DOCSLIB.ORG

Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (Sdrcc) Centre De Règlement Des Différends Sportifs Du Canada (Crdsc)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (Sdrcc) Centre De Règlement Des Différends Sportifs Du Canada (Crdsc) SPORT DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTRE OF CANADA (SDRCC) CENTRE DE RÈGLEMENT DES DIFFÉRENDS SPORTIFS DU CANADA (CRDSC) No: SDRCC 15-0269 Kira Lengkeek (Claimant) and Canada Snowboard (Respondent) Attendees at hearing: For the Claimant: Michael-Tai Nguyen Shannon Lengkeek Kira Lengkeek For the Respondent: Fedora Mathieu Guy Poupart Robert Joncas ______________________________________________________________________ REASONS FOR DECISION 1. Introduction 1. This case concerns the Claimant’s appeal of a decision made by the Respondent and dated June 24, 2015 (the "Decision"), to not name her to the Halfpipe National Team, the Slopestyle Development Team, and the Slopestyle Next-Gen Team. As a result of not being named to these teams, the Claimant was not eligible to be nominated for carding for the 2015-2016 carding cycle under the Sport Canada Athlete Assistance Program (the "AAP"). 2. On July 11, 2015 the Claimant's mother, as authorized Representative for the Claimant, filed a Request on her behalf (the "Request"). Various materials were filed at the time and shortly thereafter in support of the Request. 3. On July 17, 2015 the Respondent’s legal counsel, as authorized representative for the Respondent, filed an Answer (the “Answer”) on its behalf. The Answer alleged that the Decision appealed by the Claimant was final and could not be appealed to the SDRCC. It challenged the jurisdiction of the SDRCC to hear this dispute, and asked that a Jurisdictional Arbitrator be appointed by the SDRCC to rule on this preliminary issue. It also asserted that the outcome of another case between another athlete and the Respondent might influence or be of importance in rendering a decision in this case on the merits. 4. On July 24, 2015 the Claimant’s legal counsel, as authorized representative for the Claimant, filed an Amended Request (the “Amended Request"). The Amended Request clarified the issues raised in the Request but did not substantively change the issues. No amended Answer was filed. - 2 - 5. On July 31, 2015 a Jurisdictional Arbitrator rendered her decision, finding that the SDRCC did have jurisdiction and that the case should proceed on the merits. Reasons for that jurisdictional decision were issued on August 10, 2015. 6. On August 3, 2015 there was a preliminary conference call to plan the course of these proceedings on the merits. The parties agreed that they wished to delay things to allow that other pending case to conclude, and thereafter proceed to a hearing on the merits during the week of August 10, 2015. The Arbitrator who initially was to decide the case was unable to accommodate that schedule, and so I was appointed Arbitrator. 7. On August 7, 2015 I conducted a preliminary conference call to plan the course of these proceedings on the merits. I confirmed that there were no objections to me being named as Arbitrator, and we agreed on a hearing date and deadlines for submissions in advance. 8. On August 11, 2015 the Claimant's legal counsel filed a submission on her behalf. On August 13, 2015 the Respondent's legal counsel filed a reply on its behalf. 9. On August 14, 2015 we proceeded to a hearing on the merits. At the close of the hearing, after each party had presented its evidence (including witnesses) and arguments, each confirmed having been given a fair hearing. 10. On August 21, 2015 I issued my short decision without reasons in accordance with Article 6.21(c) of the Canadian Sport Dispute Resolution Code (January 1, 2015) (the “Code"). The SDRCC advised the parties of my decision that same day it was issued. In my decision I ordered as follows: This is my decision pursuant to the Canadian Sport Dispute Resolution Code (January 1, 2015), arising from the hearing, which took place on August 14, 2015. The Claimant's Request appealed the Respondent's decision to not name her to the Halfpipe National Team, the Slopestyle Development Team, and the Slopestyle Next-Gen Team. It was alleged that by not being named to these teams, the Claimant could not obtain funding through the Athlete Assistance Program (carding), although she had allegedly met the carding criteria. After considering all of the evidence and arguments advanced, I have decided to dismiss the Request of the Claimant. Complete written reasons for my decision will follow within the timelines prescribed by the Canadian Sport Dispute Resolution Code. 11. The reasons for my decision are set out below. 2. Factual Background 12. The facts recited below are a summary setting out the most salient parts of the evidence. Even though not documented in these Reasons, however, in coming to my decision I have considered all of the evidence presented. 13. As there was little in the way of conflict on the most important events, I generally have not attributed the evidence to specific witnesses. I felt it preferred to recite the facts in a coherent way, rather than focusing on precisely who said what in their testimony. - 3 - 14. The Claimant is 16 years old. She is a talented athlete in the sport of snowboard, in both the Slopestyle and Halfpipe disciplines. She has been competing for about 5 years. She competed in the World Junior Championships in China in the 2014-2015 season, and finished 5th in Halfpipe and 14th in Slopestyle. This was her only international competition for this season. Her overall performance was good but objectively behind the performance of those appointed to the High Performance Program (the "HPP") ahead of her. The HPP includes the National Teams for the disciplines, as well as any Developmental Teams or Next-Gen Teams. 15. The sport of snowboard has progressed significantly and continues to do so. Athletes improve and constantly introduce innovative and impressive tricks. Competitors learn these new tricks and are inspired and challenged to develop new tricks of their own. That cycle continues and the sport continues to evolve. 16. The Claimant has done very well in snowboard, and no doubt this is a credit to her own ability and hard work, as well as the support she has received from others, particularly her family. 17. As a National Sport Organization, the Respondent is party to an agreement with Sport Canada respecting athletes in snowboard who might qualify to receive financial aid (“carding”) with Sport Canada through the AAP. In order to obtain a carding nomination certain criteria have to be met, including specifically for our purposes here, the athlete must be named to the HPP. 18. The Snowboard National Teams (including Developmental Teams and Next-Gen Teams, if they exist) receive 98% of their funding from Sport Canada. This funding goes to develop the best athletes, and is linked to the Long Term Athletic Development model, which links back to the potential division of athletes in the HPP on the National Team, the Developmental Team or the Next-Gen Team. 19. Being named to the HPP in a particular discipline is a requirement but in and of itself does not qualify an athlete for carding. Other criteria must be met as well and so being named to the HPP is not by itself a guarantee of a successful application for carding. 20. Criteria for being named to the HPP are set by the Respondent. The intention is to have only the very best athletes who are going to compete successfully and represent Canada on the international scene. This is not about participation or reward for good work, but rather is intended to develop elite athletes who are able to win medals for Canada in international competition. 21. Eligibility and selection criteria for the HPP change from year to year. They are annually set by the Respondent through the efforts of Robert Joncas (the Director of the HPP) together with coaches and various other technical personnel who meet for this purpose. They review national and international statistics, all relevant information, and establish the criteria. 22. Performance in the present season determines selection for the HPP for the following season. Normally the eligibility/selection criteria for the HPP for the following season are set towards the very end of if not after the present season has concluded. This means that in most circumstances the specific criteria by which performances of the athletes are to be assessed, for the purposes of the HPP, are finalized after-the-fact. - 4 - 23. By this system then, athletes would conclude the 2014-2015 season not being aware of the specific criteria by which they were going to be assessed. The criteria would then be set by the Respondent (knowing what had already occurred throughout the 2014-2015 season), the athletes' performance in the 2014-2015 season then assessed as per that criteria and finally, eligibility and selection determined for the 2015-2016 HPP year. 24. There are exceptions to this timing of events, typically in Olympic years where obligations arising from the Olympics require teams to be named earlier. This means that criteria must be established at the start of or at the latest in the earlier part of the season, before most events have taken place, and then the athletes would compete and be selected as per those pre-set criteria. The Respondent described this as a real challenge, where everyone would "cross their fingers" in the hope that the eligibility and selection criteria proved to be correct, with the best athletes being selected to represent Canada at the Olympics. 25. The Respondent explained in detail why this after-the-fact process was much preferred to what was required in Olympic years. 26. Something called the Canadian Ranking List (the "CRL") is generated to rank Canadian competitive snowboarders.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SPC Mentor List April 2017 External Province Mentor Credential Level
    SPC Mentor List April 2017 External Province Mentor Credential Level Contact and Location Areas of Interest AB Amy Bauele Diploma 403-202-6565 Personal sport experience: Provincial level slo-pitch and National level figure skating Calgary, AB Physiotherapist sport experience (primary areas of current focus): hockey, figure skating, freestyle skiing AB Daniel Crumback Diploma [email protected] Exercise Physiology, Physiological Testing, Respiratory Testing 780-574-1907 and Training, Performance Training, Advanced FMS/SFMA, Injury Prevention, Tactical Athlete Assessment and Treatment Lancaster Park, AB FR Instructor, Sport Taping Instructor, Sport Equipment Instructor Running, Triathlon, Cycling, Mountain Biking, Skiing, Hockey AB Leigh Garvie Diploma [email protected] Clinical practice, have Diploma of Advanced Manual Therapy & 780-451-6263 manipulation, IMS Coronation Physiotherapy Sports: swimming, ultra trail running, rugby, gymnastics, figure skating, track, diving Edmonton, AB Page 1 of 16 SPC Mentor List April 2017 External Province Mentor Credential Level Contact and Location Areas of Interest AB Susan Masstiti Diploma [email protected] Injury Prevention, Movement as Medicine, Optimal Recovery in Elite Sport, Manual Therapy Canmore, AB Clinical Specialist Musculoskeletal Physiotherapy, UBC Gunn Intramuscular Stimulation Instructor, Certificate Medical Acupuncture innovative and integrative solutions and strategies to stimulate thebody's innate wisdom to heal. Our role as physiotherapists is ultimately to work in collaboration with you (and other professionals) to restore your physical wellness. Health crises can challenge our physical capacities. This is as true for a soccer player experiencing a knee injury, as for a parent who is dealing with chronic neck or back pain. Susan’s expertise has helped Olympic and recreational athletes, as well as inspired many to restore their health.
    [Show full text]
  • Chasing the Dream: Canadian Track and Field Student-Athlete Migration to the NCAA Division I
    Chasing the Dream: Canadian Track and Field Student-Athlete Migration to the NCAA Division I by Sarah Boyle A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Master of Science Department of Exercise Sciences University of Toronto © Copyright by Sarah Boyle 2017 Chasing the Dream: Canadian Track and Field Student-Athlete Migration to the NCAA Division I Sarah Boyle Master of Science Department of Exercise Sciences University of Toronto 2017 Abstract While there is interest in understanding the motivations and experiences of student-athletes who migrate to the NCAA, there is a lack of data quantifying migration to the NCAA. Specifically, in the case of track and field, the last quantitative effort to identify Canadian student-athlete migration to the NCAA was published in the early 1990’s by John Bale. Using descriptive research methods, this thesis defines the population of Canadian track and field student-athletes who migrated to the NCAA DI between the 2005/06 and 2012/13 academic years. Results indicate that during this eight year period, 562 Canadian student-athletes migrated to the NCAA Division I to participate in track and field. Canadian track and field student-athletes who migrate to the NCAA Division I comprise more than half of the athletes competing internationally for the Canadian National Track and Field Team. ii Acknowledgments This project would not have been completed if it were not for the support of my supervisors, Peter Donnelly and Michael Atkinson. With a three-year hiatus to complete my Juris Doctorate at Osgoode Hall Law School, I have been afforded time to reflect on this research and appreciate the fruits of collecting systemic research data.
    [Show full text]
  • Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games Nomination Criteria
    Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games Nomination Criteria Selection Criteria Amendments • February 19, 2021 o Section 1.2: . Removed reference to NACAC Combined Events Championships, which has been cancelled. The dates and location of the Canadian Combined Events Trials is now to-be-confirmed. Moved the Final Nomination for Marathon and Race Walk to July 2 to align with all other events. Moved the final declaration deadline for all events to June 10, 2021. Updated dates for: Final Preparation Camp, On-site Decision Making Authority, Athletics Competition and Departing Japan o Section 1.3: . Removed requirement to participate in Canadian Championships. Added requirement to comply with COVID-19 countermeasures. o Section 1.6: Added reference to Reserve Athletes. o Section 3: Removed requirement to participate in Canadian Championships. o Section 4.1 . Step 2: Removed: “For the avoidance of doubt, the NTC will not nominate athletes for individual events who are only qualified to be entered due to World Athletics’ “reallocations due to unused quota places” after July 1, 2021 (June 2, 2021 for Marathon and Race Walk).” . Final Nomination Meeting: Added prioritization process for athletes qualifying for both the Women’s Marathon and 10,000m. o Section 4.2: . Removed: “AC will not accept any offers of unused quota places for relay teams made after July 1, 2021;” . Step 1: Removed automatic nomination for national champions. o Section 8: Added language regarding possible further amendments necessitated by COVID-19. • October 6, 2020 o Section 1.2: Updated qualification period to match World Athletics adjustments for Marathon and 50k Race Walk. Updated dates for NACAC Combined Events Championships (Athletics Canada Combined Events Trials).
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Athlete Representation Within Governance Structures of National Sport Organizations
    The Future of Athlete Representation within Governance Structures of National Sport Organizations The Association of Canada’s National Team Athletes © November 20, 2020 Published by AthletesCAN, the Association of Canada’s National Team Athletes. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form for commercial purposes, without the permission from AthletesCAN. Acknowledgements AthletesCAN extends their sincere appreciation to the members of the Leadership Committee for their important contributions and guidance throughout the development of the Athlete Representation Project. Ashley LaBrie Former Executive Director, AthletesCAN Patrick Jarvis Former Executive Director, Canada Snowboard Dasha Peregoudova Former President, AthletesCAN Jillian Drouin Former Vice-President, AthletesCAN Thea Culley Past Vice President, AthletesCAN Josh Vander Vies Former President, AthletesCAN We would like to sincerely thank those who contributed valuable insight in the development of the Athlete Representation Project at each phase outlined below. PHASE I 1. Canadian Athlete Representation Landscape Overview 2. Comprehensive Review of existing NSO bylaws 3. Identification of current models of athlete representation PHASE II 1. Athlete Representation Workshop & Panel hosted at the 2017 AthletesCAN Forum. PHASE III 1. NSO & Athlete Representative Consultation 2. Resource development 3. Final drafting phases of the position paper, “The Future of Athlete Representation in Canada”, including a comprehensive review of existing
    [Show full text]
  • 2030 Commonwealth Games Hosting Proposal – Part 1
    Appendix B to Report PED18108(b) Page 1 of 157 2030 Commonwealth Games Hosting Proposal – Part 1 – October 23, 2019 – Appendix B to Report PED18108(b) Page 2 of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
    [Show full text]
  • Sport Dispute Resolution Centre of Canada (Sdrcc) Centre De Règlement Des Différends Sportifs Du Canada (Crdsc)
    SPORT DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTRE OF CANADA (SDRCC) CENTRE DE RÈGLEMENT DES DIFFÉRENDS SPORTIFS DU CANADA (CRDSC) NO: SDRCC 16‐0297 OLIVIA MEW (CLAIMANT) AND SAIL CANADA (RESPONDENT) DECISION Appearances: Jordan Goldblatt On behalf of the Claimant Olivia Mew Robert Mew Adam Klevinas On behalf of the Respondent Todd Irving (President) Phil Gow (Chair, Athlete Development Committee) Ken Dool (High Performance Coach) 1. On June 17, 2016, I was appointed by the SDRCC as an Arbitrator under section 6.8 of the Canadian Sport Dispute Resolution Code (the “Code”) to hear Olivia Mew’s request for arbitration (the “appeal”) of Sail Canada’s decision not to select her to the 2016 Canadian Olympic Sailing Team. 2. This appeal was conducted on an urgent basis by telephone conference call on June 20, 2016, with a decision to be issued by June 21, 2016, as June 22, 2016 was the last date Sail Canada had to advise World Sailing whether it would accept or turn down the additional quota spot offered for the 2016 Olympics. 3. I issued my decision to deny Ms. Mew’s appeal on June 21, 2016, with reasons to follow. These are my written reasons. 4. Although I have carefully considered all of the evidence, I will refer only briefly to much of it in this decision. BACKGROUND 5. Ms. Mew is a competitive RS:X wind‐surfer and a member of Sail Canada National Sailing Team – Development Team. 6. Sail Canada is the national governing body for the sport of sailing. Designated by the Government of Canada as a National Sport Organization representing the sport of sailing, it represents all participants, including recreational sailors and high performance athletes, at club, provincial, national and international levels.
    [Show full text]
  • 2006 Rbc Financial Group's Support of the Olympic Games and Amateur Sport in Canada
    Backgrounder - 2006 RBC FINANCIAL GROUP’S SUPPORT OF THE OLYMPIC GAMES AND AMATEUR SPORT IN CANADA RBC has been involved with the Canadian Olympic Movement since 1947 and is the longest- standing corporate supporter of Canada's Olympic Team. Our sponsorship includes support for the Canadian Olympic and Paralympic Teams from 2005 until 2012. RBC supports amateur sport in communities across Canada, from recreational to competitive activities, and from grassroots to elite-level athletes. We sponsor the following sport associations in Canada: o Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games o Canadian Olympic Committee o Canadian Paralympic Committee o Hockey Canada o Canadian Freestyle Ski Association o Canadian Snowboard Federation o Athletics Canada o Special Olympics Canada RBC works closely with the sport associations to develop programs to educate youth and others on the merits of sport in Canada, while also providing them with an opportunity to participate, encouraging healthy active lifestyles. These include: The RBC Olympians Program In 2002, RBC introduced a program to recruit and hire both current and retired Olympic and Paralympic athletes to work for RBC as community ambassadors to bring the Olympic messages of excellence, teamwork, leadership, and commitment to our communities. Athletes are hired from across Canada, and during the course of their employment, gather skills and experiences that will help them find a career for life after sport. The program also provides the athletes much needed funding, allowing them to focus on training and competition. RBC and the Canadian Olympic School Program The Canadian Olympic School Program, presented by RBC, is a school-based program designed to promote the Olympic Values including excellence, leadership, respect, and fun, and the importance of health and physical activity.
    [Show full text]
  • To Select the Most Competitive Team for the 2021 Jeux Canada Games. Athletes Must Not Be More Than 23 Years of Age As of December 31, 2021
    2021 Team NB Selection Standards and Criteria Mission: To select the most competitive team for the 2021 Jeux Canada Games. Athletes must not be more than 23 years of age as of December 31, 2021. This means a date of birth 1998 or Later. Women Men Event A+ Standard A Standard B Standard A+ Standard A Standard B Standard 12.03s 12.32s 12.50s 100m 10.68s 10.97s 11.14s 24.28s 25.06s 25.53s 200m 21.39s 22.15s 22.56s 55.43s 56.93s 58.07s 400m 47.89s 49.30s 50.05s 2:09.28s 2:12.63s 2:15.70s 800m 1:51.41s 1:54.07s 1:55.13s 4:2756s 4:35.99s 4:43.89s 1500m 3:52.60s 3:57.79s 4:07.36s 17:16.06s 17:52.07s 18:12.86s 5000m 14:34.29s 15:05.32s 15:25.32s 14.04s 14.94s 16.31s 100H/110H 14.72s 15.46s 16.69s 1:01.31s 1:04.11s 1:07.25s 400H 53.49s 56.16s 59.23s 10:38.98s 11:17.74s 11:42.68s 3000SC 9:12.53s 9:35.31s 9:55.55s 1.70m 1.61m 1.55m HJ 2.05m 1.93m 1.83m 5.73m 5.38m 4.97m LJ 7.15m 6.61m 6.30m 11.85m 11.18m 10.62m TJ 14.03m 13.14m 12.56m 3.74m 3.32m 3.20m* PV 4.53m 4.08m 3.40m 13.77m 11.80m 11.15m SP 15.02m 13.30m 12.14m 43.91m 37.19m 32.83m DT 46.13m 40.73m 36.85m 44.38m 38.47m 34.30m JT 63.69m 52.82m 46.17m 53.30m 44.96m 37.15m HT 54.00m 45.20m 35.95m 4818pts 4327pts **3700 Hept/Dec 6286pts 5422pts **5000 Para-Athletics – Athletes must not be more than 34 years old ie.
    [Show full text]
  • POWERING PODIUMS PARALYMPIC SPORTS NATIONAL LANDSCAPE November 16, 2017
    POWERING PODIUMS PARALYMPIC SPORTS NATIONAL LANDSCAPE November 16, 2017 *** some of the information in this deck has been put together with OTP in preparation for CPC- OTP Summer Sport Summit INTERNATIONAL REALITIES Some Realities • Winning medals at the Paralympic Games is tough and only getting harder • Global sophistication is rising and more countries are placing increasing importance on podium results • Canada has a relatively low population with disabilities – We have an excellent health system in Canada less people with congenital disabilities – We have strong laws for security / transport Less people with acquired disabilities – We have low incidence of participation in major global conflicts CANADIAN PARALYMPIC COMMITTEE | COMITÉ PARALYMPIQUE CANADIEN Some Realities • Canada has been the leader in Paralympic Sport: we have ‘champions’ • Since the 2000 Games, Canada’s medal output has been on downward trend • Canada’s Pool of podium performance athletes continues to decrease • Canada has been relatively benign in adopting aggressive strategies in changing these trends CANADIAN PARALYMPIC COMMITTEE | COMITÉ PARALYMPIQUE CANADIEN SUMMER SPORTS LANDSCAPE Paralympic Summer Sports 72 % of the medal table at the Games- best sports from Rio for Team Canada. • Para Swimming – Swimming Canada • Para Athletics- Athletics Canada • Para Cycling- Cycling Canada Team Sports • Wheelchair Basketball Men’s and Women’s – WBC • Wheelchair Rugby – Canadian Wheelchair Sport Association CANADIAN PARALYMPIC COMMITTEE | COMITÉ PARALYMPIQUE CANADIEN Paralympic Summer Sports Other individuals sports: • Para Equestrian- Equine Canada • Boccia- Boccia Canada • Para Rowing- Rowing Canada • Para Triathlon- Triathlon Canada • Para Canoe- Canoe Kayak Canada • Para Judo- Judo Canada • Para TT- Table Tennis Canada CANADIAN PARALYMPIC COMMITTEE | COMITÉ PARALYMPIQUE CANADIEN Paralympic Summer Sports • Para – Archery- Archery Canada • Para Badminton- Badminton Canada (new) • Football 5 – a Side – Canadian Blind Sports / Soccer Canada.
    [Show full text]
  • The Long-Term Athlete Development Plan for Snowboarding in Canada “It Takes 10 Years of Extensive Practice to Excel in Anything.” Introduction H
    The Long-Term Athlete Development Plan for in Canada Table of Contents Foreword ......................................................................................... 2 Introduction ...................................................................................... 3 Where are we now? .......................................................................... 4 Where would we like to be? .............................................................. 5 How are we going to get there? ........................................................ 5 STEP 1: The 11 key factors influencing LTAD ................................. 6 STEP 2: The 8 stage Athlete Development Model ............................ 6 STEP 3: Putting it all in operation .................................................... 7 The 11 key factors influencing LTAD 1. The Ten-Year Rule .................................................................. 8 2. The FUNdamentals ................................................................. 9 3. Early and late specialization ...................................................10 4. Developmental Age ...............................................................11 5. Windows of opportunity ........................................................12 6. Physical, technical, tactical and psychological development ....................................................13 7. Periodization .........................................................................14 8. Calendar planning for competition .........................................15
    [Show full text]
  • Athletics Canada Organizational Structure Rules
    ATHLETICS CANADA – RULES AND BY LAWS Rules 111-150 ATHLETICS CANADA ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE RULES SECTION II ATHLETICS CANADA COMMITTEE STRUCTURE Committees fulfill an important function by providing sound and timely advice to the Board and the CEO on key areas of governance, stewardship, and strategy. Committees also provide a means for individuals to contribute directly to the organization and to the sport, and can serve to prepare individuals for greater responsibilities. Types of Committees AC’s Committee structure is consolidated into four categories: 1) Board Committees 2) Operational Committees 3) Partner Sessions 4) Independent Committees Committee Guidelines Committees will operate under the following general guidelines: 1. Committees will operate in a transparent and open manner 2. Committees will report, make recommendations, and be accountable to the Board 3. The Board will use Committees as a primary medium to communicate and engage directly with Members and stakeholders 4. Committees will have Terms of Reference approved by the Board 5. On an annual basis, the Board will review each Committee’s terms of reference, and will identify expected outcomes. This review will ensure that each Committee is meeting its objectives, continues to be relevant, and is following its Terms of Reference 6. The Chair of each Board Committee will be appointed by the Board. The CEO (or designate) will be the Chair of each Operational Committee. Committee Chairs of Board Committees will serve terms of two years, with the exception of the Chair of the Governance & Nominating Committee who will serve a term of one year 7. The Chair of each Committee is a voting member of that Committee, unless otherwise indicated in a Committee’s Terms of Reference 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Towards Inclusive Sports Structures Selected Results of a Cross-Cultural Comparison
    TOWARDS INCLUSIVE SPORTS STRUCTURES SELECTED RESULTS OF A CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISON PROF SABINE RADTKE UNIVERSITY OF PADERBORN GERMANY VISTA 2017 TORONTO, SEPTEMBER 20TH 2017 S. Radtke 2 S. Radtke 3 Main area of research: structural support for Paralympic athletes 2007: Pilot Study 2010/11: A cross-cultural comparison of Structural resources for talent TID in Paralympic sports identification and development in USA, CAN, UK Germany and abroad Expert interviews (N = 65) with officials, national (AUS, CAN, ESP, GB, USA ) coaches and athletes (wheelchair basketball, Hypothesis development swimming, athletics, alpine skiing, Nordic skiing) Hypothesis development 2011/12: A cross-cultural 2016/17: A study of school-age athletes comparison of TID in Paralympic with disabilities at German schools sports How young athletes combine their sporting USA, CAN, UK career with education at sports schools vs. regular schools Quantitative survey (N = 87) Hypothesis testing Interviews (N = 35) with athletes, parents, coaches and school principals S. Radtke 4 Main area of research: structural support for Paralympic athletes 2007: Pilot Study 2010/11:2010/11: A A cross cross-cultural-cultural comparison comparison of of Structural resources for talent TIDTID in in Paralympic Paralympic sports sports identification and development in USA,USA, CAN, CAN, UK UK Germany and abroad Expert Expert interviews interviews (N (N = =65) 65) with with officials, officials, national national (AUS, CAN, ESP, GB, USA ) coachescoaches and and athletes athletes (wheelchair (wheelchair
    [Show full text]