DOCSLIB.ORG

ACCELERATED Programme Evaluation –

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ACCELERATED Programme Evaluation – Summative Evaluation of the Enhanced and Accelerated WASH Programmes ACCELERATED Programme Evaluation – Final Report Scope: March 2015 to June 2019 30th January 2020, commissioned by UNICEF in Ghana Ipsos MORI & FCG Sweden 18-093236-01 | Version 4 | Internal Use Only | This work was carried out in accordance with the requirements of the international quality standard for Market Research, ISO 20252:2012, and with the Ipsos MORI Terms and Conditions which can be found at http://www.ipsos-mori.com/terms. © UNICEF 2020 Ipsos MORI & FCG Sweden | Accelerated Programme Evaluation Final Report 18-093236-01 | Version 4 | Internal Use Only | This work was carried out in accordance with the requirements of the international quality standard for Market Research, ISO 20252:2012, and with the Ipsos MORI Terms and Conditions which can be found at http://www.ipsos-mori.com/terms. © UNICEF 2020 18-093236-01 | Version 4 | Internal Use Only | This work was carried out in accordance with the requirements of the international quality standard for Market Research, ISO 20252:2012, and with the Ipsos MORI Terms and Conditions which can be found at http://www.ipsos-mori.com/terms. © UNICEF 2020 Ipsos MORI & FCG Sweden | Accelerated Programme Evaluation Final Report Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 6 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 13 1.1 The Accelerated WASH programme ............................................................................................................. 13 1.2 Background to the programme ..................................................................................................................... 14 1.3 Revised Theory of Change .............................................................................................................................. 15 1.4 Evaluation purpose, objectives and scope ................................................................................................... 18 1.5 Evaluation Criteria ........................................................................................................................................... 18 1.6 Evaluation Questions ....................................................................................................................................... 19 1.7 Methodology .................................................................................................................................................... 20 1.8 Challenges and limitations ............................................................................................................................. 25 2 Evaluation Findings & Preliminary Conclusions (by Criterion) ........................................... 28 2.1 Relevance .......................................................................................................................................................... 29 2.2 Effectiveness ..................................................................................................................................................... 35 2.3 Efficiency ........................................................................................................................................................... 78 3 Final Conclusions ...................................................................................................................... 86 4 Lessons Learned ......................................................................................................................... 88 5 Recommendations ..................................................................................................................... 90 Annexes .......................................................................................................................................... 99 List of Figures Figure 1: Programme timeline ....................................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 2: Revised Theory of Change ............................................................................................................................. 17 List of Tables Table 1: Summary of recommendations ...................................................................................................................... 12 Table 2: Key evaluation questions for the Accelerated programme ........................................................................ 19 Table 3: Interviews completed by stakeholder type for the Accelerated programme ......................................... 23 Table 4: Focus groups for the Accelerated programme ............................................................................................. 24 Table 5: Key evaluation questions for the Accelerated programme related to relevance ................................... 29 Table 6: Key evaluation questions for the Accelerated programme related to effectiveness ............................. 35 Table 7: ODF communities in Ghana by implementing organisation ...................................................................... 61 Table 8: Key evaluation questions for the Accelerated programme related to efficiency ................................... 78 Table 9: Strategic recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 91 Table 10: Operational recommendations ..................................................................................................................... 97 18-093236-01 | Version 4 | Internal Use Only | This work was carried out in accordance with the requirements of the international quality standard for Market Research, ISO 20252:2012, and with the Ipsos MORI Terms and Conditions which can be found at http://www.ipsos-mori.com/terms. © UNICEF 2020 Ipsos MORI & FCG Sweden | Accelerated Programme Evaluation Final Report Table of Acronyms BaSIS – Basic Sanitation Information System CLTS – Community-led total sanitation CONIWAS - Coalition of NGOs in Water and Sanitation CSO – Civil Society Organisation CWSA – Community Water and Sanitation Agency DAC – Development Assistance Committee DCD – Department for Community Development DCE - District Chief Executive DICCS – District Inter-Agency Coordinating Committee on Sanitation DHS – Demographics and Health Surveys DRP – District Resource Person EHSD – Environmental, Health and Sanitation Directorate EMIS – Education Management Information System GAC – Global Affairs Canada GES – Ghana Education Service GHS – Ghana Health Service GoG – Government of Ghana HHETPS – Health and Hygiene Education Through Play and Sports HWWS – Handwashing with Soap JMP - WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme KEQ – Key Evaluation Question KNUST – Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology KPM – Key Performance Measurement MDGs – Millennium Development Goals MICS - Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys MHM – Menstrual Hygiene Management 18-093236-01 | Version 4 | Internal Use Only | This work was carried out in accordance with the requirements of the international quality standard for Market Research, ISO 20252:2012, and with the Ipsos MORI Terms and Conditions which can be found at http://www.ipsos-mori.com/terms. © UNICEF 2020 Ipsos MORI & FCG Sweden | Accelerated Programme Evaluation Final Report MMDA – Metropolitan, Municipal and District Assemblies NCWSP – National Community Water and Sanitation Programme NDPC – National Development Planning Commission NESSAP – National Environmental Sanitation Strategy and Action Plan NGO – Non-governmental organisation OD – Open defecation ODF – Open defecation free OECD – Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development O&M – Operations and Maintenance RICCS – Regional Inter-Agency Coordinating Committee on Sanitation RSMS – Rural Sanitation Model and Strategy SDGs – Sustainable Development Goals SHEP – School Health Education Programme SIS – Sector Information System SKMI – Sanitation Knowledge Management Initiative STSM – Small Town Sanitation Model ToR – Terms of Reference ToC – Theory of Change WASH – Water, Sanitation and Hygiene WSUP - Water and Sanitation for the Urban Poor WinS – WASH in Schools 18-093236-01 | Version 4 | Internal Use Only | This work was carried out in accordance with the requirements of the international quality standard for Market Research, ISO 20252:2012, and with the Ipsos MORI Terms and Conditions which can be found at http://www.ipsos-mori.com/terms. © UNICEF 2020 Ipsos MORI & FCG Sweden | Accelerated Programme Evaluation - Final Report 6 Executive Summary 1. Introduction UNICEF in Ghana supported implementation of the Accelerated Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) programme from March 2015 to June 2019 in Ghana’s Northern region, where access to WASH-related services and related health outcomes are among the lowest in the country. At the start of the programme, only 68% of households and 37% of schools had access to improved water services in the Northern region. Additionally, open defecation was widely practiced (by 72% of the population). Subsequently, the Accelerated programme proposal identified three specific objectives: 1) to increase equitable access to suitable household and institutional sanitation facilities; 2) to facilitate the adoption of good hygiene practices for improved
Load more

Recommended publications
  • WINSTON-SALEM OPEN: DAY 2 MEDIA NOTES Monday, August 24, 2015
    WINSTON-SALEM OPEN: DAY 2 MEDIA NOTES Monday, August 24, 2015 Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, USA | August 23 – 29, 2015 Draw: S-48, D-16 | Prize Money: $616,210 | Surface: Outdoor Hard ATP Info: Tournament Info: ATP PR & Marketing: www.ATPWorldTour.com www.winstonsalemopen.com Greg Sharko: [email protected] Twitter: @ATPWorldTour @WSOpen #WSOpen Press Room: +1 913 953 0094 Facebook: facebook.com/ATPWorldTour facebook.com/WinstonSalemOpen DEFENDING CHAMP ROSOL, CINCY SEMI-FINALIST DOLGOPOLOV IN ACTION STARS ON STADIUM, YOUNG GUNS ON COURT 2: Day 2 of the Winston-Salem Open on Monday features 10 first-round and four second-round matches, kicking off with defending champion Lukas Rosol versus 2014 Roland Garros semifinalist Ernests Gulbis. Also in action on Stadium Court are former World No. 2 Tommy Haas, No. 13 seed Steve Johnson and Cincinnati semi-finalist Alexandr Dolgopolov, who opens his Winston-Salem campaign against 19-year-old Australian Thanasi Kokkinakis. Three other teenagers – No. 8 seed Borna Coric, qualifier Frances Tiafoe and Hyeon Chung – are playing Monday on Court 2. DEFENDING CHAMPION RETURNS: Last year, Rosol took an unorthodox route to the Winston- Salem Open title. Seeded seventh, he received a first-round bye, second-round retirement (d. Harrison 3-6, 2-1 ret) and quarterfinal walkover (d. Isner). In his three full matches, Rosol needed three sets to beat No. 10 seed Pablo Andujar, No. 9 seed Yen-Hsun Lu and Jerzy Janowicz. GULBIS SHOWING SIGNS: Rosol’s opponent Gulbis is only 14 months removed from cracking the Top 10 of the Emirates ATP Rankings.
    [Show full text]
  • Lena Schoneborn and Adam Marosi Are the Winners at the 5Th Kremlin Cup in Moscow
    25 MAY 2015 LENA SCHONEBORN AND ADAM MAROSI ARE THE WINNERS AT THE 5TH KREMLIN CUP IN MOSCOW Lena Schoneborn (Germany) was imperious in the last round of shooting and running, keeping her nerves when she needed them most and from there the Olympic Champion was unstoppable as she raced towards the finish line to take the gold in Moscow. The Women`s Final was decided by a thrilling battle. Until the last round, Sarolta Kovacs (Hungary) was leading, followed by Anna Burjak (Russia) with an 8-second gap. Schoneborn started the Combined Event with an incredible 20-second deficit to the leaders. Until the last shooting three leaders kept their positions, but Schoneborn quickly reached Burjak and approached Kovacs. Donata Rimsaite (Russia) left Burjak behind and the three leaders of the women’s competition became evident: Lena Schoneborn, Sarolta Kovacs and Donata Rimsaite, repeating the podium from the 2012 Kremlin Cup. In the men’s event, Amro El Geziry (Egypt) was dominant in Fencing and Swimming but a highly disappointing performance in Riding blunted his chances of success. It was Adam Marosi (Hungary) who led from the beginning to the end to claim victory. Maxim Kustov (Russia) finished second, followed by Valentin Prades (France) and Ricardo de Luca (Italy). The Kremlin Cup is one of the most prestigious Modern Pentathlon international competitions. With a record number of participating countries, the organisers were delighted with the turnout and the audience was once again captivated by the high-class competition. Final Results: Women 1. Lena Schoneborn (Germany) – 1329. 2.Sarolta Kovacs (Hungary) – 1325.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Las Vegas Media Notes
    TOURNAMENT NOTES as of October 31, 2018 RED ROCK PRO OPEN LAS VEGAS, NV • NOV. 4-11 USTA PRO CIRCUIT WOMEN’S TENNIS RETURNS TO LAS VEGAS, RED ROCK PRO OPEN CONTINUES AUSTRALIAN OPEN WILD CARD CHALLENGE The Red Rock Pro Open returns to Las Vegas for the 12th consecutive year. The tournament also continues the women’s side of the USTA’s Australian Open Wild Card Challenge, which kicked off in Macon, Ga., Andrew Ong/USTA last week. Las Vegas is the third of four consecutive TOURNAMENT INFO women’s hard-court tournaments that make Site: Red Rock Country Club – Las Vegas, Nev. up the women’s side of the Challenge, which will award an American woman a main Website: https://redrockproopen.com draw wild card into the 2019 Australian www.procircuit.usta.com Open. The USTA and Tennis Australia have Madison Brengle won her 12 th career USTA Facebook: Facebook.com/RedRockProOpen a reciprocal agreement in which wild cards Pro Circuit singles title at the $60,000 event in into the 2019 US Open and Australian Landisville, Pa., before the US Open Twitter: @RedRockTennis Opens are exchanged. The Challenge also Qualifying Draw Begins: Sunday, Nov. 4 included an $80,000 events in Macon, Ga., This tournament will be streamed live on Main Draw Begins: Tuesday, Nov. 6 and Tyler, Texas, each of the last two weeks, www.procircuit.usta.com. as well as the WTA $125,000 Series event Main Draw: 32 Singles / 16 Doubles in Houston (week of Nov. 12). Notable players competing in Tyler include: Surface: Hard / Outdoor In addition to the four women’s tournaments, Belinda Bencic, 21, Switzerland Prize Money: $80,000 the Australian Open Wild Card Challenge • Career-high world No.
    [Show full text]
  • Optimal Solutions to Tennis Scoring Systems, Challenge System, Court Surface Allocation and Olympic Games Format
    Optimal Solutions to Tennis Scoring Systems, Challenge System, Court Surface Allocation and Olympic Games Format By Tristan Barnett Scoring Systems The fundamental problem with current scoring systems is the deuce game is very “inefficient”. Some games can last for 25 minutes. The 50-40 game where the server has to win 4 points and the receiver has to win 3 points is very “efficient”. At most only 6 points are played in such a game. The number of games played in a set are significantly reduced since there are more breaks of serve. Hence, with the 50-40 game, a ‘long’ advantage final set is highly unlikely. The author has listed all the current scoring systems in table 1 and proposed scoring systems in the second table 2. The author thinks it makes sense to have just the one game structure and the 50-40 game due to its simplicity I feel is best to achieve this goal. All the early sets are tiebreak with a first-to-7 point tiebreak game at 6 games-all. The final set is advantage with a first-to-7 point tiebreak game at 12 games-all. Playing a final advantage set makes sense to keep with tradition. Matches are either 3 or 5 sets. This simplifies the scoring systems to 2. The author published a paper: Barnett T (2012). Analyzing tennis scoring systems: from the origins to today. Journal of Medicine and Science in Tennis 17(2), 68-77. http://strategicgames.com.au/article32.pdf which demonstrates why the deuce game came about and why the 50-40 game could potentially replace it.
    [Show full text]
  • T O U R N a M E N T S Davis Cup / Fed Cup
    T O U R N A M E N T S DAVIS CUP / FED CUP ATP / WTA / ITF 2006 DAVIS CUP FINAL 2006, Russia–Argentina, Moscow, Russia ATP TOUR Kremlin Cup 2006, Moscow, Russia Sony Ericsson WTA TOUR Kremlin Cup 2006, Moscow, Russia 2007 FED CUP FINAL 2007, Russia – Italy, Moscow, Russia ATP TOUR Kremlin Cup 2007, Moscow, Russia Sony Ericsson WTA TOUR Kremlin Cup 2007, Moscow, Russia 2008 FED CUP CROATIA vs SERBIA ATP TOUR Kremlin Cup 2008, Moscow, Russia Sony Ericsson WTA TOUR Kremlin Cup 2008, Moscow, Russia PBZ ZAGREB INDOORS, ATP 250, 2008, Zagreb,Croatia DAVIS CUP Russia vs Serbia 2008, Moscow, Russia DAVIS CUP Kazakhstan vs Phillipinnes 2008, Astana, Kazakhstan FED CUP Italy vs Spain 2008, Naples, Italy PBZ ZAGREB INDOORS 2008 DAVIS CUP Croatia vs Italy 2008, Dubrovnik, Croatia FED CUP Croatia vs Serbia 2008, Zagreb, Croatia DAVIS CUP Croatia vs Brasil 2008, Zadar, Croatia ASTANA CHALLENGER, NTC Astana, Kazakhstan CROATIA FUTURES F1, NTC Alplan, Zagreb, Croatia CROATIA FUTURES F2, NTC Alplan, Zagreb, Croatia 2009 PBZ ZAGREB INDOORS 2009 ATP TOUR Kremlin Cup 2009, Moscow, Russia Sony Ericsson WTA TOUR Kremlin Cup 2009, Moscow, Russia PBZ ZAGREB INDOORS, ATP 250, 2009, Zagreb,Croatia FED CUP Serbia vs Japan 2009, Belgrade, Serbia DAVIS CUP Serbia vs Uzbekistan 2009, Belgrade, Serbia NTC ALPLAN, ZAGREB FED CUP Russia vs China 2009, Moscow, Russia DAVIS CUP Croatia vs Chile 2009, Poreč, Croatia ASTANA CHALLENGER, NTC Astana, Kazakhstan ITF WOMEN'S, NTC Astana, Kazakhstan ITF WOMEN'S, TC Almaty, Kazakhstan CROATIA FUTURES F1, NTC Alplan, Zagreb, Croatia
    [Show full text]
  • Best of N Contests: Implications of Simpson's Paradox in Tennis Benjamin Wright
    Florida State University Libraries Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations The Graduate School 2012 Best of N Contests: Implications of Simpson's Paradox in Tennis Benjamin Wright Follow this and additional works at the FSU Digital Library. For more information, please contact [email protected] THE FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF EDUCATION BEST OF N CONTESTS: IMPLICATIONS OF SIMPSON’S PARADOX IN TENNIS By BENJAMIN WRIGHT A thesis submitted to the Department of Sport Management in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Degree Awarded: Summer Semester, 2012 Benjamin Wright defended this thesis on June 28, 2012. The members of the supervisory committee were: Ryan Rodenberg Professor Directing Thesis Yu Kyoum Kim Committee Member Michael Mondello Committee Member The Graduate School has verified and approved the above-named committee members, and certifies that the thesis has been approved in accordance with university requirements. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my parents, Bill and Donna Wright, for their support throughout my life. I also greatly appreciate their unquestioned support in my choice to further my education in obtaining a graduate degree. Both have assisted in making this thesis the best paper it can be throughout the editing process and I am indebted to them for this. Next, I would like to thank my major professor, Dr. Ryan Rodenberg, for his great contributions to not only this thesis but also my time in the Florida State University Sport Management Masters program. Working closely with Dr. Rodenberg on this thesis and other projects has been an excellent experience.
    [Show full text]
  • UNICEF-Annual-Report-2018 Revised 1.Pdf
    Annual Report 2018 For every child, every right Data in this report are drawn from the most FRONT COVER: Jasmin, 7, washes her and other United Nations agencies, annual clothes in the sea near the Shamlapur reports prepared by UNICEF Country Offices refugee camp. She is one of many and the Annual Report of the Executive thousands of Rohingya who have sought Director of UNICEF presented to the refuge from Myanmar in Cox’s Bazar Executive Board, 11–13 June 2019. District, Bangladesh. © UNICEF/UN0203392/Sokol For any corrigenda found subsequent to printing, please visit our website at www.unicef.org/publications PAGE 3: UNICEF Executive Director Henrietta H. Fore joins children in their ISBN: 978-92-806-5032-7 classroom during a visit to the Alexandria School in a rural area of northern Hama, © United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) Syrian Arab Republic. June 2019 © UNICEF/UN0264631/Al-Droubi Annual Report 2018 For every child, every right UNICEF Annual Report 2018 MESSAGE FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR On a clear, cold morning in January 2018, I walked and medical care they need. The families reunited with through the front door of UNICEF headquarters in New children who have been recruited into armed forces and York to take up my new role as Executive Director. I felt armed groups. The refugee children finding the protection privileged to begin leading an organization with a noble and opportunities they could not find at home. mission: protecting the rights of every child. But I wanted to do something more. I wanted to open up opportunities The often painful stories of the children and young people for every child.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Foreign Assistance Transitions a Report of the Csis Project on Prosperity and Development Strategic Foreign Assistance Transitions Enhancing U.S
    Strategic Foreign Assistance Transitions Assistance Foreign Strategic a report of the csis project on prosperity and development Strategic Foreign Assistance Transitions enhancing u.s. trade and cooperation relations with middle-income countries 1800 K Street, NW | Washington, DC 20006 Project Director and Tel: (202) 887-0200 | Fax: (202) 775-3199 Principal Author E-mail: [email protected] | Web: www.csis.org Daniel F. Runde Runde Project Adviser Johanna Mendelson Forman Lead Author Amasia Zargarian Contributing Author Ilona Teleki June 2012 ISBN 978-0-89206-723-7 CSIS Ë|xHSKITCy067237zv*:+:!:+:! CHARTING our future Blank a report of the csis project on prosperity and development Strategic Foreign Assistance Transitions enhancing u.s. trade and cooperation relations with middle-income countries Project Director and Principal Author Daniel F. Runde Project Adviser Johanna Mendelson Forman Lead Author Amasia Zargarian Contributing Author Ilona Teleki June 2012 CHARTING our future About CSIS—50th Anniversary Year For 50 years, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) has developed practical solutions to the world’s greatest challenges. As we celebrate this milestone, CSIS scholars continue to provide strategic insights and bipartisan policy solutions to help decisionmakers chart a course toward a better world. CSIS is a bipartisan, nonprofit organization headquartered in Washington, D.C. The Center’s 220 full-time staff and large network of affiliated scholars conduct research and analysis and de- velop policy initiatives that look into the future and anticipate change. Since 1962, CSIS has been dedicated to finding ways to sustain American prominence and prosperity as a force for good in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • 2012 Calendar 11-19-10.Xlsx
    2012 Season Week Starting City Tournament Name Surface Jan 2 Doha Qatar ExxonMobil Open H Chennai Aircel Chennai Open H Brisbane Brisbane International H Jan 9 Sydney Medibank International Sydney H Auckland Heineken Open H Jan 16 Melbourne Australian Open* H Jan 23 Jan 30 Montpellier Open Sud de France IH Zagreb PBZ Zagreb Indoors IH Santiago Movistar Open CL Feb 6 Davis Cup First Round* Feb 13 Costa do Sauipe Brasil Open CL Rotterdam ABN AMRO World Tennis Tournament IH San Jose SAP Open IH Feb 20 Marseille Open 13 IH Memphis Regions Morgan Keegan Championships IH Buenos Aires Copa Claro CL Feb 27 Acapulco Abierto Mexicano Telcel CL Dubai Dubai Duty Free Tennis Championships H Delray Beach Delray Beach International Tennis Championships H Mar 5 Indian Wells BNP Paribas Open H Mar 12 Mar 19 Miami Sony Ericsson Open H Mar 26 Apr 02 Davis Cup Quarter-finals* Apr 9 Houston US Men’s Clay Court Championship CL Casablanca Grand Prix Hassan II CL Apr 16 Monte-Carlo Monte-Carlo Rolex Masters CL Apr 23 Barcelona Barcelona Open BancSabadell CL Bucharest BCR Open Romania CL Apr 30 Estoril Estoril Open CL Belgrade Serbia Open CL Munich BMW Open CL May 07 Madrid Mutua Madrileña Madrid Open CL May 14 Rome Internazionali BNL d’Italia CL May 21 Nice Open de Nice Côte d’Azur CL Düsseldorf Düsseldorf World Team Cup CL May 28 Paris Roland Garros* CL Jun 4 Jun 11 Halle Gerry Weber Open G Queen's AEGON Championships G Jun 18 ’s-Hertogenbosch UNICEF Open G Eastbourne AEGON International G Jun 25 London Wimbledon* G Jul 2 Jul 9 Newport Campbell’s Hall of Fame Tennis Championships G Båstad SkiStar Swedish Open CL Stuttgart MercedesCup CL Umag Studena Croatia Open CL Jul 16 Atlanta Atlanta Tennis Championships H Gstaad Allianz Suisse Open Gstaad CL Hamburg German Open Tennis Championships CL Jul 23 Los Angeles Farmers Classic H Kitzbühel TBD CL Jul 30 Washington D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Europeatp Londonatp Palliser House Road Palliser London W14 9Eb United Kingdom T F
    2021 ATP 2021 TOUR MEDIA GUIDE MEDIA TOUR USA EUR ATP AMERICASATP AMERICAS ATP EUROPE ATP EUROPE 201 ATP TOUR201 BOULEVARD ATP TOUR BOULEVARDMONTE-CARLO MONTE-CARLOSUN SUN PONTE VEDRAPONTE BEACH VEDRA BEACH 74 BOULEVARD74 D’ITALIE BOULEVARD D’ITALIE FLORIDA 32082FLORIDA USA 32082 USA 98000 MONACO98000 MONACO T +1 904 285 8000T +1 904 285 8000 T +377 97 97 04T 04+377 97 97 04 04 F +1 904 285 5966F +1 904 285 5966 F +377 97 97 04F 00+377 97 97 04 00 MEDIA INT LDN ATP INTERNATIONAL ATP LONDON SUITE 208 46A MACLEAY ST. PALLISER HOUSE POTTS POINT PALLISER ROAD ATP INTERNATIONALSYDNEY NSW 2011 ATP LONDON LONDON W14 9EB SUITE 208 46AAUSTRALIA MACLEAY ST. PALLISER HOUSEUNITED KINGDOM GUIDE POTTS POINT PALLISER ROAD SYDNEY NSW T2011 +61 2 9336 7000 LONDON W14 9EBT +44 20 7381 7890 AUSTRALIA F +61 2 8354 1945 UNITED KINGDOMF +44 20 7381 7895 T +61 2 9336 7000 T +44 20 7381 7890 F +61 2 8354 1945 F +44 20 7381 7895 2020 WORLD NO. 1 PRODUCTION TEAM Editors-in-Chief Maria Garcia-Planas Joshua Rey Art Directors Celine Lenoir Cedric Pucheu Editors Martin Dagahs Florian Gardetto Greg Sharko ATP WELCOME Contributors Nicola Arzani Fabienne Benoit On behalf of the ATP, it is my pleasure to welcome you to Mark Epps the 2021 ATP Tour season. Cecilia Ghe Chris Giles Simon Higson As we reflect on a challenging 2020 season, I would like Susie Hygate 2020 Josh Meiseles to acknowledge the hard work and collaboration across Stephanie Natal tennis that now allows us to look ahead with cautious Cristian Uguzzoni NOVAK optimism.
    [Show full text]
  • How Adr Might Save Men's Professional Tennis
    ACCEPTING A DOUBLE-FAULT: HOW ADR MIGHT SAVE MEN’S PROFESSIONAL TENNIS Bradley Raboin* Introduction..................................................................... 212 I. History and Structure of Men’s Professional Tennis Today................................................................................ 214 A. The Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP)..... 214 B. International Tennis Federation (ITF).................. 218 II. Present Governance Structure .................................. 220 III. Modern Difficulties & Issues in Men’s Professional Tennis .............................................................................. 224 A. Player Dissatisfaction............................................. 224 1. Prize Money.......................................................... 224 2. Scheduling ............................................................ 230 B. Match-Fixing ........................................................... 233 C. Doping...................................................................... 235 IV. Present Solutions ...................................................... 237 A. ATP Players’ Council .............................................. 237 B. Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ..................... 238 C. ATP & ITF Anti-Doping Program.......................... 242 V. Why Med-Arb ADR Is the Solution ........................... 245 A. “Med-Arb” ................................................................ 245 B. Advantages of Med-Arb .......................................... 246 * Bradley
    [Show full text]
  • 2011 Calendar Dec 13.Xlsx
    2011 Season Week Starting City Tournament Name Surface Jan 3 Doha Qatar ExxonMobil Open H Chennai Aircel Chennai Open H Brisbane Brisbane International H Jan 10 Sydney Medibank International Sydney H Auckland Heineken Open H Jan 17 Melbourne Australian Open* H Jan 24 Jan 31 Santiago Movistar Open CL Zagreb PBZ Zagreb Indoors IH Johannesburg SA Tennis Open H Feb 7 Costa do Sauipe Brasil Open CL Rotterdam ABN AMRO World Tennis Tournament IH San Jose SAP Open IH Feb 14 Marseille Open 13 IH Memphis Regions Morgan Keegan Championships IH Buenos Aires Copa Claro CL Feb 21 Acapulco Abierto Mexicano Telcel CL Dubai Dubai Duty Free Tennis Championships H Delray Beach Delray Beach International Tennis Championships H Feb 28 Davis Cup First Round* Mar 7 Indian Wells BNP Paribas Open H Mar 14 Mar 21 Miami Sony Ericsson Open H Mar 28 Apr 4 Houston US Men’s Clay Court Championship CL Casablanca Grand Prix Hassan II CL Apr 11 Monte-Carlo Monte-Carlo Rolex Masters CL Apr 18 Barcelona Barcelona Open BancSabadell CL Apr 25 Estoril Estoril Open CL Belgrade Serbia Open CL Munich BMW Open CL May 2 Madrid Mutua Madrileña Madrid Open CL May 9 Rome Internazionali BNL d’Italia CL May 16 Nice Open de Nice Côte d’Azur CL Düsseldorf Düsseldorf World Team Cup CL May 23 Paris Roland Garros* CL May 30 Jun 6 Halle Gerry Weber Open G London AEGON Championships G Jun 13 ’s-Hertogenbosch UNICEF Open G Eastbourne AEGON International G Jun 20 London Wimbledon* G Jun 27 Jul 4 Newport Campbell’s Hall of Fame Tennis Championships G Davis Cup Quarterfinal* Jul 11 Båstad SkiStar Swedish Open CL Stuttgart MercedesCup CL Jul 18 Atlanta Atlanta Tennis Championships H Hamburg German Open Tennis Championships CL Jul 25 Los Angeles Farmers Classic H Gstaad Allianz Suisse Open Gstaad CL Umag Studena Croatia Open CL Aug 1 Washington D.C.
    [Show full text]