RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 1 The Challenges of Developing Intergenerational Recreation Programs and Recommendations for Creating Programs that Encourage Participation and Build Generational Connections Jodi Appleton Department of Recreation, Langara College RECR 4400: Applied Major Project Joanne Edey-Nicoll & Yue-Ching Cheng March 23, 2025 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 2 Contents Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 4 Research Question .................................................................................................................................... 5 Definitions................................................................................................................................................. 5 Background and Context............................................................................................................................... 6 Literature Review.......................................................................................................................................... 6 Benefits of Intergenerational Programs .................................................................................................... 6 Institutional Capacity Challenges ............................................................................................................. 8 Programmatic Challenges ......................................................................................................................... 9 Methodology ............................................................................................................................................... 10 Potential Research Challenges ................................................................................................................ 11 Content Analysis ..................................................................................................................................... 11 Interviews................................................................................................................................................ 12 Special Status Observations .................................................................................................................... 13 Additional Research ................................................................................................................................ 14 Potential or Perceived Conflicts of Interest ............................................................................................ 15 Research Findings and Analysis ................................................................................................................. 15 Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................... 16 Analysis of the Findings ......................................................................................................................... 19 Best Practices .......................................................................................................................................... 22 Recommendations ....................................................................................................................................... 23 Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................. 25 References ................................................................................................................................................... 28 Appendices.................................................................................................................................................. 32 Appendix A: Saanich School District 63 Forms ..................................................................................... 33 Appendix B: Content Analysis List ........................................................................................................ 35 Appendix C: Content Analysis Checklist................................................................................................ 36 Appendix D: Interview Field Notes ........................................................................................................ 37 Appendix E: Interview Questions ........................................................................................................... 61 Appendix F: Observation Checklist ........................................................................................................ 64 Appendix G: Cordova Bay 55+ Association Intergenerational Report ................................................... 68 Appendix H: ESCCS Intergenerational Program Planning Documents ................................................. 70 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 3 Appendix I: ESCCS Intergenerational Overview and Work Plan ........................................................... 73 Appendix J: Content Analysis Results .................................................................................................... 80 Appendix K: Observation Results........................................................................................................... 81 Appendix L: Observation Field Notes .................................................................................................... 84 Appendix M: Interview Results ............................................................................................................ 100 Appendix N: ESCCS Intergenerational Program Promotion ................................................................ 105 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 4 Executive Summary Participation in Intergenerational Programs (IGPs) has been proven by researchers to provide many benefits for both individuals and communities including improving a person’s sense of purpose, wellbeing and self-worth, reducing feelings of loneliness and social isolation, increasing empathy and reducing ageist stereotypes, and increasing feelings of community connectedness. Yet very few of these programs were offered by recreation organizations within Greater Victoria. This paper aimed to identify the challenges for recreation organizations when developing Intergenerational Recreation Programs (IGRPs - IGPs offered by recreation organizations) and provide recommendations to the James Bay Community School Centre (JBCSC) on how their organization could overcome these challenges to successfully offer these programs to their community. Quantitative analysis of recreation program and activity guides for fifteen recreation organizations within Greater Victoria revealed that there was a lack of IGPs being offered to the community. The literature review and qualitative analysis through interviews revealed several themes for why IGPs were not more commonly offered. Institutional capacity challenges for developing and delivering IGPs were identified in both the literature and through the interviews and included needing to prioritize and secure funding for these programs, increasing staff’s knowledge and awareness of them, and finding suitable and available facilities for them. Programmatic challenges for developing and delivering IGPs such as finding an optimal schedule that worked for the different age groups, ensuring activities were developmentally appropriate, and finding activities that were interesting and engaging for participants was another area identified in the literature and supported by the research. Meanwhile, the qualitative analysis through observations supported the research findings from the literature that these programs provided opportunities for building connections between different generations and therefore were worthy of consideration by recreation organizations. The observations also revealed that older adult volunteers played an especially important role in creating and delivering IGPs for their organizations. The research revealed many potential ways forward to overcome these challenges and potential best practices and recommendations that would assist the JBCSC in creating a successful IGRP for their community that encourages participation and builds connections between generations. Introduction Because IGPs offer several benefits for individuals and communities, the purpose of this paper was to consider the concept of offering these programs through recreation organizations and determine what the JBCSC could do to create a successful IGRP. This paper begins with a literature review that discusses what researchers have found in terms of the benefits of IGPs and the challenges of developing and delivering these programs. The primary research follows and includes a content analysis, interviews RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 5 with recreation professionals and volunteers, and special status observations of four different IGPs. The purpose of the primary research was to determine the frequency of IGPs being offered by recreation organizations in Greater Victoria, to discuss and identify with different organizations the challenges of developing these programs and how to overcome these challenges, and to witness some of the benefits of IGPs as identified through the literature review. Finally, from the research findings and analysis, this paper provides several recommendations for how the JBCSC could develop and deliver a successful IGRP for their community. Research Question What are the challenges of developing intergenerational recreation programs and how can the James Bay Community School Centre create recreation programs that encourage participation and build connections between generations? A quote from Jill Juris summed up well why research into IGRPs is important for the field of recreation and why recreation organizations like the JBCSC should consider offering IGPs: “Recreation professionals are uniquely positioned to create environments that foster connections through shared leisure interests to create connections and combat loneliness for participants of all ages” (Juris, 2025). Because of the unique position of recreation organizations, understanding how to create successful IGRPs is important for recreation professionals and the communities they serve. Definitions An Intergenerational Program (IGP) brings together people from different generations for ongoing, meaningful social interactions and the sharing of knowledge and skills (Femia et al., 2008; Lai et al., 2025; Murayama et al., 2019). This definition includes people from differing generations (the 'who'), the reason they are getting together (the 'why) and that they are participating in activities together on a regular basis (the 'how'). What this means in the field of recreation is that an IGP is not just bringing people from different generations together, but being purposeful in the design of a recreation program to encourage social interactions and the exchange of resources between the different generations (Murayama et al., 2019). With this definition in mind, this review will discuss the benefits of IGPs, the challenges associated with developing them, and some best practices for successful implementation of an IGP within the context of community recreation. Before exploring the challenges of developing IGPs, it is important to define what is meant by the term challenges. Challenges are situations involving a problem or difficulty that is preventing the implementation of an idea, but at the same time provides an opportunity to find a solution (Horikoshi, 2023). When researching the term challenges, there are variety of different meanings, but in this context, RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 6 challenges refer to obstacles that recreation organizations need to overcome to be able to offer recreation IGPs with meaningful intergenerational interactions. Background and Context The sponsoring agency for this research was the JBCSC which is located in the James Bay neighbourhood of Victoria, BC. The JBCSC is a non-profit community centre attached to the James Bay Elementary School. This format, also known as a “Community School” is a positive concept for the community because the children have opportunities to participate in childcare and/or recreation programs within the same building as they attend school. Having both within the same building creates a strong connection between families, the school and the community centre. In addition, the JBCSC offers meals for seniors twice a week which brings together older adults to a share meal and socialize. Knowing that the centre is serving both children and older adults already, the JBCSC’s Executive Director was interested at looking at potential ways to bring the different generations together through an IGRP which would support the JBCSC’s mission of “building community connections” (James Bay Community School Society, 2020). Exploring the topic of developing successful IGRPs is important to the field of community recreation because of the individual and community benefits these types of programs offer. From babies to seniors, all generations are visiting their local community centres to learn, play and socialize. These centres, like the JBCSC are literally, the hubs of their communities and as such are well placed to bring the generations together through IGRPs. With this in mind, the goal of this research for the JBCSC is to provide them with recommendations on how their organization can overcome challenges and be intentional in the planning of an IGRP that will encourage participation, build connections between generations, and create a successful and sustainable program for their community. Literature Review Benefits of Intergenerational Programs According to age distribution data from Statistics Canada between 2001 to 2021, the age demographic trend for British Columbia is shifting older with the number of people in the age range of 15 to 24 only increasing by approximately 22 percent since 2001 while the age range of those 65 and older increasing by around 90 percent with the same time frame (Statistics Canada, 2022). As British Columbians live longer and healthier lives, recreation programming and facilities serving older adults will be important for municipalities and recreation organizations to consider (May & Ziegler, 2024). One area that recreation organizations can explore when developing programs for older adults is IGPs. RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 7 Research shows that there are several benefits for older adults who participate in IGPs. Participating in an IGP can help reduce stress (Wendland & Parizet, 2023), increase a person’s sense of purpose (Baum & Ochoa, 2024; Lau, 2024), reduce feelings of social isolation and loneliness (Baum & Ochoa, 2024; May & Ziegler, 2024), increase their sense of well-being (Wendland & Parizet, 2023; Wlodarczyk, 2020), and increase their sense of self-worth (Proudfoot, 2007). In addition, participation in these programs can help older adults feel more connected to younger generations and invested in their success (Wlodarczyk, 2020). Participating in IGPs also provides benefits for the younger generations. Children who participate in IGPs learn to be more empathetic towards older adults (Femia et al., 2008; Kirsh et al., 2021; Wendland & Parizet, 2023), have a more positive attitude towards them (Proudfoot, 2007), and learn patience and self regulation (Femia et al., 2008; Kirsh et al., 2021). When college age students participate in IGPs it can increase their confidence (Jarrott et al., 2021), and provide an opportunity for them to gain wisdom in a meaningful way from those from older generations (Baum & Ochoa, 2024). It should be noted that the research on the benefits of IGPs for younger generations focuses mainly on preschool aged, primary school aged and college aged students while there is little mention of adolescents in the research (Chorn Dunham & Casadonte, 2009). However, one recent study by Webster et al. (2024) does focus on adolescents participating in IGPs and found they experience benefits including developing new skills, becoming more self-aware, and improved attitudes and connection towards older adults. In addition to the individual benefits of IGPs is the positive effect participating in these programs can have on community connectedness and the societal attitudes. Participating in IGPs can reduce ageist stereotypes and improve attitudes that the different generations hold towards each other (Baum & Ochoa, 2024; Wlodarczyk, 2020), can increase feelings of community connectedness (Doiron & Lees, 2009; Wlodarczyk, 2020), and can increase the level of interest that the different generations feel towards interactions with people from a different age group than themselves (Lau, 2024). As much as the research shows that IGPs provide many individual and community benefits, it does not mean that simply bringing different generations together will guarantee these results. In one study that asked for community members’ thoughts on IGPs, some older adults recognized the program’s potential benefits, but were also concerned that IGPs might be “emotionally draining”, could feel like a chore and might even lead to conflicts (Kenning et al., 2021, p. 7). In addition, not all older adults are necessarily interested in exposure to messy, loud and potentially disrespectful children (Ruggiano & Welch, 2011). Wendland and Parizet (2023) warn that if an IGP is implemented without proper planning it can have a negative effect on how children perceive older adults and their own aging. Without proper implementation, children’s exposure to older adults who have physical or cognitive deficiencies can result in the children withdrawing from them which can result in the older adults feeling rejected (Wendland & RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 8 Parizet, 2023). The concept that proper implementation of an IGP is required for it to provide individual and community benefits is reinforced by the research by Caspar et al. (2019) who found that the benefits of an IGP will not be present if proper training of staff and planning of the program are insufficient. The research clearly shows that the sum of individual and community benefits gained from participating in IGPs is high. From a community recreation perspective, these positive outcomes make IGPs potentially enticing for a recreation organization to develop and deliver within their community, but recreation professionals need to understand that creating these programs is not without challenges. Not all intergenerational interactions are inherently positive which leads to the following section which identifies some of the challenges researchers have found for developing and delivering successful IGPs. Institutional Capacity Challenges One of the main challenges for developing IGPs is institutional capacity which includes several impediments that can prevent an IGP from being developed by an organization. Institutional capacity refers to the level of funding, staff training and suitable locations an organization has available for offering a program within their community (Ruggiano & Welch, 2011). Below details how the lack of availability of any or all of these can pose a challenge for an organization when developing an IGP. Securing sustainable funding for a social program such as an IGP can be challenging, especially in the beginning when the program is just being proposed (FallCreek, 2011). Public funding is scare and other sources of funding from external agencies, corporate donations or individual donations may be required to launch a new program (FallCreek, 2011). Because there are many organizations competing for funding, if the value and proposed outcomes of a program are not clearly identified or met, it may not be considered worthy of allocating funding or receiving future funding (FallCreek, 2011). Without funding, it may be difficult or impossible for an organization to launch or sustain an IGP. Recreation organizations may be able to prioritize funding for a recreational IGP if the benefits are clearly communicated to the decision-makers within the organization. The research shows that for an IGP to be successful, staff members who are responsible for developing and delivering the program need appropriate training on how to create positive interactions and communication between generations (Lai et al., 2025; Wendland & Parizet, 2023). Finding a staff member with this cross generational training can be challenging for organizations as often activity leaders have been working with a specific age group when delivering programs. This means that staff training will be required when developing an IGP. The advantage recreation organizations may have in this area is that staff members can get experience working with the different age groups compared to a stand alone childcare or seniors centre where staff only engage with a single age group. Finding an appropriate location for an IGP can also create challenges because of transportation and facility amenity considerations. If transportation will be required to bring the participants together, it RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 9 will need to be decided how to cover that cost and which age group will do the travelling (Ayala et al., 2007). If the distance is too far, some participants may decide against participating (Ayala et al., 2007). In addition to the physical location of the program is the environment of the room that is available for the program. When a room is more spacious, it is easier for both children and older adults to move around in, and when the participants are not separated by tables and can sit together it improves their ability to interact (Kirsnan et al., 2023). Rather than transporting the children to a senior centre or transporting the older adults to a childcare facility, recreation organizations could potentially provide a single location that is already known to and used by both age groups. Programmatic Challenges In addition to institutional capacity challenges are programmatic challenges for designing and delivering IGPs. These include finding an optimal schedule, ensuring activities are developmentally appropriate for the different age groups, and finding activities that are interesting and engaging for all participants. A challenge that researchers have identified for developing an IGP is finding a schedule that works for all the participants. To create opportunities for interactions, the program planner must find a schedule that works for both generations involved. It can be difficult for school-aged children and older adults to find a time that is suitable as the children are in school for most of the day while the availability of the older adults is generally in the morning or early afternoon (Ayala et al., 2007; Ruggiano & Welch, 2011). Another scheduling challenge is the timing of family obligations that older adults may have such as providing childcare for their own grandchildren after school making them unavailable in the later afternoons (Weng, 2019). For IGPs that involve high school or university students, they may not be interested in prioritizing participating in an IGP over their other activities unless it is a course requirement for their education (Lau, 2024). Recreation professionals may need to be creative when trying to accommodate these differing schedules, but recreation organizations may have underutilized spaces that can offer schedule flexibility once they establish an optimum program time. The different physical and cognitive abilities of the generations can also create a challenge when developing IGPs. Older adults might have mobility, eyesight or hearing conditions that can make it difficult to contribute (Kirsnan et al., 2023). They might also tire easily and so activities need to be planned that are inclusive to all abilities and allow everyone to participate (Kirsnan et al., 2023). However, program facilitators also need to be careful that the IGP activities are not too child focused because if the activities are too simple and not respectful of the older adults’ abilities, they run the risk of infantilization of the older adults which could lead them to not wanting to participate (Wendland & Parizet, 2023). Keeping the diverse abilities of the participants in mind would be important for a recreation professional to ensure the program activities are doable by the different age groups involved. RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 10 In addition to scheduling and differing ability levels, finding activities that are interesting to participants from different generations can be challenging. For example, if an organization wants children or young adults to participate in an IGP and expects them to stay interested and committed to the program, they need to ensure that the activities will “effectively foster the interest and proactivity of young people” (Lai et al., 2025). Some research has shown that providing diversity in the activities and offering them in a variety of locations, not just a seniors home, is needed (Ayala et al., 2007). Hayes (2003) suggests that activities that offer some spontaneity and an ability for the different generations to partner on a project work well for engaging the different age groups. But even when an activity is likely to be of interest to different generations, some older adults may not be interested in interacting with children at their senior centre because they see that space as a place for older adult recreation and not a place where children are welcome (Ruggiano & Welch, 2011). Respecting the interest or non-interest of the older adults in a particular activity or participating at all in an IGP will be important for the recreation professional to consider when trying to create a successful program Community recreation has an opportunity to help meet the programmatic challenges of delivering IGPs since community and municipal recreation centers already provide a diverse range of recreation and leisure activities, have staff on board who understand working with different age groups and their physical and cognitive abilities, and often have a variety of multi-purpose flexible spaces available that could be utilized for IGPs. Methodology The research methodology for this project used both quantitative and qualitative field research methods including content analysis, interviews, and special status observations. Three different methods were chosen to help provide an understanding of the current level of IGPs in Greater Victoria, which organizations had successfully offered these programs, and whether some of the benefits of IGPs from the literature review were detected. The purpose of the content analysis was to establish whether IGPs were a common program offering in Greater Victoria. A keyword search of fifteen program and activity guides from community non-profit, municipal, and regional recreation organizations was conducted. Interviews were used to establish the level of experience that recreation professionals and volunteers had with IGPs and challenges they may have encountered when developing and delivering these programs. The eight interviewees were chosen from a broad range of organization types, roles and locations with the purpose of identifying any trends these elements might have had on an organization’s ability to overcome the challenges of developing and offering an IGP. RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 11 Through the content analysis, the only IGPs that were identified in Greater Victoria with potential to conduct observations were ones that involved children which required permission from the recreation organization or school district and therefore had to be conducted as special status observations. Four programs were observed and used to confirm evidence from the literature review that IGPs help build intergenerational connections. The following section describes potential research challenges and outlines each research method. Potential Research Challenges In preparing to conduct the research a few potential challenges were anticipated. The first potential challenge was that the individuals identified to interview would not be available within the research timeline. To minimize this, the individuals were contacted early to schedule interviews. In addition, when requesting the interviews a brief description of the project was included to pique the potential interviewee’s interest, the email was sent from the researcher’s Langara College email to add legitimacy to the request, and an offer to share the research findings was made to encourage participation. Another potential challenge was that there would not be enough IGPs available to observe during the research timeline. To minimize this problem, the content analysis was done early to determine potential opportunities and organizations were contacted immediately to request permission to observe their programs. The content analysis did reveal that there were very few programs happening in Greater Victoria and requesting permission early proved to be an important strategy to minimize this problem. A final potential challenge was that permission to observe a program would not be granted. Again, identifying potential programs early and identifying the individuals who had the ability to grant permission was critical for obtaining permission. Providing background on the project, offering to share the findings, conducting communication through the Langara College email, and explaining the project timeline helped minimize this problem. In addition, the Saanich School District 63 required a Request for Research form be submitted (see Appendix A) prior to providing their approval. In order for the observations to not require permission from the Langara Research Ethics Board, the school district required that there be no interaction with the Cordova Bay Elementary School students during the observations. Content Analysis The purpose of this review was to determine the number of IGPs currently being offered by recreation organizations in Greater Victoria. If the number was found to be low, this would support findings from the literature review that there were several challenges when developing and delivering IGPs. If the number was found to be high, this would support the findings that IGPs were worthwhile RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 12 offering because of the benefits they provide and that recreation organizations were overcoming the challenges of developing and delivering these programs. The content analysis involved a keyword search of recent program guides, activity guides or event calendars for municipal, regional, and non-profit community recreation organizations within Greater Victoria (see Appendix B). The analysis used a checklist to review fifteen separate documents found online through the different organizations’ websites for keywords within the documents including: “intergenerational”, “multi-generational”, “all ages”, and “everyone welcome” (see Appendix C). Interviews One of the purposes of the interviews was to confirm the accuracy of the number of IGPs being offered by the interviewees’ organizations as identified through the content analysis. In addition, the interviews were used to establish the interviewees’ level of knowledge and experience with IGPs as well as determine whether they had experienced similar or different program challenges as identified through the literature review. Another purpose of the interviews was to help identify what types of activities were currently being offered as IGPs or that the interviewees would consider as appropriate activities to offer and their reasons for suggesting them. A final purpose of the interviews was to help determine whether best practices identified in the literature review were being followed by those organizations offering IGPs or if there were additional best practices currently being used in the field that had not yet been identified. Field notes from the interviews are included in Appendix D. Interviews were conducted with recreation professionals and volunteers from municipal, regional and non-profit community recreation organizations within Greater Victoria. Eight interviews were conducted, and all interviews except one, which was held over Zoom, were conducted in person, onsite at the interviewee’s recreation facility. Interviewees were selected from a range of recreation organization types, roles held within those organizations, and geographic regions within Greater Victoria which are outlined in Table 1. Each interview included an introduction to the research project, a description of the purpose of the interview, and then followed a set list of questions (see Appendix E). Table 1 List of Interviewees from Municipal, Regional and Non-profit Recreation Organizations No. Name Title Organization Type of Organization 1 Doug Bowen Volunteer Esquimalt Seniors Community Centre Non-profit Association 2 Jason Gray Coordinator - Arts, Culture & Community Panorama Recreation Regional District 3 Kerynne Adler Recreation Program Coordinator James Bay Community Centre Non-profit Association 4 Kim Dixon Executive Director James Bay New Horizons Non-profit Association RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 13 5 Lesley Cobus Monterey Coordinator Monterey Centre Municipal Recreation 6 Steph Reid Recreation Coordinator Esquimalt Recreation Municipal Recreation 7 Tracey Gibson Executive Director James Bay Community Centre Non-profit Association 8 Von Bishop Volunteer – Membership Liaison Cordova Bay 55+ Association Non-profit Association Special Status Observations As listed in Table 2, four special status observations were conducted to verify whether program elements identified in the literature review impacted program participation and promoted the building of connections between the generations. The program elements that were evaluated were whether the activity appeared to be interesting to the different generations, whether the level of facilitation was supportive and encouraged interaction between the generations, and whether the environment appeared appropriate for the activity and conducive for the different generations to interact with each other. Table 2 List of Observations Organization Type of Organization Cordova Bay 55+ Non-profit Association Association Cordova Bay 55+ Non-profit Association Association Cordova Bay 55+ Non-profit Association Association Panorama Recreation Regional District Program Observation Date & Time Pickleball Feb 27 9:45-11:15am Cooking Feb 27 11:15am-12pm Support a Reader Feb 27 12:15-12:45pm Generations in Clay - parent/grandparent/caregiver and child pottery class Feb 10 6:00-8:00pm The four IGPs observed included three programs offered by the Cordova Bay 55+ Association (CB55+) in partnership with Cordova Bay Elementary School including pickleball, cooking and the Support A Reader program plus the Generations in Clay program run by Panorama Recreation. Permission was granted to conduct these observations the Director of Instruction for Saanich School District 63 and by the Coordinator for Arts, Culture & Community for Panorama Recreation. An observation checklist was used to evaluate the programs for levels of activity interest, facilitation support, activity environment, and intergenerational connections (see Appendix F). RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 14 Additional Research Out of the interviews and literature review a few additional documents emerged worthy of review to help answer the research question and develop recommendations for the JBCSC. The CB55+ 2025 Annual General Meeting report (see Appendix G) that was shared by the organization’s membership liaison provided an update on their IGP for their board and members. The report identified their IGP as a unique program within Saanich School District 63 further confirming that there were very few IGPs offered in Greater Victoria. The report stated that their IGP was recognized for “its innovation and breadth of offerings” on a provincial, national and even international scale and described three additional IGP activities offered by their organization that were not observed during the field research which included knitting, chess and photography. The Wisdom and Wonder Program Overview document (see Appendix H) shared by the President of the Esquimalt Seniors Community Centre Society (ESCCS) provided a list of goals and objectives they had established for their new IGP which aligned with benefits found in the literature review including creating positive attitudes for youth towards older adults. The document also outlined several potential activities the organization considered as having potential to offer as IGPs in partnership with Macaulay Elementary School. In addition, he provided the ESCCS draft 2024 Intergenerational Overview and Work Plan document (see Appendix I) which in addition to describing several of the benefits of IGPs, discussed the potential liability considerations of bringing people from different generations together. The concept of ensuring participant safety was mentioned by several interviewees, but the work plan provided a checklist of steps to take to safeguard the health and safety of IGP participants. Another document recommended for review by the Recreation Coordinator for Esquimalt Parks and Recreation, was the City of Richmond’s 2015-2020 Seniors Service Plan (Seniors Service Plan: Active and Healthy Living 2015-2020, n.d.). This document listed “Maintaining a focus of respect and inclusion that ensures accessibility and promotes intercultural and intergenerational interaction” (p.10) as one of the City of Richmond’s Guiding Principles. The document suggested that at the time there was a demand for intergenerational programming and under this Service Plan Directions suggested that intergenerational programming be expanded in partnership with community associations. During the literature review, a toolkit developed by Generations United for intergenerational program planners (Connecting Generations, Strengthening Communities, n.d.) was discovered. The toolkit is a large document containing extensive information on developing an IGP. The toolkit confirmed the research that there are many different types of IGPs and suggested five key elements to developing and sustaining a successful IGP. First, the roles of the IGP participants should be clearly defined and connected to the organization’s own values or vision. This ties into some of the findings from the RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 15 interviews regarding the need to seek input from the community as to whether the community sees intergenerational programming as a priority and worthy of inclusion in an organization’s strategic plan and initiatives like was done with the City of Richmond. Second, the IGP should be intentional in creating relationships between the different generations by encouraging interactions. This concept of planning meaningful interactions was supported in the literature review. Third, the IGP should provide opportunities for both generations to contribute something and receive something from the interactions. This was not a concept directly revealed in the literature review or research but was tied into the idea that for an IGP to be successful that both generations should be engaged in the activity. Fourth, the IGP participants should be recognized for their contributions to the program which encourages further participation and shows respect for their participation. This was a new idea not identified in either the literature review or the research. And fifth, the IGP should respond to address a community need which was identified through the research as necessary for a municipal recreation organization to consider development of an IGP. In addition to identifying essential elements of successful IGPs, the toolkit discussed the importance of partnerships for developing these programs and confirmed reasons for developing these partnerships such as bringing together different generations, increasing capacity for development of an IGP, avoiding duplication by working together and being aware of the programs offered by other organizations, and increasing community involvement in development of an IGP. And finally the Youth-Led Intergenerational Projects guide also developed by Generations United (Youth-Led Intergenerational Projects, n.d.) was reviewed. This document started by suggesting that youth start by putting together a team of individuals to work on the project, prepare the team for success by providing sensitivity training, develop a timeline, set goals and consider potential partners. All of these elements aligned with the finding from the literature review. Potential or Perceived Conflicts of Interest For this research, the only potential or perceived conflicts of interest that were identified were that the researcher’s direct supervisor from Esquimalt Parks and Recreation, was included in the list of interviewees. To avoid any potential or perceived interpersonal relationship conflicts of interest, the interview was scheduled outside of the researcher’s regular workday, IGPs were not listed as part of the researcher’s work plan or area of responsibility, and the same interview question list was followed for all the interviews. Research Findings and Analysis Through the research, several results and key findings were identified which were important for answering the question of existing and potential challenges related to development and delivery of IGPs RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 16 by recreation organizations. In addition, the research identified how purposeful implementation of program elements is key to ensuring IGPs encourage participation and successfully build connections between different generations. The next section reveals the results and findings. Key Findings The main finding from the content analysis was that there were a very limited number of IGPs being offered in Greater Victoria. The results of the keyword searches (Appendix J) found that the keyword “intergenerational” appeared only 4 times within the documents. The keywords “all ages” appeared 17 times and “everyone welcome” appeared 27 times, but these keywords were in reference to activities geared towards children and teenagers such as public skate and public swim events and not to all generations. The word “multi-generational” did not appear at all within the documents. The results of the content analysis guided the design of the interview questions to pursue an understanding of why these beneficial programs were not being offered. The purpose of observing several IGPs was to verify the participants’ level of interest in the activities, whether the level of facilitation impacted the interaction between the generations, and whether the physical environment was conducive for the participants to interact with each other. Four very different programs including pickleball, cooking, reading and pottery were observed with some varying results in these categories (see Appendix K). A key finding from the observations was that for all the activities, whether sports, art, cooking or reading, both generations appeared engaged and focussed on the activities and showed signs of enjoyment such as smiling and laughing (see Appendix L). The only signs of boredom or disinterest during the activities were while the youth were waiting for their turn to play pickleball. For all activities aside from pickleball, the participants from both generations were situated near each other and although hugging and holding hands, which can be a sign of relationships being built, were not observed, the older adults did pat the children and youth on the shoulders frequently. Plenty of eye contact between the generations was observed indicating a level of comfort and trust with each other. The observations also showed that the level of facilitation from the program organizer was minimal for all four activities. Aside from the pottery class, the other three IGPs offered by the CB55+ had volunteer program facilitators who arranged the schedule, participants, and location for the activities, but then allowed the older adult volunteers to basically lead the activities. The program facilitators were available for support, but the older adult volunteers arranged the equipment and led the activities with the children. For the pottery class, the instructor provided instruction but then allowed the participants to decide on their project and then work on it with their partner with limited interruptions aside from the occasional bit of additional instruction. RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 17 Another key finding from the observations was that a variety of different facilities were used for the different activities including a pottery studio, kitchen, gym and school hallway. Most facilities had adequate space for the participants to move around, although the pottery studio space was quite tight and would be difficult for someone with mobility challenges to navigate. The noise level for each space was reasonable without much background noise aside from a fan in the school gym and the chatter of students waiting for their turn to play during pickleball. Aside from the pottery studio which was quite a visually stimulating space with various projects stored all around the room, the facilities contained very few distractions. The interview results (see Appendix M) provided many key findings to help answer the research question. The first of these findings was that there were varying levels of knowledge and experience with IGPs among recreation organizations in Greater Victoria. Half of the interviewees had minimal knowledge of IGPs while the other half were currently running or planning IGPs for their organizations. When discussing the strategic, vision and values documents of the different organizations with the interviewees, only one organization, the newly established Esquimalt Seniors Community Centre Society (ESCCS) mentioned IGPs as a priority for their programming. The most active IGP identified was one delivered by the CB55+ which was a non-profit association run completely by older adult volunteers. The James Bay New Horizons (JBNH) seniors centre had successfully partnered with the University of Victoria (UVic) for many years to deliver an IGP that brought ESL students and older adults together on a regular basis. The interviewees from the municipal and regional recreation organizations had various levels of past knowledge and experience with IGPs but were not currently running these programs. Through their own experiences with program development and implementation, interviewees validated several of the challenges of developing IGPs found in the literature review. These included finding funding for these programs including funding to cover the cost of transportation, determining a schedule that would work for both generations, allocating the time required to plan an IGP when staff are already busy with many competing priorities, determining how to promote an IGP and attract volunteers and participants, having a lack of knowledge about IGPs, and finding available facilities without interfering with current programming. In addition to confirming those challenges found in the literature review, the interviewees also identified meeting school district and recreation organization safety requirements such as criminal record checks and emergency procedures as another challenge. Also highlighted by interviewees from municipal and regional recreation organizations was that IGPs had not been included in community surveys and were not identified as a community priority and therefore were not included in their service plans. The results from the interviews revealed that the representatives from the different organizations were aware of the benefits of bringing different generations together through IGPs. They identified RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 18 benefits found in the literature review including reducing stereotypes, promoting health and well-being, increasing community connections between generations, providing those without extended family in town an opportunity to interact with other generations, and building relationships between generations. According to the Executive Director for James Bay New Horizons, the ESL students from Japan who participated in James Bay New Horizon’s IGP, showed a lot of positive emotions towards the seniors they worked with and considered them their “Canadian Grandparents” The interview results also supported the findings from the literature review regarding what needs to be considered when developing activities that will work across different generations. These included considering of abilities of the different generations, targeting the activity to the ages being served, offering activities that will encourage interaction, and consulting with older adults, youth and teenagers on what activities would interest them and that they would enjoy. When considering the abilities of the different ages of participants, Dixon suggested that program planners need to avoid making assumptions about older adults’ capabilities because several of the older adults who have participated in James Bay New Horizons’ fitness programs were more skilled and had more endurance than the college students who participated in them as IGPs. The interviewees suggested several different types of activities that could be offered as IGPs. They suggested that activities where participants work on a project together like cooking, baking, arts and crafts or gardening could work well because these activities provide opportunities for interaction plus an end product is created. A class on how to work with certain technology could work well as it would be interesting to older youth or teenagers because they would be able to contribute by sharing their knowledge on a topic with older adults. Quiet activities like reading together and story telling could work well for building connections and understanding between the generations. Depending on the abilities of the participants, offering fitness activities such as pickleball, table tennis, slow soccer and nature walks could be another way to bring the generations together. And finally, activities that fit with school curriculum could help encourage partnerships with the school districts because the activities will have more value to the teachers if they help them meet school curriculum requirements The interview results supported the concept that training for staff and/or volunteers is an important part of developing and delivering an IGP. The literature review discussed the importance of providing staff with training to ensure successful implementation of an IGP so that participants and communities received the benefits these programs could provide. The interviewees supported this concept and suggested several areas of staff or volunteer training that would be beneficial when developing and delivering an IGP. One area of staff or volunteer training suggested through the interviews was facilitation training which would give activity leaders the knowledge and skills to encourage positive interactions between the participants. Another area of training suggested was behavioural training which would help RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 19 activity leaders be able to identify common behaviours within the different age groups and know how to support them. Accessibility training was also suggested which would help activity leaders adjust a program ensuring it is accessible to a range of participants. In addition, training in conflict resolution, first aid, food safety, emergency procedures, and equity, diversity and inclusion were discussed. The High Five Principles of Healthy Child Development program and the High Five Principles of Healthy Aging program were also suggested (High Five, n.d.). Finally, providing training or an orientation for older adult volunteers who would be participating in an IGP was also suggested. The research identified variables that require consideration when determining the best schedule and location for an IGP. The literature review discussed the challenges of deciding on a location or facility and schedule that would work for delivering an IGP which the interviewees also identified including facility availability, activity leader (staff or volunteer) availability, ages of the participants and their availability. In addition, the interviewees discussed potential locations for an IGP which could include a senior’s centre, senior’s residence, recreation centre, school, gym, art studio, or park. They noted transportation as a potential barrier to participation and that walkability of the location for the different participants would be important. They also noted that the location could depend on the partner organizations, and which has the best location and facility availability schedule for activities Finally, the research determined that partnerships are a key aspect for developing and delivering successful IGPs. The interviewees identified the need for establishing partnerships with other organizations when developing an IGP. They confirmed how beneficial it has been or would be to partner with other organizations to share knowledge and resources for delivering an IGP. The interviewees suggested potential organizations to partner with on IGPs including school districts or individual schools both elementary, middle and high schools, senior’s centres or associations, senior’s residences, social services, sports organizations, recreation organizations, sports organizations, youth organizations, cultural organizations, legions and Military Family Services. Analysis of the Findings The purpose of this research was to identify the challenges of developing IGPs and how these programs can be developed and delivered in a recreation setting as Intergenerational Recreation Programs (IGRPs) to encourage participation and build connections between generations. The literature review showed that IGPs provide many individual and community benefits, but also that there are several challenges to developing and delivering these programs. The following analysis will help determine meaning behind the results and what the JBCSC will need to consider and address when planning to develop and deliver an IGRP for their community. The research showed that for most recreation organizations within Greater Victoria, offering IGPs was not a priority. The non-profit senior’s centres were the only ones that offered IGPs through RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 20 partnerships with Cordova Bay Elementary and the University of Victoria. This shows that although IGPs provide many benefits, there are challenges that need to be overcome for the JBCSC to develop and deliver their own IGRP. Observations of the engagement and interest of the participants in the CB55+ IGPs supported the research from the literature review that these programs provided opportunities for building connections between different generations. In addition, the observations showed that minimal facilitator or instructor interference encouraged the older adults to play a larger role in planning and facilitating the IGPs themselves. Also, the use of various facilities showed the diversity in potential spaces that could be used for IGPs and that the appropriate facility should be selected for the activity to ensure all participants can engage fully and safely. The interviewees confirmed the research from the literature review that developing IGRPs has many challenges that need to be overcome to be successful. Creativity, time, partnership building and research were identified as requirements for a recreation organization to successfully implement an IGRP. Identifying the challenges of developing intergenerational recreation programs is the first step in answering the research question because it lays the foundation for what an organization needs to consider to successfully develop and implement an IGRP. For the JBCSC this means being aware of the challenges that other organizations have encountered when developing IGRPs and identifying strategies for overcoming these challenges when developing and implementing their own IGRP. When looking at how an organization can create recreation programs that build connections between different generations, designing IGRPs that are engaging and interesting to both generations will encourage these connections. When considering which facilities work well for IGRPs, the choice of activity plays a large role in this decision. And when looking at how to encourage participation, involving older adult volunteers in the planning and facilitation of IGRPs has proven to be successful. These findings showed that it will be important for the JBCSC to consider the interests of the different age groups, seek their input when planning an IGRP, involve older adult volunteers in development of the program, and consider the needs of the participants and the activities when deciding on facilities to use. The research showed that the interviewees had varying levels of knowledge and experience with IGPs, but that they understood many of the benefits that bringing generations together could provide even if they did not have experience offering IGPs themselves. This is important for recreation organizations to understand when developing an IGRP because promoting the program’s benefits will be important for attracting partners, volunteers, and participants. One of the initial steps for the new Wisdom and Wonder IGP developed by the ESCCS was promoting the program concept to their members and seeking feedback during the development stages of the program (See Appendix N). For the JBCSC, building the RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 21 community’s awareness of the benefits of bringing different generations together will be important when developing and promoting their new IGRP and will help encourage participation. The research indicated that if a recreation organization decides to develop an IGRP, they need to be prepared to provide their staff and volunteers with training that will support them in delivering a successful program. When looking at how the JBCSC can create recreation programs that encourage participation, providing staff and volunteers with training on how to create a safe, accessible, and inclusive environment where participants feel welcome will play a key part in encouraging participation. When determining how the JBCSC can create recreation programs that build connections between generations, providing staff and volunteers with training on how to encourage interactions between participants and how to recognize the different needs and behaviours of the participating age groups will help them create an environment that is conducive to building connections between the generations. For the JBCSC this means while developing their IGRP, planning for the training of staff and volunteers in areas such as facilitation, safety, equity, diversity and inclusion, and behaviour management should be included in their overall plan in order to promote successful implementation. In addition, the JBCSC should reach out to organization like James Bay New Horizons who already have experience offering IGPs and seek their advice on developing their own IGRP. The research revealed that there are many activities, both active and quiet, that have potential to be offered by a recreation organization as an IGRP. Recreation organizations often have various sizes of multi-purpose rooms that could be utilized for these programs and already have connections established with members of different ages within their community. In the initial planning stages of an IGRP, the recreation organization should reach out to the community for feedback on what they would like to see offered, keeping in mind that some activities encourage interaction more than others. When looking at how the JBCSC can create recreation programs that build connections between generations, the choice of generations to bring together for an IGRP will play a large role in building those connections. In addition, choosing activities that encourage a high level of interaction between participants will help build connections between the generations. When considering how the JBCSC can create recreation programs that encourage participation, offering activities that are interesting and engaging will be a key to attracting participants and therefore seeking community feedback would help determine which activities spark interest in the potential participants. Both the primary research and literature review identified scheduling and finding a facility as common challenges for IGPs. Weekdays during the school day could be challenging to offer an IGRP as children are in school, unless the school and community centre are in close proximity to one and other like the CB55+ and Cordova Bay Elementary who share the same building. Weekends and evenings could provide an opportunity for recreation organizations to bring the generations together as long as the IGRP RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 22 had high value enough to compete with people’s busy evening and weekend schedules. When looking at how the JBCBC could encourage participation in an IGRP, finding an optimal schedule and convenient location for these programs is important for encouraging participation. For the JBCSC this means developing a partnership with the James Bay Elementary School, which shares the same building as the JBCSC, to offer an IGRP during the school day would provide a convenient location and optimal schedule that would encourage participation. The school already has programs where students use the JBCSC’s café area during the school day for fun lunches. This could be expanded to using that space for an IGRP involving some of the older adults who already participate in the JBCSC’s Seniors Meal Program. Alternatively, the JBCSC could also look at offering a weekend IGRP when their facilities have more availability and when they could reach older youth and teenagers to participate in a program. Partnerships were identified through the research as highly important when developing and delivering an IGP. Partnering with other organizations would provide an opportunity to share resources and knowledge and create a well rounded IGRP plan that takes into consideration the various needs, priorities and interests of community members. When looking at how the JBCSC can create recreation programs that encourage participation, building partnerships with organizations to develop and deliver an IGRP together will ensure that the interests of the different potential participants are considered and included in the program design which will encourage them to participate. For the JBCSC this could mean forming a committee to bring together knowledge and expertise from various community organizations within James Bay would be beneficial for development and delivery of an IGRP. Best Practices This following section briefly describes three of the best practices researchers have identified for creating successful IGPs. These include (1) identifying the needs and expectations of the participants; (2) providing training for staff; and (3) building partnerships with other organizations to develop IGPs. One of the first steps when creating an IGP is to determine the needs and abilities of the different generations that will be participating. This includes determining activities that would be of interest to the different participating age groups and understanding their physical and cognitive capabilities to participate (Kirsnan et al., 2023). One way to ensure an IGP includes activities that are suitable and of interest to the participants is to involve the participants directly in the decision-making which can include them offering input into potential activities or permitting participants to choose from a variety of activities during an IGP (Jarrott et al., 2019). An example of this best practice in action was how the CB55+ determined the IGPs they offer. The organization is completely volunteer run and according to their membership liaison, the activities they chose to offer were member driven. This means the older adults provided feedback on the IGPs they offered which ensured they were interesting and engaging for the volunteers who participated. The reason this best practice is important is because it shows the importance RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 23 of soliciting input from participants during the planning stages of an IGP. This could include gathering input from both the older adults and the children. When a recreation professional is developing a recreation IGP for their community they should follow this best practice to ensure they are respecting the needs, abilities, and interests of their program participants. Another important best practice for developing IGPs is to ensure that the staff who are planning and delivering the program have adequate training. Development of an IGP may benefit by having one person responsible for designing the program, bringing together the expertise from different age-group specialists, and making adaptations to the program based on feedback from participants (Hayes, 2003). By working together, the age-group specialists can share their perspectives on what will work or not work for their age-group when planning IGP recreational activities (Jarrott et al., 2019). Although the CB55+ is volunteer run, they still provided training for their Support A Reader volunteers who participated in this IGP. This ensured that the volunteers understood their role and encouraged participation and success for the program. This best practice is important for the recreation professional because it shows how important it is to bring together staff members with diverse expertise to help promote a successful experience and positive outcomes for the program participants. No one person should think that they must figure it all out on their own when they can work as a team to design an IGP that will consider the needs and abilities of all participants. And the third best practice for developing IGPs is to build partnerships with other organizations to share knowledge and resources. As the location of services and activities for different generations can vary, looking outside one’s own organization for potential partnerships can provide a way to connect organizations together and benefit from their knowledge and expertise (Bailey Yoelin, 2024). An example of this best practice in action was how the Esquimalt Seniors Community Centre was partnering with McCaulay Elementary to develop an IGP. In addition, the organization had reached out to James Bay New Horizons to learn from their experiences with IGPs. This best practice is important for the recreation professional because it provides an opportunity to work together with organizations outside the field of recreation to help ensure an IGP has a higher likelihood of producing the positive benefits discussed at the beginning of this paper. Recommendations The following recommendations are based on the research findings and provide suggestions for how the JBCSC can develop and deliver a successful IGRP for their community that encourages participation and builds connections between generations. 1. The research demonstrated the importance of being intentional and purposeful when developing an IGRP. Therefore, it is recommended that to support the development of an IGRP, the James RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 24 Bay Community School Society which runs the JBCSC should add intergenerational programming as a strategic priority which aligns with their mission of building community connections. The justification for this recommendation is based on the finding that when organizations include intergenerational programming as a strategic priority or action item, that those organizations are successful in delivering those programs, whereas when this is not included, organizations tend to not include intergenerational programming in their operations. 2. The research revealed the importance of forming partnerships when developing an IGRP. Therefore, it is recommended that the JBCSC strike a steering committee and invite local organizations to partner with them on developing and delivering an IGRP to their community. Potential partners include the James Bay Project, James Bay New Horizons, James Bay Elementary School, Central Middle School, Victoria Secondary School, Parent Advisory Committees, University of Victoria, Camosun College and local sports organizations, senior’s residences, youth organizations and social services. It is recommended that representatives from these organizations be invited to participate on a steering committee to share their knowledge and resources to help develop a plan, draft a budget and implement an IGRP. In addition, active community members could also be invited to sit on the committee. The reason for this recommendation is based on the observed success of the IGP offered by the CB55+ in partnership with Cordova Bay Elementary and of the potential success of the IGP in development by the ESCCS which has successfully struck a steering committee including representatives from a number of local organizations working together to implement an IGP for their community in Esquimalt. 3. The research identified the importance of training staff and volunteers to ensure an IGRP is inclusive, accessible and safe for all participants. Therefore, it is recommended that the JBCSC develop a training plan for staff and volunteers who will be involved in developing and delivering the IGRP. Areas identified in the research that should be included in the plan include training in facilitation, behaviour management, first aid, and equity, diversity and inclusion. The High Five Principles of Healthy Child Development and Healthy Aging certifications were also recommended for those working in a program that brings together participants from different generations. The justification for this recommendation is based on the results of the literature review and interviews which both highlighted the importance of training and education for staff and volunteers to ensure IGRP participants have positive experiences. RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 25 4. Funding was identified in the research as a challenge when developing and delivering an IGP. Although no potential funding sources were specifically identified through the research, a few recommendations in this area were identified. Therefore, the first recommendation for the JBCSC to fund an IGRP is to include intergenerational programming as a strategic priority (as recommended above) which could enable the organization to allocate some of its operational funding towards supporting this strategic priority. A second recommendation is for the JBCSC to seek alternative sources of funding through community, municipal and provincial grants. And a final recommendation is to be deliberate in encouraging a high degree of the facilitation of the IGRP be conducted by volunteers rather than relying on staff who may not have the time or resources to support the program. The proven benefits of IGPs and their importance for building community connections while understanding that there could be low cost recovery for these programs justifies looking at various ways to support IGRPs by reallocating operational funds, seeking alternative funding and encouraging volunteerism as a key aspect of delivering these programs. 5. The observations showed how important older adult volunteers can be for facilitating IGPs and how once established there is potential for an IGP to be delivered completely by volunteers. Therefore, it is recommended that the JBCSC develop a volunteer management plan to recruit and train volunteers to support development and delivery of their IGRP. The success of the CB55+ IGP which is run completely by dedicated volunteers provides inspiration and support for this recommendation. 6. The research showed that IGPs can provide significant benefits to individuals and communities including improving a person’s sense of purpose, well-being and self-worth, increasing empathy and reducing ageist stereotypes, and increasing feelings of community connectedness. Therefore, it is recommended that the JBCSC promote the benefits that bringing generations together can provide when advertising, pursuing partnerships and recruiting volunteers for their IGRP. The reasoning behind this recommendation is that promotion of the benefits will help encourage participation and support development and delivery of the program. Conclusion The research shows that IGPs provide many benefits to individuals and communities. This paper considered the concept of offering these programs through recreation organizations and provided recommendations that would help the JBCSC create a successful IGRP that would encourage RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 26 participation and build connections between generations. This paper began with a literature review of the benefits of IGPs and the challenges of developing and delivering these programs. The primary research included a content analysis, interviews, and special status observations to determine the frequency of IGPs in Greater Victoria, to discuss and identify the challenges of developing these programs and recommendations for how to overcome these challenges and to observe the benefits of these programs in action. Finally, the paper provided recommendations for how the JBCSC could implement a successful IGRP for their community. There research showed that there are many benefits that IGPs provided individuals and communities which is why these programs are important for recreation organizations to consider offering their communities. Before embarking on implementation of an IGRP, the research revealed that that were several challenges to developing IGPs that need to be addressed in order to provide a program that will build connections between generations and provide positive experiences for the participants. These challenges included institutional capacity challenges such as securing funding, providing adequate training for staff and volunteers, and finding a suitable location for offering an IGP and programmatic challenges such as finding an optimal schedule, ensuring activities were developmentally appropriate for the different age groups, and finding activities that were interesting and engaging for all participants. Although challenges were identified through the research, the results also showed that although not many organizations in Greater Victoria were offering IGPs that the benefits of these programs were understood by the recreation professionals and volunteers who were interviewed. The research also revealed that the CB55+ was offering a highly successful IGP in partnership with Cordova Bay Elementary School that engaged their students in pickleball, cooking and reading and was run exclusively by dedicated volunteers. In addition, the ESCCS, which was also run exclusively by volunteers, was gaining momentum with the development of a new IGP for their community by building partnerships, promoting the benefits of the program, and inviting members to participate in development of the program. The success of these two organizations provided validation for several of the recommendations put forward in this paper. Through the research several recommendations for the JBCSC were identified that would help the organization successfully develop and deliver an IGRP to their community that would encourage participation and build connections between generations. These recommendations included adding intergenerational programming as a strategic priority, striking a steering committee and inviting other organizations to be partners in development of the program, providing training to staff and volunteers to ensure the program was inclusive, accessible and safe for all participants, looking at funding options including allocating some JBCSC operational funds towards the program, pursuing grant opportunities and reducing costs by engaging volunteers in the program’s planning and facilitation, developing a RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 27 volunteer management plan to recruit volunteers to participate and facilitate the program, and promoting the benefits of bringing different generations together through recreation to encourage participation and support implementation of the program. Overall, the research showed the benefits of bringing different generations together through recreation and helped identify several ways for the JBCSC to overcome common challenges of developing these programs to purposefully and successfully implement an IGRP for their community that will encourage participation and build connections between generations. RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 28 References Ayala, J. S., Hewson, J. A., Bray, D., Jones, G., & Hartley, D. (2007). Intergenerational programs. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 5(2), 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1300/J194v05n02_04 (List A) Bailey Yoelin, A. (2024). Implementing positive education about aging and contact experiences (PEACE) model into an undergraduate therapeutic recreation course. Therapeutic Recreation Journal, 58(4), 503–521. https://doi.org/10.18666/TRJ-2024-V58-I4-12369 (List A) Baum, N., & Ochoa, S. (2024). From Gen Alpha to the Greatest Generation: Fostering intergenerational connection as the antidote for social isolation. Parks & Recreation, 59(6), 38–42. (List B) Chorn Dunham, C., & Casadonte, D. (2009). Children’s attitudes and classroom interaction in an intergenerational education program. Educational Gerontology, 35(5), 453–464. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601270802605473 (List A) Connecting Generations, Strengthening Communities: A Toolkit for Intergenerational Program Planners. (n.d.). Generations United. Retrieved March 8, 2025, from https://www.gu.org/resources/connecting-generations-strengthening-communities-a-toolkit-forintergenerational-program-planners/ (List B) Doiron, R., & Lees, J. (2009). It takes a village to raise a reader: Reflections on an intergenerational literacy program. School Community Journal, 19(1), 137–154. (List A) FallCreek, S. (2011). Proceed with caution. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 9(3), 339–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2011.593460 (List A) Femia, E. E., Zarit, S. H., Blair, C., Jarrott, S. E., & Bruno, K. (2008). Intergenerational preschool experiences and the young child: Potential benefits to development. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23(2), 272–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2007.05.001 (List A) Hayes, C. L. (2003). An observational study in developing an intergenerational shared site program: Challenges and Insights. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 1(1), 113–132. https://doi.org/10.1300/J194v01n01_10 (List A) RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 29 High Five (n.d.). Certifications. Accessed on March 14, 2025. https://www.highfive.org/certifications (List B) Horikoshi, K. (2023). The positive psychology of challenge: Towards interdisciplinary studies of activities and processes involving challenges. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, 1090069. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1090069 (List A) James Bay Community School Society. (2020). James Bay Community School Society: Going from great to even greater 2021-2024. (List B) Jarrott, S. E., Stremmel, A. J., & Naar, J. J. (2019). Practice that transforms intergenerational programs: A model of theory- and evidence informed principles. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 17(4), 488–504. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2019.1579154 (List A) Jarrott, S. E., Turner, S. G., Juris, J., Scrivano, R. M., & Weaver, R. H. (2021). Program practices predict intergenerational interaction among children and adults. The Gerontologist, 62(3), 385–396. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnab161 (List A) Juris, J. (2025). Creating Intergenerational Programs in Recreation Settings. Parks & Recreation. (List B) Kenning, G., Ee, N., Xu, Y., Luu, B., Ward, S., Goldwater, M., Lewis, E., Radford, K., Anstey, K., Lautenschlager, N., Fitzgerald, J., Rockwood, K., & Peters, R. (2021). Intergenerational practice in the community—What does the community think? Social Sciences, 10(10), 374. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10100374 (List A) Kirsh, E., Frydenberg, E., & Deans, J. (2021). Benefits of an intergenerational program in the early years. Journal of Early Childhood Education Research, 10(2), Article 2. (List A) Kirsnan, L., Kosiol, J., Golenko, X., Radford, K., & Fitzgerald, J. A. (2023). Barriers and enablers for enhancing engagement of older people in intergenerational programs in Australia. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 21(3), 360–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2022.2065400 (List A) RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 30 Lai, D. W. L., Zhou, J.-J., Bai, X., Lam, R. Y. K., & Li, Y.-Z. (2025). Intergenerational engagement and challenges: Participants’ perspectives on intergenerational activities in Hong Kong. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 23(1), 30–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2023.2287229 (List A) Lau, M. H. M. (2024). Intergenerational interactions, Ageism and ableism in community settings. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 22(2), 258–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2023.2206387 (List A) May, M., & Ziegler, A. (2024, June 27). Parks and recreation supports older adults. National Recreation and Park Association. https://www.nrpa.org/parks-recreation-magazine/2024/july/parks-andrecreation-supports-older-adults/ (List B) Murayama, Y., Murayama, H., Hasebe, M., Yamaguchi, J., & Fujiwara, Y. (2019). The impact of intergenerational programs on social capital in Japan: A randomized population-based crosssectional study. BMC Public Health, 19(1), 156. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-6480-3 (List A) Proudfoot, S. (2007, Dec 24). Intergenerational programs work: [final edition]. Leader Post. Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/intergenerational-programswork/docview/349952681/se-2 (List D) Ruggiano, N., & Welch, B. J. (2011). Institutional capacity for volunteerism in intergenerational shared sites. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 9(3), 250–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2011.593434 (List A) Seniors service plan: Active and healthy living 2015-2020. (n.d.). Retrieved March 6, 2025, from https://www.richmond.ca/__shared/assets/seniorsservice43172.pdf (List B) Statistics Canada. (2022, July 13). British Columbia – Age distribution, 2001 to 2021. https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2021/as-sa/fogsspg/alternative.cfm?topic=2&lang=E&dguid=2021A000259&objectId=1 (List C) RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 31 Wendland, J., & Parizet, L. (2023). Benefits and challenges of intergenerational child daycare and senior programs or facilities: A systematic review of the literature. Annales Médico-Psychologiques, Revue Psychiatrique, 181(6), 487–494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amp.2022.02.020 (List A) Weng, S. S. (2019). An Asian American community intergenerational response to older adult isolation and loneliness. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 17(3), 257–272. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2019.1617591 (List C) Wlodarczyk, N. (2020). “It’s My Time”: Older adults’ experiences and perceived benefits of participation in an intergenerational rock band. Music Therapy Perspectives, 38(2), 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1093/mtp/miz021 (List A) Youth-Led Intergenerational Projects. (n.d.). Retrieved February 1, 2025, from https://www.gu.org/app/uploads/2018/07/Intergenerational-Report-Youth-Led-Toolkit.pdf (List) RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON Appendices 32 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON Appendix A: Saanich School District 63 Forms Request for Research Form and 33 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON Letter of Approval for Special Status Observations 34 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 35 Appendix B: Content Analysis List Websites and Webpages Accessed in February 2025 Organization Guide Reviewed Webpage/Website City of Victoria Program Guide (Online) & Aquatics Drop-in https://www.victoria.ca/parks-recreation/recreation/program-guide Cook Street Village Activity Centre Fall Program Guide | September - December https://storage.googleapis.com/production-constantcontact-v1-04/674/956674/w8uMC76P/06c74958f322448584e55ee23abaff7c?fileName=Fa ll%20Program%20Guide_compressed%20(1).pdf Cordova Bay 55+ Association Activity Calendar CRD Panorama Recreation Winter 2025 Esquimalt Parks & Recreation Winter Spring 2025: Esquimalt Program & Event Guide Fairfield Gonzales Community Association https://cordovabay55plus.org/activities-events/ https://issuu.com/panoramarec/docs/winter_2025_brochure_final_visual_pro of?fr=sNDJlZDYyODUyMTA https://issuu.com/esquimaltrecreation/docs/esq-guide_winter_25-final https://fairfieldcommunity.ca/ Fernwood Neighbourhood Resource Group Fernwood Neighbourhood House Fall Programs https://fernwoodnrg.ca/neighbourhood/fernwood-communitycentre/recreation/ James Bay Community Centre 2025 Winter Program & Activity Guide James Bay New Horizons Fall Program Schedule, February Calendar http://www.jamesbaynewhorizons.ca/ Monterey Recreation Centre Club Calendar Monterey Winter Club Schedule https://www.oakbay.ca/sites/default/files/Winter-ClubSchedule%28UpdatedJan18%29.pdf Oak Bay Parks, Recreation & Culture Winter Active Living Guide 2025 https://issuu.com/oakbayparksrecreationculture/docs/alg_winter_2025_finalonline Quadra Village Community Centre QVCC Calendar Saanich Parks, Recreation & Community Services Winter/Spring Activity Guide 2025 Victoria West Community Association Programs (online) West Shore Parks & Recreation Activity Guide January to April https://www.jamesbaycentre.ca/leisure-recreation-programs/ https://www.qvcc.ca/ http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/15224967#/15224967/1 https://www.victoriawest.ca/ https://www.wspr.ca/programs-registration/activity-guide RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 36 Everyone Welcome All ages Guide/Calendar Multigenerational Name of Organization Intergenerational Appendix C: Content Analysis Checklist Notes RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON Appendix D: Interview Field Notes 37 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 38 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 39 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 40 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 41 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 42 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 43 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 44 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 45 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 46 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 47 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 48 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 49 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 50 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 51 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 52 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 53 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 54 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 55 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 56 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 57 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 58 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 59 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 60 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON Appendix E: Interview Questions 61 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 62 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 63 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON Appendix F: Observation Checklist 64 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 65 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 66 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 67 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON Appendix G: Cordova Bay 55+ Association Intergenerational Report 68 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 69 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON Appendix H: ESCCS Intergenerational Program Planning Documents 70 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 71 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 72 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON Appendix I: ESCCS Intergenerational Overview and Work Plan 73 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 74 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 75 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 76 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 77 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 78 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 79 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 80 Appendix J: Content Analysis Results No. Name of Organization Guide Reviewed Intergenerational Multi-generational All ages Everyone Welcome Results of Review of Municipal and Non-profit Recreation Organization Activity/Program Guides and Event Calendars 1 City of Victoria Program Guide (Online) & Aquatics Drop-in 0 0 2 0 There are a couple drop-in activities where all ages are welcome, but these programs are mainly geared towards children/ 2 Cook Street Village Activity Centre Fall Program Guide | September - December 0 0 7 1 1 drop-in day-time bridge activity and 7 "adults of all ages" activities 3 Cordova Bay 55+ Association Activity Calendar 1 0 0 0 Program for CB55+ volunteers and Cordova Bay Elementary School students. 4 Capital Regional District Panorama Recreation Winter 2025 1 0 3 9 1 weekly class "Generations in Clay" for 5 weeks + 4 special event everyone welcome skate + 1 special event everyone welcome swim + single day pottery event for 2yrs + with caregiver 5 Esquimalt Parks & Recreation Winter Spring 2025: Esquimalt Program & Event Guide 0 0 0 4 2 everyone welcome special event skate + 1 everyone welcome weekly swim drop-in and + 1 everyone welcome weekly skate drop-in 6 Fairfield Gonzales Community Association Events & Activities page 0 0 0 1 Monthly community meals 7 Fernwood Neighbourhood Resource Group Fernwood Neighbourhood House Fall Programs 0 0 0 1 1 everyone welcome weekly community meal drop-in 8 James Bay Community Centre 2025 Winter Program & Activity Guide 0 0 0 0 9 James Bay New Horizons Fall Program Schedule, February Calendar 0 0 0 0 10 Monterey Recreation Centre Club Calendar Monterey Winter Club Schedule 0 0 0 0 11 Oak Bay Parks, Recreation & Culture Winter Active Living Guide 2025 0 0 2 10 12 Quadra Village Community Centre QVCC Calendar 0 0 0 0 13 Saanich Parks, Recreation & Community Services Winter/Spring Activity Guide 2025 2 0 0 0 2 fabric art workshops (1 day each) - 1 listed under youth, 1 listed under adult 14 Victoria West Community Association Programs (online) 0 0 0 1 Weekly free board game night for all 15 West Shore Parks & Recreation Activity Guide January to April 2025 0 0 3 0 Edge class for all ages 6-69yrs weekly program and weekly all ages basketball, weekly drop-in swimming all ages "Fun Swim" 4 0 17 27 Totals Notes 4 everyone welcome special event skate + 2 everyone welcome special event swims + 1 everyone welcome weekly skate drop-in RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 81 Appendix K: Observation Results Observations Results Based on the Observation of Four Intergenerational Programs Program Data Pickleball Cooking Support a Reader Generations in Clay Ratios (Adults: Youth) 5:24 3:8 1:1 5:5 Familial connection: none none none family Interest in Activity Pickleball Cooking Support a Reader Generations in Clay No. Indicators Yes/No Observations Yes/No Observations Yes/No Observations Yes/No Observations 1 Actively engaged and focused on the activity or project Yes 2 Not engaged or No focussed on the activity or project While waiting for turn to play, youth appear bored and are goofing off. No 3 Cooperating with N/A partner N/A N/A N/A Yes 4 Not cooperating with partner N/A N/A N/A No No Support a Reader Generations in Clay Observations Yes Observations Yes Observations Program leader organizes, but is not involved in delivery (just clean up) Yes Volunteer and child work independently. Training happens earlier before volunteer takes on role Yes program instructor brings Facilitation/instruction for IGPs was group together to give generally hands off allowing generations instruction and then lets to work together and build connections. them work on project together. No Only interrupts with new instruction. Very hands off, but supportive. N/A While playing - both Yes generations focused on activity, seniors actively offering tips and instruction Level of Facilitation Pickleball Cooking No. Indicators Yes/No Observations Yes 1 Leader gives Yes instructions and then lets participants work on activity without interruption Program leader and Yes seniors are teaching the sport. Program leader lets seniors work with the students 2 Leader gives instructions and then oversees participants and frequently interrupts with additional instructions Some volunteer leaders No (seniors) provide a lot of interaction/guidance, but that is pare of teaching the sport 3 Leader lets Yes participants try to solve problems on their own Program leader observes and lets seniors work with students to teach them sport 4 Leader solves No problems for participants even when not asked Program leader only No engages when needed seniors know what they are doing No Yes Seniors instructing. Yes Children focused on activity and listening to instruction. Both generations fully engaged. Many steps to follow. Senior is listening Yes while child is reading. Offering help and taking breaks to discuss what was read. No No Working together to work out text No Seniors work independently with children. They solve problems as they come up - like candies not sticking to chocolate Yes Both adults and children seem very interested in activity. Focused on project. Lots to work on. Projects at multiple stages Main Results Both younger and older generations were engaged in the IGP activities offered which indicates that both were interested in the activities. Parent/grandparent with Most IGPs in study did not include a child working well partner situation and therefore not together. Lots of enough data collected for comparison. communication between the pairs. Main Results N/A N/A Yes Instructor keeps eye on IGP facilitators/instructors let how things are going. generations to work together to solve Offers help when needed problems but are were to support. or requested. Allows partners to discuss their plan for the project and select what to work on. N/A N/A No Let’s them try to figure it out. Participants seem comfortable in the space and with the equipment and with asking questions. RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 5 Leader is open to N/A participants taking projects in different directions N/A Yes 6 Leader is strict about participants adhering to the project process and end product N/A N/A No 7 Leader talks less than participants Yes Program leader just observes and leaves talking to seniors and students Yes 8 Leader talks more No than the participants No Yes Participants have lots of freedom of creativity with pottery projects. None look the same. The freedom to take IGP activities or projects in different direction was dependent on type of activity. Participants are chatting away while instructor wanders to be available. Facilitators/instructors only provided necessary instruction to the IGPs which allowed the older and younger participants to chat and build connections. No Yes No N/A N/A No Support a Reader Generations in Clay Observations Yes Observations Yes The kitchen space is not huge, but number of participants have room to move around yet all working at a single kitchen island together. Yes Sitting together at a No small desk. Adult chair and child chair. No Yes Cooking No. Indicators Yes Yes Program leader is hands off - just observing. Seniors and children do all the talking. Lots of questions from the children. Yes N/A Pickleball 1 Participants can Yes easily move around the space Gym space - 2 pickleball Yes courts set up 2 The space is tight No and difficult to move around in No 3 Participants can sit close to each other N/A N/A Yes 4 The room layout restricts how closely participants can sit together N/A N/A No 5 Low noise level No Noise low during Yes instruction aside from a fan blowing 6 Noisy Yes Quite noisy during sport, seniors instructing and youth chatter No No 7 Lack of distractions Yes Aside from sport, there Yes aren't any distractions aside youth chatting while waiting their turn Nothing around to Yes distract the children there are no toys, just a clean kitchen space. 8 Several distractions No No Pickleball Cooking Evidence of connection The project is Support -a-reader so volunteers don't deviate from the program for other projects. N/A Environment Observations Program leader lets volunteer seniors decide on the cooking projects. Volunteers organize supplies and equipment. 82 Not sitting, standing a kitchen island together in close proximity to each other. Observations The space is a bit tight would need a larger space for someone with mobility challenges. A variety of facilities were used for the IGPs with different amounts of space for participants to move around. Yes Sitting across the tables from each other mostly The proximity of participants to each other during the IGPs was based on type of activity - participants were further apart from each other for sports activity and closer together for quiet reading activity No Could sit beside each other but seem to choose to sit across from each other. Seems better for conversation. Yes Event though lots of chatting, no other noise in the room. Participants seem respectful of noise they are making. The noise level of the IGP was lower based on level of action involved with activity - sports activity was noisier than reading support No A lot going on in the space For the most part, the spaces used for the IGP activities had few distractions No Yes A lot of equipment and projects around the room. Visually, very busy, Support a Reader Generations in Clay Yes Sitting side by side to look at book together No Room is quiet and separated from the rest of the centre. Door is closed for quiet. Main Results Yes Quiet hallway space No Nothing else going on in hallway. RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON No. Indicators Yes Observations Yes 1 Smiles or laughter Yes Those playing the sport Yes are engaged. Seniors smiling and laughing. Youth laughing together 2 Bored expressions, yawning Yes Those waiting to play look bored 3 Conversation between participants Yes Most conversation is Yes instructions, but when asked questions "what's the score" the youth respond 4 Lack of conversation between participants No Only 5 seniors to large group so waiting group were not chatting with seniors No 5 Physical closeness and/or touching (hugs, pats, holding hands) Yes Seniors put hand on shoulders. No hugs, holding hands. Yes 6 Keeping physical distance from each other No Generations appear No comfortable being close with each other 7 Eye contact Yes While listening to senior volunteers, eye contact. Focus when getting tips from senior volunteers 8 Lack of eye contact No Observations Seniors smiling, Yes instructing. Children happy and excited by project. Lots of smiles and laughter. No Yes No Yes 83 Observations Yes Observations Main Results Smiles from both senior and child Yes Lots of smiles and laughter During all the IGPs, both the older adults and children showed signs of enjoyment including smiles and laughter. This supports the idea that IGPs provide opportunities for connection between generations. Yes Some children showing small signs of boredom starting to mess around and not be on task. With limited court space, children had to wait their turn during the Pickleball session, and they began to show signs of boredom. Yes Lots of chatting - family connection so comfortable with each other. For the IGP activities that required less instruction, there was more interaction between the generations. No Mostly instruction and questions, but some chatting All around single kitchen island together. Seniors place hand on shoulder from time to time. Lots of eye contact between generations. Yes Reading, but also some conversation No No No Yes No No No Yes Focus on book, very little eye contact Yes No Family members so this is Not much physical closeness was expected displayed during the IGPs which could indicate that the activities did not encourage connection or relationship building. Family members so this is During the IGPs, eye contact was expected observed between the younger and older generations which could indicate a level of trust and comfort between the generations. RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON Appendix L: Observation Field Notes 84 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 85 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 86 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 87 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 88 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 89 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 90 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 91 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 92 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 93 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 94 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 95 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 96 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 97 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 98 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 99 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 100 Appendix M: Interview Results Focus Areas, Key Components, Quests and Response Summaries No. Focus Areas Key Components Interview Questions Responses 1 Experience with designing IGPs Determine interviewees’ experience with IGPs. Do you have any experience with developing and/or delivering intergenerational recreation programs. Experience with IGPs: 4/8 have various levels of experience with IGPs Where in your policies, or strategic documents, or vision or mission or values statements, is there reference to intergenerational recreation programs? 2 Number of IGPs in Greater Victoria Evaluate quantity of IGPs Does your organization offered in Greater Victoria. currently offer intergenerational recreation programs? Has your organization offered intergenerational recreation programs in the past? 3 Purpose of offering IGPs Mention of intergenerational program priorities in strategic documents or policies: 1/8 Interviewees have experience working with seniors, children, social services and with developing recreation or social service programs for these groups Esquimalt Seniors Community Centre Wisdom & Wonder promotional materials and workplan Currently offering IGPs: 2/8 currently offering. The two non-profit seniors’ centres are offering IGPs. Offered IGPs in the past: 3/8 have offered IGPs in the past The two non-profit seniors’ centres and one municipal seniors’ centre have offered them in the past. Esquimalt Seniors Community Centre is currently developing an IGP “Wisdom & Wonder” Determine whether the benefits of IGPs are identified as a motivator for offering these programs. If yes, what is the purpose Purposes identified for offering IGPs: of offering them and what programs do you offer (type of activity, ongoing or one-off event)? Identify patterns for activities offered as IGPs. If yes, what was the purpose of offering them and what programs did you offer (type of activity, ongoing or one-off event)? Determine if IGP was meant to build brief intergenerational connections or longerterm intergenerational relationships - Help children learn about the past. Help UVic ESL students practice their English Build relationships between different generations Provide different perspective for international students on how different generations interact For high school students – provide opportunity for those who don’t have grandparents in town to interact with older seniors Help reduce stereotypes about abilities of seniors. The good feelings it creates for everyone Provide opportunity for those who do not have access to children (grandchildren’s families have moved away) Seniors remember spirit of being a child Encourage and increase interactions between generations Guests in elementary school – provides a way to give back Bridge connection between youth and seniors Health and well being Provide opportunity for older teens to build relationships with seniors Help seniors feel less insecure and afraid of teenagers in neighbourhood Provide opportunity for military families who have moved away from extended family to connect with seniors There’s a natural fit between seniors and children Overall community benefit by building these connections Help seniors come out of their residences and have a bigger role in their communities An opportunity for seniors to contribute to their community Current or Past Activities IGPs interviewees were part of delivering: Pottery program (familial) UVic ESL students participate in fitness classes Tea Baking/cooking Technology classes x 2 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 101 - Arts & Crafts projects x 2 Theme/Holiday related projects like Valentine’s Day, Christmas, etc. Family movie nights (familial) Support A Reader program x 2 Walking ambassador program (Richmond) Pickleball Chess Community dinners and events Boardgames Photography Lego Story sharing x 2 See Section 8 for activities Ongoing or one-off events – interviewees mentioned some of both 4 IGP Success Evaluate participation levels How well attended are or were the programs? Of the 3/8 seniors’ centres that offered IGPs – attendance in programs by the seniors as participants or volunteers was good 5 Challenges of offering IGPs Identify programmatic, institutional capacity, and other challenges of offering IGPs. If no, what are the reasons you don’t offer them? Programmatic challenges (scheduling, developmentally appropriate, interesting and engaging): Course minimums Community isn’t currently asking for IGPs x 2 Follow safety requirements for working with children – Criminal record check Schedule dictated by UVic for ESL students Safety of participants x 3 Waiting for other departments to bring forward initiatives for IGPs Would need to put on agenda for program team meetings Limited facility availability High level of staff turnover resulting in loss of historical IGP knowledge Finding a schedule that would work for participants and facility Matching abilities of participants Institutional capacity challenges (funding, staff training, facilities): Staff portfolio silos Cost recovery Funding – Difficult to get grants to implement a social program Need long term funding (3-5yrs) to pilot a program, learn from it, analyze assumptions and whether it is meeting goals and objective. If successful, should see growth in participation numbers. Staff are already very busy with day-to-day work operations x 2 Strategic plan determines what coordinators need to focus on providing the community Haven’t made IGPs a priority – focussed on offering age-based activities Staff requiring enough knowledge to develop an IGP Will likely require grant funding as it’s unlikely people will pay to participate If Recreation Commission sees value, they might offer funding to sustain a program Transportation – bringing the groups together. School bus can be costly. Takes time to plan an IGP – build partnerships, create a steering committee, decide program plan Other challenges: 6 Recreation program planning Identify how organizations How does your choose program activities organization determine to offer their communities. the types of activities you will offer your community and the schedule and Determining activities - Not knowing where to start x 2 Promotion - Community feedback Budget and cost recovery Strategic Plan direction Mandate from mayor and council Patron/member feedback or requests x 5 Contract instructor proposals x 3 Regular schedule of activities RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON Identify how organizations decide on schedules and facilities for activities. location for these activities? Identify who is responsible for making these decisions. Determining schedule Determining facility 102 - Seasonal programs/projects Success of past programs x 3 Special advisory committee Surveys to identify gaps and opportunities for growth Provide range of activities for all ages Trial and error - Time that works best for target group to participate Demographics Facility availability Based on past activity schedules Work together to accommodate activities - Appropriate space for activity x 2 Appropriate space for age group Historical use of space for a program Availability of space x 3 Successfulness of program in that space Maximizing use of facilities Annual space needs assessment – identify vacancies and adjust 7 Assessing public need Identify if there is a correlation with the best practice of including participants in design of IGP. How does your organization determine the types of recreation programs people in your community are looking for? Examples: market research, surveys, program evaluations How organization determines community need for recreation programs: Community feedback through strategic planning every 4-5 years Surveys x 5 Program evaluations x 5 Patron/member ideas/feedback x 5 Instructor proposals Staff feedback Word-of-mouth Look at what other regions are offering and compare to what organization is offering Member advisory committees Feedback through social media channels Look at participation rates and what is impacting positively or negatively – date/schedule/cost If surveying the community, make sure it is holistic and inclusive and use their time wisely. Be accountable to survey responses Environmental scan 8 Activity choice Identify patterns in activities that are selected for IGPs – level of action, level of ability required, length of program and other themes. If you are currently offering an IGP, what activities do you offer and why? What activities would be good for IGP and why? Art because it can be tailored to different ages and abilities x 2 Guided nature walks or story walks (story pages enlarged and posted around a park so people can read them while on a walk together) – not strenuous, all ages and abilities can participate Board and card games because the generations can share knowledge and interact with each other Sit down programs like arts and crafts because seniors can be frightened by sudden noise so avoid children running around Technology – youth teach seniors, and both can learn new skills Storytelling – workshop series – walk around a park Music/choir Walking sports “slow soccer” Food and games – breaking bread together and then playing games would provide opportunities for connection Promote age inclusivity with fitness classes Support A Reader Fitness classes Pickleball Cooking and crafts Meal and board or card games Table tennis Open art session open to all ages Depends on which generations will be involved Activity needs to meet the needs of the primary participants Young children and seniors have a lot in common for bonding If working with a school, tie activities to curriculum OR If you were to offer an Identify stereotypes that influence choice of activity IGP, what activities would you offer and why? offered for IGPs. RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON Suggestions: 103 - 9 Schedule influences Verify whether organizations see scheduling as a challenge when designing IGPs. If you are currently offering an IGP, what time of day do you schedule your activities? What’s the best schedule OR - If you were to offer an IGP, what time of day would you schedule it for and why? Notes: - 10 Choice of facilities and location for IGPs Verify whether organizations see finding an appropriate facility or location as a challenge when designing IGPs. Verify whether selection of facility aligns with best practices of accessibility and providing opportunities for close interactions. If you are currently offering an IGP, what location/facility do you use and why? Location/Facility - OR - If you were to offer an IGP, what location/facility would you use and why? - 11 Importance of training for staff in IGP development and delivery Verify whether organizations see staff training as a challenge when designing IGPs. If you are currently offering an IGP, what training do you provide staff? Confirm whether organizations currently offer or would consider offering specific training for staff members when designing IGPs. OR Confirm whether organizations identify the best practice of crosstraining staff from If you were to offer an IGP, what training would you provide staff and why? Training staff - Avoid active activities for safety of all ages x 3 Avoid making assumptions about the abilities of seniors x 2 Talk to seniors about what they want to do – “meet them where they’re at” (Reid, 2025) Provide appropriate supports for all participants to avoid anyone having a bad experience (Gibson, 2025). Target activity to population serving. Daytime - preschoolers and seniors After school - School aged children/youth Weekends - Working adults, seniors, children/youth x 2 Evenings – Working adults, children/youth Daytime for seniors – currently offering programs between 8:30am-5:00pm. Afternoons from 3:30-5:00pm based on room availability at centre Avoid early morning for youth During school if working with school district x 2 School day if working in partnership with a school Seasonal schedule – program for each season Instructor/facility availability Monthly or every three weeks Weekends can be challenging because program needs to provide enough value for people to encourage participation (Gray, 2025) Need to consider school, work, mealtimes and extracurricular activity schedules (Adler, 2025) Offer program at a variety of times to people with different schedules can participate (Adler, 2025) Community centre on one level, no stairs and rooms with access to external doors Accessible Gyms or halls for fitness activities or special events that require more space Art/pottery studio spaces School library for quiet activities Seniors’ centres – large and small multi-purpose rooms, kitchen space x 2 Elementary school Highschool x 2 Look at all recreation facilities within a municipality for the different options they provide School community garden Assisted living centres Think about how central the facility is for the community members – close to schools and seniors centre? Kitchen for cooking classes Avoid rooms with background noise/echoes Outdoors Facilitation training x 2 (to help get the conversations and interactions happening Behaviour support training x 2 Accessibility training – how to alter a program to make activity accessible to range of participants BCRPA seniors’ fitness training Conflict resolution training Choose staff with experience in program area (children, seniors, arts, fitness, etc.) Collaborate in team meetings and have conversations about what IGP would look like Hire someone with specific experience with IGPs First Aid/CPR Food Safe Safety and responsibility training RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 104 - different age-based programs when designing IGPs. - 12 Using partnerships Verify whether to develop and organizations see deliver IGPs developing partnerships as a challenge when designing IGPs. Confirm whether organizations currently partner or would partner with other organizations when designing IGPs. If you are currently offering an IGP, what external organizations do you partner with and why? OR If you were to offer an IGP, what external organizations would you partner with and why? Potential partnerships - Have plans in place to keep everyone physically and emotionally safe Seniors need to understand responsibility of relationship Have emergency procedures in place – health, fire, evacuation protocols Recruit retired teachers to participate as volunteers Always have a staff person present when running the IGP Training on specific age groups (children/youth) “So, it’s a good experience for everyone” (Cobus, 2025) Provide training/education/orientation for seniors participating BCRPA Active Aging EDI training so staff understand what inclusion and all abilities looks like Partner with seniors’ residences for resources Reach out to other municipalities for what has been successful and look to integrate those ideas Build training around diversity and inclusiveness – respect for all Training on how to incorporate all members of a group to avoid segregation Support-a-Reader program has an orientation for new volunteers Local school districts x 2 Community associations/neighbourhood houses Elementary schools x 4 High Schools – students need volunteer hours, leadership program Seniors’ centres or associations x 4 Seniors’ residences x 2 Recreation Centres Parent Advisory Committees Community Policing Youth organizations Military Family Services The Legion Childcare Resource Referral OneAbility UVic/Camosun Volunteer Victoria Rotary Clubs U-JAM Society (jazz advocacy and education non-profit) Other recreation departments within municipal recreation – Arts & Culture, fitness, community, youth, etc. Rainbow kitchen – meal prep and food security Sports organizations Cultural societies – combine intergenerational and culture Gorge Waterway Society – habitat restoration Social services Create advisory committee or steering committee including seniors centre, seniors’ residence, schools, and Parent Advisory committees RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON Appendix N: ESCCS Intergenerational Program Promotion Esquimalt Seniors Community Centre Society Promotional Materials Development of their Intergenerational Program 105 RECR4400 MAJOR PAPER – JODI APPLETON 106