When possible, assessments of program efficacy should be based not on gut feelings, but on metric-driven evaluations. Productive discussions and constructive disagreements can become a part of our modus operandi to fuel progress and change if we employ objective data to frame these difficult conversations.
The table to the right is an evaluation of the ODP program efficacy that I built while working for the US Sailing Team (and have updated since). It is an example of a tool that I believe the US Sailing Team needs to use more often.
One of the takeaways of the table is the significant impact that the i420 fleet has had on overall medal counts post 2015. The insights here beg the question: how effective is the ODP centralized coaching effort, and how much of our youth success has been driven by free market regional programs?
Before 2015 the Skiff Squad was responsible for coaching 4 teams to Youth Worlds medals out of 9 opportunities, including boys and girls fleets. Since the end of the Skiff Squad in 2015, the 29er class has only earned 2 youth worlds medals out of 14 opportunities.
LISOT & Steve Keen’s efforts began earning i420 medals at the Youth Worlds in 2015, with the class contributing to 1.186 medals annually in the years since. This accounts for the vast majority of the 1.214 medal increase that has occurred since the start of the ODP program.
This is not to say that the ODP has been completely ineffective, or that LISOT by itself is responsible for US success since 2015, but these data points are critical to frame a more objective discussion of program efficacy.
I believe that it is important for leadership to embrace feedback even when it does not align with the popular narrative, and work to parse out the lessons and takeaways from successes and failures so that we can focus our energies on effective projects in the future.