In this study, we examine Sport for Development (SFD) practitioners’ experiences of service–learning partnerships with universities. Although these collaborations are often framed as mutually beneficial, practitioners’ perspectives remain underrepresented in relevant scholarship. Drawing on qualitative interviews with 22 practitioners from 20 U.S.-based SFD organizations from 2022, we adapt Ankrah and AL-Tabbaa’s University-Industry Collaboration framework into a University-Organization Collaboration framework to better incorporate the nonprofit, community-based, and mission-driven nature of SFD organizations. Findings show that service-learning UOCs are shaped by interconnected motivations, including talent recruitment, organizational capacity building, and contribution to the broader SFD field. They also reveal that reciprocity is not guaranteed; rather, partnership quality depends on structured communication, shared responsibility, and organizational capacity to support supervision and learning. The study’s primary contribution is a tailored service-learning UOC framework that positions these partnerships as mechanisms for capacity building and pipelines for talent development while also recognizing their potential to create burdens or imbalances for SFD organizations. Practical implications emphasize formalized agreements, proactive university involvement, capacity assessment, and ongoing evaluation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shin et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: