Understanding the financial status of a group of high performance athletes

With the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympic Games quickly approaching, there has been a heightened interest in the performance of Canadian athletes at international competitions (Duffy, 2007; Fidlin, 2005; Longley, 2006). Two significant documents outline Canada's goal to become the number one sporting nation at the 2010 Olympic Games, and improve Canada's performance at the 2008 Olympic Games: Own the Podium and Road to Excellence (Priestner Allinger & Allinger, 2004; Road to Excellence, 2006). These two documents represent heightened interest in the performance of our elite athletes, in conjunction with Canada's hosting status of the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic Games. The requirements to train and compete at the international level have become more demanding both in terms of financial resources and time commitment. The need to financially assist athletes with their training and competition costs has been an important topic of debate over the past decades (Beamish & Borowy, 1987; Gatehouse, 2004; Macintosh, 1996; Munro, 1970; Owens, 2004). Two sources of fiinding for high performance athletes in Canada are the Athlete Assistance Program (AAP) provided by the Federal Government and the Canadian Olympic Excellence Fund provided by the Canadian Olympic Committee. The importance of these fiinds for athletes has been discussed in various forums (Ekos, 1992, 1997, 2005; Priestner Allinger & Allinger, 2004; Thibault «& Babiak, 2005). However, alternative sources of funds for high performance athletes have never been the object of research. As such the purpose of this study was to describe a group of athlete applicants from the time period of November 2004 to April 2006, and to contextualize these applications within the development of the Charitable Fund for Athletes.

The Development of a Survey to Assess the Type of Capacity within Nonprofit Sport Organizations

The topic of organizational capacity and organizational capacity-building has gained importance among Canadian nonprofit sport organizations. This is illustrated by practitioners calling for increased attention to the capacity-building matters of nonprofit organizations, and two critical Canadian federal government documents outlining strategic direction for the nonprofit sport sector. Consequently, the purpose of this quantitative research study was to develop a valid and reliable survey to categorize nonprofit sport organizations into capacity types identified by Stevens (Stevens, 2006). This quantitative research study offers a preliminary development towards achieving a reliable and valid tool for assessing types of nonprofit sport organizational capacity. This research provides interesting insight into what capacity means by organizing the all-encompassing literature into an easy to understand framework. In addition, it sets the stage for future researchers to build upon this survey development process to achieve a reliable and valid capacity measuring tool.

Mechanisms for sustainable accountability : a case study of a nonprofit educational organization

A qualitative case study of the capacity to be accountable in one nonprofit intennediary educational organization yielded an emergent conceptual framework of four mechanisms: structural, governing, communicative, and educative mechanisms to build and sustain the capacity of accountability. Drawing attention to the purposeful creation of structures that support accountability, purposeful navigation of the complex matrix of accountability relationships, and purposeful transfer of knowledge to infonn future accountability, this study calls for mindfulness in practice in broader educational contexts. Protocols to pass on knowledge gained in building the four capacities reveal a new dimension of accountability: continuity. In this model, the educative mechanism is the life force that feeds the other three mechanisms to increase accountability and sustain it over time.