Global Session Topic Discussions The votes are in! Go to the delegates page and click on an athlete's name to see how he or she voted on each issue. Please check out the aggregate results as well. Special Olympics athletes discussed several major topics at the Global Athlete Congress. Following is an outline of those discussions that was provided to the participants in advance of the Congress. How should Special Olympics deal with "sandbagging" in preliminary races? What is sandbagging? Sandbagging occurs when an athlete intentionally does poorly in a preliminary competition so he or she will be placed in a division with slower athletes for the finals. Once in the final race, the athlete competes his or her hardest and thus usually wins the division. What have we done to try to stop sandbagging? Honest Effort rules that allow Competition Directors to disqualify athletes who perform 15 percent better in a final than they did in the preliminary competition were put in place. These rules are not followed at all levels of the movement, but are usually enforced at World Games. Questions Who should be punished if officials suspect that an athlete has intentionally "held back" in a preliminary competition? The coach? The athlete? The Program Director? How do officials know for sure that someone "held back"? Is there a way to stop sandbagging other than punishing athletes at a competition? Should Honest Effort rules be enforced at all levels of the organization or just at the big events? How often does sandbagging happen at the local level, national level or international level? The discussion in Panama The question Global Athlete Congress participants will start with is how to "deal with" sandbagging. They might say to ignore it, to educate people or to punish people who suspected of having "sandbagged."  The Congress will need to come to a conclusion on how participants think Competition Directors should deal with this situation. Once they have done that, participants will be asked to try to write the rule or policy that will be recommended to the Special Olympics Board of Directors to deal with this situation. As a result, athletes' opinions and decisions will be acted on as a policy decision. Should every Program be required to develop a strategy for athlete leaders to participate in government relations to support the movement? What is meant by "government relations?" There are times that Special Olympics wants to make contact with government leaders to explain the movement and to seek support for Special Olympics. Sometimes that support is in the form of money from the government to pay for programming and sometimes it is official recognition of Special Olympics by the government so that the movement can be seen as a good organization that the government approves of. Reasons for Global Athlete Congress participants to vote Yes: They believe that athletes can explain Special Olympics as well as or better than staff or volunteers. They think that athletes are more effective at changing attitudes of the government officials they meet. They think that any time someone is representing Special Olympics, an athlete should be present and a meaningful part of the presentation. Reasons for participants to vote No: It is difficult to get appointments with government leaders and they don't appreciate Special Olympics bringing extra people to the meeting. Requiring that athletes be present will not ensure that Special Olympics representatives make the impression they want to. Some people feel that asking athletes to attend these meetings is taking advantage of their disability and it looks like a "pity" appeal. The discussion in Panama Global Athlete Congress participants will start this discussion by talking about what message they think government leaders need to hear about athletes and Special Olympics. From there, the discussion will move to how best to get those messages to government leaders; where to talk to them; and who should talk to them. Finally, the discussion will move to whether there should be a rule or policy on this issue, or just a recommendation. Minimum standard for training and competition What is the current minimum standard for training and competition? From Article I of the Sports Rules: Each Accredited Program shall offer comprehensive year-round sports training, conducted by qualified coaches in accordance with these Sports Rules. Every Special Olympics athlete who competes in a Special Olympics sport at a Games or a Tournament must have been trained in that sport. Training shall include physical conditioning and nutrition education. Accredited Programs shall establish written minimum training requirements for competitors in each Official Sport, in accordance with their respective Accreditation Criteria and these Sports Rules. Athletes who desire to compete in Regional Games, U.S. Multi-State Games or World Games must be trained for at least eight (8) consecutive weeks in the appropriate sport and must have several opportunities to compete (including scrimmages and practice sessions) during that period. Each Accredited Program should offer athletes who are preparing for competitions at other levels within Special Olympics, such as for National Games, U.S. Program Games or Sub-Program Games (e.g., local, area, community), the same training and competition opportunities as are offered by that Accredited Program to athletes who participate in Regional, U.S. Multi-State and/or World Games. Reasons for Global Athlete Congress participants to vote for a minimum standard: Their concern is that athletes do not seem to be prepared when they arrive at competition. They feel that the current rule of requiring Programs to set their own standards allows for some programs to set standards that are too low. They feel that all athletes should have a similar training and competition experience. Reasons for participants to vote against a minimum standard: They think it is best to let Programs and coaches do what is best for them and the situations they face (facility or transportation, etc.). They feel that the current rule of allowing Programs to set their own standards is just fine. They worry that a global standard could not be enforced. The discussion in Panama: Participants will start by talking about what really happens in the local Programs they know of. How often do people have training and competition? Then participants will move to a discussion about what a minimum standard should be if there was one. Is the eight-week standard set for Regional or World Games not enough or too much to ask people to do at a local level? Is it enough to say "eight weeks" or should the standard be more specific? At that point participants will vote on whether to recommend a minimum standard or not. If they vote to recommend a standard, then they will be asked to decide what that new standard should be. Athletes assisting with fundraising There is no current policy related to athletes assisting with fundraising. Reasons to include athletes in fundraising efforts: Athletes can talk about the benefits of Special Olympics better than anyone else. Athletes see the need for more funds and can help with who and how to ask for support. If athletes are to be real leaders in the organization, they should take part in all the work to keep a Program alive — including this one. Reasons to not include athletes in fundraising efforts: It looks and feels like Special Olympics is using athletes not as leaders but as tokens. Business people want to deal with other business people and they don't have time for long meetings where an athlete talks about the program. It takes time to prepare for each fundraising meeting and athletes may not have the time or support people to help them. The discussion in Panama: Global Athlete Congress participants will start with discussion about whether they think athletes should be involved in fundraising or not, being sure to talk about the reasons that people have not included athletes in the past. Then they will move on to talk about what roles athletes should and should not be asked to play in the fundraising area. Should athletes be asking for money or just participate by telling how the money gets spent? Finally, participants will discuss what recommendation to make about athletes helping in this area and what supports or training is needed to make their recommendation work.   Additional Topics In addition to the general discussion topics, participants in the Congress also voted on the Advancement Rule and the Athlete and Coach Codes of Conduct. The Advancement Rule currently states that athletes advancing to compete in World Games will be chosen at random from gold medal winners at State and National Games. Participants could vote to change the rule, leave it as it is now, or increase punishment for those programs not enforcing the rule. The question concerning the Athlete Code of Conduct reads as follows: Do you agree to the change in the Athlete Code of Conduct to say, "I will not drink alcohol, smoke or take illegal drugs while representing Special Olympics at sports training sessions, competition or during Games."? The changes considered for the Coach Code of Conduct pertained to Section 3 and are detailed below: III. ACT PROFESSIONALLY AND TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR MY ACTIONS My language, manner, punctuality, preparation and presentation will demonstrate high standards. I will display control, respect, dignity and professionalism to all involved in the sport (athletes, coaches, opponents, officials, administrators, parents, spectators, media, etc.). I will encourage athletes to demonstrate the same qualities. I will not drink alcohol, smoke or take illegal drugs while representing Special Olympics at training sessions,  competition or during Games. I will refrain from any form of personal abuse towards athletes and others, including inappropriate or unwanted sexual advances on others, verbal, physical and emotional abuse. I will be alert to any form of abuse from other sources directed toward athletes in my care. I will abide by the Special Olympics policy on the prohibition of coaches dating athletes.   Topic Tally The Global Athlete Congress participants were given a list of 15 possible discussion topics in April, and told to rank them in order of importance. The results of this survey are broken down by Region and by athlete, and can be found in the following Excel spreadsheet. Lower numbers indicate higher importance. Final Results How should Special Olympics deal with "sandbagging" in preliminary races? Increase Training 37 Change Rule 12 Punish Coaches 14 Should every Program be required, or merely encouraged, to develop a strategy for athlete leaders to participate in government relations to support the movement? Encouraged 39 Required 21 Abstained 3 Who/what should set the minimum standard for training? SOI sets minimum for all sports 33 8-week minimum for all sports 10 Each Program sets minimum standard for local and Program level training 18 Abstained 2 Should athlete leaders participate in fundraising? Yes 59 No 3 Abstained 1 Do you approve the changes to the Athlete Code of Conduct? Yes 56 No 6 Abstained 1 Do you approve the changes to the Coaches Code of Conduct? Yes 34 No 26 Abstained 3 What should we do regarding selection criteria for advancement to higher level competition? Keep Rule 20 Change Rule 32 Add Consequence 9