation of the event and overall service from Laureus staff as
“good” to “excellent”. This was reflected in the positive comments received, several of which
are included below:
36%
60%
4%
Figure 3.1 Overall Ranking of the Sport for Good Summit
Good
Excellent
Very Good
- “I felt energised and enthused to
carry on the fight”
- “Excellent, practical and proof that
feedback about the Summit is
taken seriously”
- “Very professionally organized, a
good space for exchanging ideas,
a diverse range of topics and
speakers”
- “Thanks for this incredible event
and for giving us the possibility to
live this fantastic experience”
21
3.1.2 Social media impact
It is of value to consider the social media impact that the Summit delivered in order to assess its
popularity, how well-known it has become, and it also serves as one indicator as to whether the
Summit was a good investment for Laureus. This is the first time the social media aspect of the
Summit has been looked at, which will be useful in future evaluations as a benchmark for
comparison. The social media impact draws on information from the Laureus website1 along
with a limited amount of wider internet analytics.
The Laureus website saw its greatest amount of hits during the initial stage of the Summit, with
425 hits on 12th November, falling to 250 by 16th November. Although most themed searches
on the Laureus website focused around FC Barcelona where the Summit was based2, this traffic
cannot be associated only with the Summit as three other news pieces ran that week on the
Laureus website, some of which had more Facebook ‘likes’ than the Summit itself.
Social Media interaction demonstrates the level of interest associated with the Summit globally.
The graph below shows the frequency of social media users that mentioned the Laureus
Summit. There was a significant amount of traffic around the time of the Summit, however this
quickly fell post-Summit suggesting little follow-up activity on the web. The reason for this can
be partly explained by the Twitter ‘tweets’ of the Summit’s participants and a few members of
the general public.
Figure 3.2 Number of social media interactions around the time of the Summit and
afterwards
Source: Topsy.com
However, this search engine is very term specific, and looking at individual websites and blogs
reveals a lot more buzz around the Summit, with most of these websites experiencing Twitter
‘tweets’, Facebook ‘likes’, or comments. The Summit photos posted on Laureus’ Facebook
group alone received 2,235 views (18% of its members) and 40 social interactions i.e. ‘likes’,
‘comments’ or ‘shares’ on Facebook. Several participants of the Summit also posted news
articles or blogs on their websites. One participant, the Right to Dream organisation based in
Ghana, then received a comment from an organisation called CHILD Liberia, expressing an
interest in the opportunities and possible linkages with the Laureus network. This highlights the
potential benefits of harnessing social media effectively.
1 Provided by Metlwater Buzz on behalf of Laureus.
2 Data provided by Meltwater Buzz on behalf of Laureus.
22
According to Meltwater Buzz, there were 1,079 hits on Microblogs (87%) during the week of the
Summit and 119 hits on social media sites (9.5%) that referred to Laureus itself. Although it is
not possible to distinguish general Laureus interest from the Summit, the fact that an estimated
21% of these hits came from Spain where the Summit was held, suggests that the Summit was
responsible for a significant number. The popularity of Microblogs suggests that there is a lot of
active interest as opposed to passive interest, such as Facebook ‘likes’, which would imply a
dedicated fan base for Laureus and the Summit in general. This coupled with the popularity of
Laureus’ Facebook photos means that there is a wide-range of interests.
In general, as this is the first time social media has been incorporated into the Summit
assessment it is difficult to make any direct comparisons, particularly given the basic media
tools used here. However, Ecorys would recommend a greater emphasis on social media
advertising by both Laureus itself and by encouraging participants to do the same, in order to
raise the profile of the Summit and attract sport for development projects.
3.2 Project interaction levels
3.2.1 Project interaction levels prior to the Summit
In order to create a relevant baseline assessment of the existing interactions between projects
before and after the Summit, the framework proposed by Ecorys (2011) was used.
Respondents were asked to rate themselves against the following:
Respondents were asked to rate themselves against these three measures during the Summit
in order to assess the amount of interaction they had with other Laureus projects pre-Summit.
23
The survey looked at project interaction levels both within a project’s country (if applicable), and
across the wider Laureus network.
From the 51 survey responses received, there was a relatively high level of awareness and
knowledge of other projects, particularly within project representatives’ own countries. The
average rating for this measure was 2.8 out of 5, or “good”. As Figure 3.3 below demonstrates,
within country 35% of participants said that they were quite aware to strongly aware of other
funded projects and 37% had some to strong knowledge of the activities that other funded
projects are involved in. This compares to 30% and 22% respectively for projects within the
wider Laureus network. Respondent’s awareness and knowledge of other projects was
relatively heterogeneous across ratings, as shown in Figure 3.4. This high variation is most
likely due to the mix of old and new members at the Summit.
The level of communication and knowledge exchange was slightly lower than general
awareness and knowledge of other projects. The average rating for this second interaction
measure was 2.3 out of 5 meaning that respondents did not undertake a great deal of
communication or exchange, and which suggests that these indicators should be a continued
priority for the Summit. Results were also more homogenous between countries and the wider
network (suggesting that once a project is aware of the other it is relatively easy to establish and
maintain communication wherever they may be). This is not surprising given technological
innovations in communications.
Figure 3.3 Percentage of respondents who rated their levels of knowledge and interaction across
various measures as “very high” or “high”
Particular emphasis at the Summit should be placed on facilitating collaboration and partnership
working between projects with ratings highly skewed towards the response of “little”
collaboration. Looking at this third measure overall, the average rating was 1.7 out of 5, which
is very low. Some reasons for this can also be found in Figure 3.3, where it is evident that there
are also few projects who carry out a great deal of joint organisation or participation in
24
fundraising or sporting events. Within country not a single respondent had high or very high
amounts of collaboration in joint fundraising. Respondents said that this was due to time and
financial constraints. Nevertheless results indicate that there is the need for greater
encouragement of collaboration and partnership working.
Overall the survey has shown there is relatively strong awareness of other projects. However,
encouraging more exchange, and focusing on collaborative workings, should be strongly
targeted for future Summits (Figure 3.4).
Figure 3.4 Distribution of existing project interactions with respect to the three measures of
interaction
From the qualitative evidence gathered shortly after the Summit, a few general themes relating
to future interaction arose. In general, the Summit seemed to have a positive effect on
representative’s desires to collaborate, with almost every respondent saying that their
organisation had something to offer which could help other projects. There was also a strong
desire by the majority of respondents for an increase in communication post-Summit. They
suggested that this could be facilitated by Laureus via an online network/forum to enable the
sharing of ideas, project collaboration, and knowledge exchange. Several project
representatives also showed enthusiasm for a coordinated international youth exchange
programme.
25
The key for Laureus is to ensure that this enthusiasm and willingness is transformed into
collaborative action. Suggestions such as an online network facilitated by Laureus could provide
an initial starting point post-Summit to achieve this.
3.2.2 Impact of the Summit on interaction and collaboration
There were 16 respondents to the follow-up survey who had also answered the original surveys,
and could therefore be used to estimate the impact of the Summit1. It should be noted that the
follow-up survey occurred three months after the Summit, and as such some respondents noted
that they had not had time to form partnerships or to contact potential partners. A sample size
of 16 is also relatively modest, and as such any inferences drawn should be treated as
illustrative of those organisations that responded.
Overall, respondents noted that their level of interaction with other projects 3-months on had
improved as a result of the Summit. The following graphs show a breakdown of the Summit’s
impact on the indicators of interaction. The results from the 16 project participant respondents
are compared with the baseline data from the same people. This first graph compares the
levels of interaction within country (if applicable), and the second graph compares results within
the context of the wider Laureus network. The comparable distributions of interaction level
ratings are provided in Appendix 1.
1 There were 20 respondents in total; however 4 of these were not comparable as they had not completed the original
two sub-surveys.
- “It’s good to meet up initially, [it allows you to] get to know each other and spot
potential collaboration”
- “In your country you have no-one to share your challenges and stories with, this
feels like a community…it motivates you and inspires you"
- “I really enjoyed participating! I got a lot out of it. I hope there's follow-up to extend
support, networking with forums for sharing ideas and curricula”
- “We could share the outcomes of collaboration to showcase the impact brought
by the Summit”
26
Figures 3.5 and 3.6 Percentage of respondents who rated their levels of knowledge and
interaction across various measures as “very high” or “high”
Within their own country (if applicable)
Within the wider Laureus Network
27
Awareness and knowledge
Significant improvement occurred due to the Summit in this area, particularly in knowledge of
other project activities in the context of the wider Laureus network. Within their own country, the
average rating of respondents rose from 3.2 to 3.9 out of 5, and the share of awareness and
knowledge rated either “high” or “very high” rose from 50% to 69%. This is reflected in the
distribution of results in Appendix 1 which is highly positively skewed. Within the wider Laureus
network the benefits from the Summit were just as positive with the average rating rising from
2.9 to 3.6 out of 5. The greatest impact was on the amount of respondents who rated their
knowledge as “high” or “very high”, increasing from 28% to 53%. These results represent
significant improvements in knowledge and awareness of other projects thanks to the Summit,
among these 16 organisations.
Communication and knowledge exchange
Somewhat surprisingly the graphs would seem to suggest that overall there was less
communication and knowledge exchange after the Summit with no change post-Summit within
the wider Laureus network, and an 8.5% drop within country. However, this is only for the
“high” or “very high” ratings. In both cases the mean rating rose from 2.7 to 3.2 out of 5 which
are reflected in the distribution of ratings in the Appendix, with lower ratings pre-Summit than
post-Summit.
In can be inferred from this is that the amount of communications and knowledge exchange is
tending to centre on the average. The Summit may be encouraging some on-going
communication but not a step change or there may be other factors at play such as timing and
time constraints. Several respondents noted that due to end of year planning and the beginning
of the year roll-out of projects they have been too busy to begin communications, and are
intending to do so soon.
Collaboration and partnership working
There was a marked improvement under the indicator partnership working and collaboration
after the Summit amongst the 16 organisations, with “high” or “very high” ratings almost
doubling both within country and the wider Laureus network. However, when considering all
three indicators of this measure, the results are less positive with a small overall increase of 5%
within country, and 7% within the wider Laureus Network. The lack of, or reduction in,
organising joint events and fundraising is an area for concern. It is most likely that projects
have not yet had sufficient time to realise their plans for partnership working, and so the full
impact of the Summit cannot be fully measured here. Respondents noted financial and time
constraints as reasons for a lack of partnership working, and although external to the Summit,
potential ideas and solutions to this could be considered by Laureus and the Summit
organisers.
Overall however, results are positive due to the doubling of collaboration and partnership, with
the average rating by respondents rising from 1.9 to 2.3 out of 5 within their country, and from 2
to 2.3 out of 5 within the wider Laureus network.
28
Project representatives were also asked to provide feedback from the Summit on what they
learnt, and how their organisation had benefited from interaction with other projects. A few of
their comments are given below.
3.3 Comparison with the Laureus Global Summit 2011
In 2011 the Laureus Global Summit was held in London. The Summit was widely considered a
great success, receiving much positive feedback and a high profile in the media, partly due to
the strong team of Academy members assembled. Ecorys UK carried out the evaluation for the
Summit, making direct comparisons between the Barcelona and London Summit possible1.
When considering the Summit as a whole, respondents were more positive about the 2012
Summit, with 100% of participants rating it “high” or “very high” compared to 96% in
2011. Looking at participants’ ratings from the workshops and sports sessions, the success of
this Summit is even clearer. Although in both categories more sessions were offered in 2011,
participants gave the sessions much higher ratings for 2012: 79% compared with 53% for
the workshops; and 94% compared with 70% for the sports sessions. It is clear that the
Summit has learnt from the evaluation of 2011, committed to continuous improvement, and
enhanced its quality dramatically, particularly in terms of the sessions it delivers. This was
reflected by project comments this year, with ten people stating how they could see that
Laureus had taken on board feedback from the previous year’s Summit.
1 Results from the 2011 Summit can be found in “Laureus Sport for Good Foundation Global Summit 2011 Impact
Report Final Report” Submitted by Ecorys UK
- “The exchanges provide above all, inspiration, and encouragement that we are all
doing good work but also face the same hurdles regarding constraints. The
capacity to consider things a bit differently, to learn from other groups as to how
they manage challenges [and] run their activities has been beneficial and shared
across staff and volunteers. In addition, the possibility to share news of the
meeting and of Laureus in general, has enabled us to enhance the reputation of
what we do and the work that we achieve. Finally, it enabled us to communicate
to a much wider international platform, which has enabled us to build our profile,
which of course assists to build our capacity”
- “We were able to get in touch with many organisations, big and small. Sharing
experiences and future plans together can be of mutual benefit if followed up
well”
- “Our board of directors is definitely more active than it was before. Our
communications has also improved, which has resulted in increased openings of
our monthly newsletter. On a personal level I came back re-energized. I cannot
express how grateful I am”
29
In terms of project interaction levels the baseline case was higher before the Barcelona Summit
2012 than for the London Summit 2011. This is interesting since it highlights not only the greater
challenge for the 2012 Summit in terms of driving further improvements, but also given the
positive results that success is likely to be cumulative; a trend of collaboration was set in train
by Laureus at the London Summit and amongst repeat participants, which the Barcelona
Summit helped to consolidate. The graphs below compare the average ratings of the indicators
for interaction and collaboration from both before and after the London and Barcelona Summits.
Figures 3.7 and 3.8 Average rating of interaction levels for London and Barcelona Summits
Within country (if applicable)
Within the wider Laureus Network
30
As Figures 3.7 and 3.8 show the interaction and collaboration levels both before and after the
Summits, it is possible to observe the relative difference, and therefore impact that each Summit
had. The follow-up survey carried out after the London Summit showed a marked improvement
in awareness and knowledge of other projects and information exchange (particularly within the
network), with a smaller improvement in collaborative working and partnerships. Compared with
this the Barcelona Summit delivered marginally less, but not dissimilar improvements in the
awareness and knowledge of other projects and in knowledge and communication exchange.
The findings from both Summits highlight again that fostering collaboration and partnerships are
a challenging area for development (and how they are to some extent out of the Summit’s
hands afterwards). Nonetheless, in the area of collaboration and partnerships, the Barcelona
Summit actually delivered a greater level of improvement than the London Summit the previous
year. This is a positive result, and reflects the emphasis placed upon encouraging this through
the design of the agenda and in particular the Speed Networking and Collaboration sessions
(not to mention the many opportunities for informal networking, programmed into the agenda in-
between).
At the same time, the slight decline in some indicators within the Laureus network between the
impact of London 2011 and the baseline for Barcelona 2012 suggests that Laureus could devise
additional mechanisms to help maintain “good” or “excellent” ratings across measures of
interaction. It clearly reiterates the point made earlier that Laureus may wish to explore
devoting more resources to fostering collaboration outside of the Summit environment, if it
wishes to achieve its objectives, for example through regional and thematic events, or through
online mechanisms.
In conclusion both Summits were well received, with the Barcelona Summit receiving more
positive ratings than the London Summit, particularly when considering the workshops and
sports sessions. Both Summits received high praise when looking at the feedback given. The
fact that levels were higher pre-Barcelona, highlights not only the success of the London
Summit but gives a more positive weighting to the Barcelona Summit’s impacts as one would
expect it to be more difficult to achieve higher average results again on already strong levels of
interaction1. The Barcelona Summit built well on the previous year’s Summit. Results also
confirm the on-going importance of encouraging greater collaboration and partnership working
amongst the Laureus network.
1 i.e. due to the laws of diminishing returns
31
4.0 Case Studies
4.1 Virreyes Hockey
Virreyes Hockey (http://www.sportanddev.org/en/connect/organisation.cfm?org=389)
is a hockey-based project near Buenos Aires that aims to provide girls and young
women a space for personal development and integration through sport. It offers an
education based sports curriculum to those aged between 5 and 22 from vulnerable
backgrounds. It teaches the values of hard work, tolerance, respect, responsibility
and honesty.
The project representative at the Summit came away saying that they had learnt a lot
from other countries’ practices. They utilised this new found knowledge upon
returning to Argentina by implementing new monitoring and evaluation systems
along with management tools: for example they ran feedback sessions with
members of the team to improve leadership.
Virreyes Hockey utilised the networking sessions that the Summit provided to go on
and work with several other projects. It has shared information with Instituto Fazer
Acontecer (IFA) in Brazil, gained further monitoring and evaluation tools from Passe
de Magica, and has planned to collaborate further with Sports Sans Frontieres.
Vierreyes Hockey was also already in contact with Peace Players International
before the Summit to organize methodology training, and they made use of the
Summit to build on this dialogue.
32
4.2 I Challenge Myself
I Challenge Myself (http://ichallengemyself.org/) aims to increase health awareness
and self-esteem among public high school students in the United States through
sport and community involvement. These challenges provide the students with
opportunities to develop healthy lifestyles, to learn and grow, and prepare them for
life ahead.
Thanks to the Summit, I Challenge Myself managed to greatly improve upon the way
it operates. Their board of directors is more active, thanks to the idea of shared
leadership discussed at the Summit. The project has become better known, with
increased readership of its newsletter thanks to a more strategic use of social media
tools and the provided ‘community checklist’. On a personal note the project
representative came back re-energized, humbled by what she had heard and could
not ‘express how grateful’ they were that they had attended the Summit.
Since the Summit, I Challenge Myself has sought guidance on leadership work from
Impact and liaised with Waves For Change on media suggestions and the formation
of a HIV/AIDS lesson plan. Due a joint frustration at the lack of sharing best practice
systems across programme sites, they also partnered with Peace Players
International (PPI), and have begun to use their online platform for sharing best
practices and provide feedback themselves. This is a step in the right direction and
hopefully one that PPI and I Challenge Myself will be able to spread throughout the
network.
33
4.3 Peace Players International
Peace Players International (http://www.peaceplayersintl.org/) follows the mantra that
‘children who play together can live together’. They work in four continents with young
people from divided communities, uniting and educating them through sport. With a
recent focus on local ownership and constant innovation PPI now employs mostly local
staff, runs a leadership development programme for youths that ‘qualify’ from the PPI
programme and they are developing a technical assistance and training programme to
share knowledge with other sports for developments projects. PPI can therefore be
considered as one of the most collaborative and international of the Laureus supported
projects.
At the Summit, project staff who had become used to giving ideas and lessons to other
projects went away with lessons themselves. It was noted that they increased their
institutional capacity by learning about how other projects are run and then applying
this to PPI’s case. They noted that there was a great deal of interest in collaborative
working, but that this is inhibited by funding issues, meaning projects have to become
more creative in their approach to funding and developing potential opportunities.
PPI nonetheless took away a lot of connections with other organisations, with six
collaborations in action or planned at the time of writing. These include: Special
Olympics Russia (training opportunities); Barclays (knowledge exchange); I Challenge
Myself (sharing best practice); Up2US (building on an existing relationship with potential
training opportunities); Scottish Sports Futures (resulting in a visit to learn and
exchange ideas), and Active Knowledge (providing advice for PPI on goal achievement
for its global retreat). This diverse set of interactions highlights how PPI is going from
strength to strength and becoming a key player in the sport for development world,
partly thanks to the Summit.
34
5.0 Conclusion and Recommendations
5.1 Overall effectiveness of the Summit
Based on the evidence in this report, it
can be concluded that overall the Global
Summit 2012 was a great success.
Project participants from the Laureus
network and other sport for
development enthusiasts were given the
opportunity to come together for 3 days
in a fantastic environment to share
knowledge and learn from one another.
It was apparent from Ecorys’
observations and informal discussions
at the Summit that participants enjoyed themselves and took away much knowledge, contacts
and inspiration from the event; this is also reflected in the positive survey results and formal
consultation evidence. This is largely due to the diverse range of sessions and the strong
organisation of the event, as well as the many and broad representation of organisations
attending.
In particular, the following areas were deemed the most successful1: the sports sessions; the
workshops on unlocking innovation from youth, scaling up, and best practice in international
development (due no doubt to the wide relevance of the topics and the quality of the
speakers/facilitators); and the networking opportunities at the beginning and end of the Summit.
The Summit 2012 was a great success in terms of sharing knowledge and good practice, one of
the major themes of the event. Overall it increased the level of interactions between projects,
with some early collaborations being consolidated after the Summit which may not have
occurred otherwise. On top of this it is possible to see that the Summits in general appear to
generate longer-term impacts. This is shown by the higher level of interaction immediately prior
to the Summit 2012 when compared with the baseline before the London Summit, which bodes
well for continuous improvements.
Nonetheless, absolute levels of collaboration and partnership still remain relatively low. This
can be partly accounted for by the fact that many of these interactions and collaborations will
require more time to develop fully and the resource constraints that organisations face (as well
as the difficulty of securing a high response rate from the post-Summit survey). We consider
the implications of this in the following section. Lastly, the media impact of this Summit from the
evidence given here suggests that there is strong potential to be more active in this area to
1 In chronological order of the percentage of respondents who rated the events as either “good” or “excellent”
35
raise awareness. It should also be noted that the media analysis in this report could be looked
at in more depth in the future, to truly evaluate the Summit’s effectiveness in this area.
5.2 Key lessons
Laureus has gone a long way to improve the Global Summit for 2012 and to address previous
issues and weaknesses by taking on the advice available at the end of the previous Summit,
and its staff are to be commended. Laureus has improved upon delivery, with the extra
sessions around collaboration and networking being received particularly positively. The
structure of the Summit has also improved (although participants still felt that possibly too much
was trying to be achieved in such a short space of time; some workshops and networking
sessions could benefit from more time and reflection). This highlights the benefits of the
extensive planning and organisation phase which precedes each Summit, the careful choice of
location and venues, and monitoring and evaluation and the proactive approach to responding
to this and other feedback received.
On the issue of stimulating greater interaction and collaboration, it is also apparent that there is
a desire for greater facilitation of this post-Summit by Laureus, for example through informal
networks such as project forums. The projects must go some way to initiate this themselves but
Laureus should also consider what further role they can play in order to maximise the return on
the Summit. For example, although the Summit already runs several very successful
networking sessions, it might be of value to have a separate capacity building session for new-
comers to the network, such as on the evening before the main Summit starts, with advice and
tips around how to strategize effectively in the formation of partnerships. A lower-cost option,
financially and time wise, might be to provide extra guidance material for new-comers in the
welcome packs sent out before the Summit. Outside of the Summit, if finance presents one of
the main barriers to collaboration then Laureus should consider how it can build on the strong
services it already offers to incentivise projects and help them further to collaborate, through its
funding mechanisms, provision of financial information and other types of support. A particular
focus should be placed on new projects and those that have yet to establish partnerships.
Another common recommendation that arose from participant consultation was for
diversification of those who attend the Summit. The inclusion of beneficiaries and of more
organisations that are not Laureus supported projects (such as corporates and other NGOs)
would be of benefit to project representatives, and at the same time would help to raise the
profile of the Summit further.
There was such general enthusiasm for the Summit that several respondents recommended
that there should also be Regional Summits running alongside the Global Summit, and a few
people also suggested that the Summit should travel the globe more; such as heading over to
Asia next year. This also presents interesting potential solutions to widening the Laureus
network and deepening collaboration.
36
A final minor criticism of the Summit was that more coffee and beverages could have been on
offer (important when the agenda is as packed and intense as it is), although this is something
that presumably can be easily addressed for future Summits!
To summarise, the Global Summit 2012 has been a great success for those that participated.
The opportunities for Laureus projects to learn and share have been its greatest achievement.
Although there are some suggestions for improvement worth considering, these do not reflect
negatively upon the content of the Summit, nor how it was run. The Summit acts as a
springboard for potential partnerships and collaborations to form. The high demand for
information sharing and networking in a global world, which requires some element of face to
face contact in order to be truly effective, ensures that in its current state the Summit will always
be popular and well received if Laureus wishes it to continue.
A1
Annex One:
Table1: Possible future themes rated by respondents from 1 “low” to 5 “very high” and then
illustrated with each rating as a percentage of the total
A2
Figures 5.1-5.6 Distribution of project interactions with respect to the three measures of
interaction both after and before the Summit
Within their own country (if applicable)
Within the wider Laureus Network
A3
Table 2: General Feedback & Potential Offerings from participants
A4