‘Culture’ of violence: Maryland National Guard staff abused at-risk teens, records claim – Baltimore Sun

Report on Institutional Failures at Freestate Challenge Academy in Relation to Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

An investigation into Maryland’s Freestate Challenge Academy, a youth program administered by the National Guard, has revealed significant operational and ethical failings. Analysis of internal reports, legal documents, and lawsuits indicates a systemic pattern of abuse and violence, which constitutes a severe breach of multiple United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The findings point to a critical failure in institutional accountability, directly undermining goals related to peace, justice, health, and education.

Violation of SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

The core of the reported issues represents a direct contravention of SDG 16, which aims to build effective, accountable, and inclusive institutions.

• Target 16.1 (Reduce Violence): The existence of a staff-run fight club and recurring assaults demonstrates a complete failure to reduce violence and instead indicates its institutionalization.
• Target 16.2 (End Abuse and Violence Against Children): The program, designed for youth, has become a site of the very abuse and exploitation this goal seeks to eliminate.
• Target 16.6 (Develop Effective, Accountable Institutions): The documented lack of oversight and a culture of violence highlight a profound institutional failure, indicating the absence of accountability and transparency.

Impact on SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 4 (Quality Education)

The environment at the academy actively harms the well-being and developmental prospects of its participants, conflicting with fundamental human development goals.

1. Compromised Well-being (SDG 3): The physical and psychological trauma resulting from abuse and assault is fundamentally at odds with the goal of ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being for all ages.
2. Negation of Quality Education (SDG 4): An environment characterized by fear and violence is incompatible with learning and personal development. It actively undermines Target 4.7, which calls for education that promotes a culture of peace and non-violence.

Systemic Failures and Broader SDG Implications

The root causes identified point to systemic issues that have broader implications for sustainable development, particularly concerning decent work and inequality.

• Inadequate Training (SDG 8): The lack of proper staff training points to a failure to ensure decent work and a safe working environment, as outlined in Target 8.8. This failure has directly contributed to the violation of participants’ rights.
• Exacerbated Inequalities (SDG 10): Youth development programs often serve vulnerable populations. The failure of this institution to provide a safe and supportive environment exacerbates existing inequalities rather than reducing them.

Analysis of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  This is the most relevant SDG as the article describes a complete failure of a state-run institution (the National Guard–run youth program) to protect vulnerable individuals. The core issues of “abuse, assaults,” a “staff-run fight club,” and a “culture of violence” point directly to a breakdown of peace and justice within this institution.

• SDG 4: Quality Education

  The Freestate Challenge Academy is a youth program, which functions as an alternative educational or developmental environment. A quality education requires a safe and supportive setting. The article highlights an environment that is the opposite of this, undermining any educational or developmental goals the program may have.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  Exposure to physical and psychological abuse and violence has severe negative impacts on the mental and physical health of young people. The conditions described in the article directly threaten the well-being of the youth participants.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• Target 16.2: End abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence against and torture of children.

  The article’s central theme is the violence and abuse perpetrated against youth in the program. The mention of “abuse, assaults and even a staff-run fight club” at a “youth program” directly aligns with the goal of ending violence against children and young people.

• Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere.

  The described “culture of violence” within the academy is a localized example of the violence this target aims to reduce. The staff’s involvement makes it an institutional failure to prevent violence.

• Target 4.a: Build and upgrade education facilities that are child, disability and gender sensitive and provide safe, non-violent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all.

  The academy, as a learning environment, has failed to be “safe” or “non-violent.” The existence of a “staff-run fight club” and widespread abuse demonstrates a direct contradiction to the principles of this target.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Implied Indicator for Target 16.2: Prevalence of violence against youth in institutional settings.

  The article does not provide statistics but implies the existence of data that could serve as an indicator. The reference to “Documents, lawsuits and internal reports” suggests that these sources contain recorded incidents of abuse and assault. Analyzing these documents would provide a measure of the prevalence and nature of violence within the institution, serving as a direct indicator of failure to meet Target 16.2.

• Implied Indicator for Target 4.a: Number of reported incidents of violence and abuse in a learning environment.

  The article’s content itself serves as a qualitative indicator that the learning environment is unsafe. The number of “lawsuits” and negative findings in “internal reports” related to violence could be quantified to measure the lack of safety in this and similar educational settings.

4. SDGs, Targets and Indicators Table

Source: baltimoresun.com