Ilva Biedre, Guilherme Campos de Moraes, Gustavo Harada, Daniela Negreda
In this section you will find statuses amongst European Sports Organisations and a legal framework to implement within sport organisations.
Key Findings of the Safeguarding Statuses Amongst European Sports Organisations
The key findings in no specific order across all the methodologies and organisations are:
1. Diversity of Legislative Frameworks
The current landscape of safeguarding in sports is marked by a lack of uniformity in legislative frameworks, nomenclatures, and sanctions. This diversity hampers the effectiveness of safeguarding measures. Organisations call for the establishment of an overarching governing body. Such a body would set the pace and standardise policies across different jurisdictions and organisations, ensuring a cohesive approach to safeguarding in sports.
2. Need for Independence
To maintain the integrity and effectiveness of safeguarding measures, organisations identify the crucial need to ensure the independence of safeguarding bodies. This independence is necessary to avoid conflicts of interest that could compromise the protection of all stakeholders. Safeguarding bodies must operate without undue influence from organisations that may have vested interests.
3. Accountability of Non-Members
Holding non-members accountable poses a significant challenge in the absence of recognised contractual agreements. For example, athletes typically have contractual obligations with their clubs, but volunteer coaches in minor leagues often do not. This disparity highlights the lack of standardised processes that encompass all individuals involved in sports, to ensure everyone is held to the same safeguarding standards.
4. Lack of Funds
Financial constraints are a major barrier to effective safeguard in sports. Many organisations lack the necessary funds to implement comprehensive safeguarding measures, provide training, and support investigative processes.
5. Need for Educational and Training Programmes
There is a pressing need for educational and training programs at all levels within sports organisations. Organisations identify the need to raise awareness, educate stakeholders on safeguarding practices, and provide the skills necessary to identify and address safeguarding issues. Comprehensive training is essential for creating a culture of safety and protection in sports.
6. Limited Data
The availability of hard data on safeguarding initiatives, processes and cases is limited, and information is often perceived differently by various organisations. This lack of reliable data hinders the analysis of stages of development of policies and measures within organisations. This lack of data impacts the analysis and distribution of information to input into safeguarding practices and policymaking.
7. Lack of Formal Structure
Safeguarding efforts are often led by volunteers or added to the responsibilities of already overloaded staff. This lack of formal structure undermines the effectiveness of safeguarding measures. Very few organisations have a dedicated department to the topic, many add to existing structures or roles.
8. Focus on Athletes and Entourage
Current regulations tend to focus primarily on athletes and their entourage, leaving other groups, such as staff and volunteers, vulnerable.
9. Ineffective Safeguarding Processes
While reporting mechanisms for safeguarding issues exist, the follow-through in terms of investigation and adjudication is often inadequate. The diversity and ineffectiveness of these processes result in a lack of accountability and justice.
Legal Benchmark Report
Assessment of Safeguarding Policies and Procedures Implemented in European Sport Organisations
Link to document
NOC Survey Report
Assessment of Safeguarding Status Amongst European National Olympic Committees
Link to document
NF Survey Report
Assessment of Safeguarding Status Amongst European National Federations
Link to document
Legal Framework Checklist Summary
To assist organisations in the development of their legal framework, a checklist divided by stages of development of Safeguarding is provided below.
Organisations can assess their current level of development by checking the items that they already have implemented. Based on this assessment each organisation can identify their specific needs.
The next step is to start the development of the Safeguarding processes and procedures based on the available legal framework documents from this project which includes references to kick start the process for each of the items listed on the checklist.
1. Codes of ethics and conduct
| T1 | Codes of ethics and conduct | In place |
| Beginning | The organisation has developed and adopted a Code of Ethics covering key topics and relevant procedures, which is published and clearly endorsed by senior management. Alternatively, the organisation adopts the IOC Code of Ethics or another applicable Code of Ethics from an organisation of which it is a member. | □ |
| Intermediate | The organisation clearly states who is bound by their rules (See Participants). | □ |
| The organisation’s senior management either has designated responsibility for oversight and implementation of the Code or an individual who reports directly to senior management (e.g. Ethics Commission, Ethics Officer, Compliance Officer). | □ | |
| The organisation dedicates adequate resources to detecting possible breaches of the Code and investigating it. | □ | |
| The organisation has developed adequate Codes of Conduct for different stakeholders (e.g. athletes, coaches, staff, volunteers, member organisations). | □ | |
| The organisation ensures that the cases are handled independently (from reporting to case resolution), meaning an individual or group conducts their role free from undue influence. | □ | |
| The organisation provides support or education for different groups to promote an ethical culture (e.g. guidance materials, templates, ethical dilemma exercises, seminars). | □ | |
| Advanced | The organisation requires its members to comply with ethical-related regulations, such as by imposing sanctions or holding funds in case of non-compliance. | □ |
| The organisation carries out regular educational work with stakeholders about the Codes, at least annually. | □ | |
| The organisation monitors the effectiveness of the Codes and reviews them regularly in consultancy with the relevant stakeholders. | □ |
2. Safeguarding policy and related strategies
| T2 | Safeguarding policy and related strategies | In place |
| Beginning | The organisation formally adopts appropriate standards, such as guidelines developed by the relevant International Federation (IF), other national sports organisation, a governmental entity or the IOC Toolkit for IFs and NOCs. | □ |
| The organisation has issued a public statement pledging to address safeguarding appropriately. | □ | |
| The organisation clearly describes its understanding and definitions of the addressed forms of transgressive behaviours. Alternatively, it indicates which definitions are applicable. | □ | |
| The organisation cooperates with public authorities, where necessary. | □ | |
| Intermediate | The organisation developed its own safeguarding policy aligned with appropriate standards that apply all year-round and/or games-times period, if applicable. | □ |
| The organisation has a designated and suitably qualified individual or group of people who lead on safeguarding issues with relevant background and expertise. This person also liaises with safeguarding focal points at other organisations. | □ | |
| The organisation’s case management is independent, meaning an individual or group is free from undue influence to conduct their role. | □ | |
| The organisation provides mandatory education on safeguarding for a specific group of people involved with its activities. | □ | |
| The organisation communicates publicly about safeguarding issues and can demonstrate that action has been taken on safeguarding matters. | □ | |
| The safeguarding-related regulations are easily accessible in formats compatible with various devices, like plain text for website viewing and PDFs for download, to support research and mobile accessibility. | □ | |
| The organisation conducts risk assessments for events, training, transport, accommodations, locker rooms and shared spaces. | □ | |
| The organisation has a safe recruitment procedure in place (e.g. interview, references and background checks). | □ | |
| Advanced | The organisation has several rules and regulations in place that take safeguarding into consideration, such as involving photography of minors or guidance around the appropriate use of technology and social media. | □ |
| The organisation prioritises diversity in appointing persons or commissions for key safeguarding roles. | □ | |
| The organisation provides mandatory education programs on safeguarding for all people involved with its activities. | □ | |
| The organisation can demonstrate that action has been taken on time and appropriately. | □ | |
| The safeguarding policy is built up in the consultancy of all stakeholders, mainly athletes and affected people, and timely reviewed based on lessons learned from experience. | □ | |
| The latest version of all safeguarding-related regulations is available on the website, highlighting any revisions from the previous version or, alternatively, providing a document summarising update. | □ | |
| The organisation is committed to managing every case considering a trauma-informed approach. | □ | |
| The organisation offers appropriate support for any individual who has been affected while involved in the organisation’s activities and supports victims in seeking remedies, taking actions to correct or compensate for wrongs that have been done to them. | □ | |
| The organisation empowers and provides relevant materials to support its members in implementing their strategies, creating a harmonised environment to protect participants. | □ |
3. Reporting
| T3 | Reporting | In place |
| Beginning | The organisation provides a direct link on its website to external credible and operational mechanisms, such as those powered by the NOC or IF, the IOC Integrity Hotline or any other organisation that deals with safeguarding locally. | □ |
| Intermediate | The organisation has a procedure in place and a reporting mechanism (e.g. a form on the website, a phone number or a dedicated e-mail address). | □ |
| The organisation guarantees confidentiality and anonymity when appropriate. | □ | |
| The organisation takes steps to protect and support any affected person, and those individuals who report, including witnesses or other persons providing information. | □ | |
| The organisation’s rules set out clear procedures for processing and managing reports and designate responsibility, including assessing urgency, categorising, prioritising or referring to the appropriate person or agency (See Triage). | □ | |
| The organisation has mechanisms in place to mitigate the risk of conflicts of interest. | □ | |
| The organisation requires participants to report any potential misconduct they are aware of, with potential sanctions for non-compliance. | □ | |
| Advanced | The organisation has a robust, confidential reporting mechanism which can be easily accessed through several means and may operate through an external supplier. | □ |
| The organisation monitors the quality and effectiveness of its reporting system through the implementation of indicators (such as the number of reports received, shelved or processed, processing times, and concerns raised). | □ | |
| The organisation ensures everyone is well informed about what is likely to happen following a disclosure, in a format and language that everyone can easily understand. | □ | |
| The organisation provides support and guidance to whistle-blowers, victims and other vulnerable individuals. | □ | |
| The organisation takes disciplinary action against acts of retaliation and over those who: – intentionally ignore a reporting request for anonymity; – knowingly make false, unfounded, or incorrect reports that harm others; – unfairly penalise or discriminate against someone who has reported a potential breach or contributed information in a safeguarding issue in good faith. | □ |
4. Investigation of a concern, suspicion or allegation
| T4 | Investigation of a concern, suspicion or allegation | In place |
| Beginning | The organisation’s rules clearly outline fair and impartial investigation procedures, which are published alongside other relevant regulations. | □ |
| The organisation has clear and objective criteria for selecting an ad hoc person or commission to conduct the investigation. | □ | |
| The organisation cooperates with public authorities when there is suspicion of a criminal offence. | □ | |
| Intermediate | There is a clear separation between investigating and adjudicating responsibilities, which different persons or commissions conduct each of them independently. | □ |
| The organisation has a defined process and appropriate resources for investigating safeguarding threats, such as previously designated individuals or commissions with sufficient expertise, clear mandate, term of office and oversight. | □ | |
| An individual or commission is responsible for assessing urgency, categorising, prioritising or referring to the appropriate person or agency (See Triage). | □ | |
| The organisation has contacts previously established at a local and national level with relevant child protection and social services, police, NGOs and other public authorities to be referred to if any specific incident occurs. | □ | |
| The organisation can impose provisional measures on a participant in cases where there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the violation was committed and/or there is a risk of further harm if the participant is allowed to continue participating in the sport, pending the outcome of the investigation. | □ | |
| All personnel with designated responsibilities are trained and receives specialist advice, support and relevant information. | □ | |
| Information is only shared on a “need-to-know” basis (confidential), thereby limiting unnecessary or inappropriate dissemination of potentially sensitive or private data. | □ | |
| Participants are obliged to cooperate with investigations and may be sanctioned if they fail to do so. | □ | |
| Victims have the right to submit (written) observations and evidence and are granted specific rights, including the ability to access their case file, which may be unrestricted, partial, or under a confidentiality agreement to protect others’ rights. | □ | |
| The organisation responds to every case brought to its attention, either recent or non-recent, although statutes of limitation are applied. | □ | |
| Advanced | The organisation can show evidence of the implementation of the procedures, monitor their effectiveness, and improve them according to lessons learned through practical implementation. | □ |
| The organisation maintains the investigation case records stored securely for a reasonable and proportional period. | □ | |
| The organisation has regulations governing the inspection of data stored in personal records and electronic devices that lead to potentially relevant evidence, respecting proportionality, confidentiality and privacy regulation. | □ | |
| The organisation makes special protection measures available for vulnerable witnesses who have actual or potential fear or distress about providing testimony in a given case or investigation. | □ | |
| Victims can have their testimony facilitated, preferably without the alleged perpetrator presence, using communication technologies when possible. Additionally, efforts are made to avoid further contact between them. | □ | |
| The organisations allow and support victims in seeking remedies both within and beyond their domain throughout the entire process, leading to results. | □ | |
| No statutes of limitation are applied to severe safeguarding breaches. | □ |
5. Disciplinary proceedings
| T5 | Disciplinary proceedings | In place |
| Beginning | The organisation’s rules reference clear, fair, and impartial adjudication procedures, including a notice and the opportunity to be heard. | □ |
| The organisation’s rules are published alongside other relevant regulations. | □ | |
| Individuals and organisations affected are entitled to formally challenge and seek a review of a decision made by the relevant authority (right to appeal). | □ | |
| The organisation adheres to relevant privacy legislation that may limit the details that can be made public in certain instances. | □ | |
| Intermediate | There is a clear separation between investigating and adjudicating responsibilities, which different persons or commissions conduct each of them. | □ |
| The organisation’s adjudicatory person or body works independently and there are procedures in place to mitigate potential conflicts of interest. | □ | |
| Adjudicators are appointed from a standing body composed of individuals with diverse backgrounds and expertise. They have a clear mandate, term of office and oversight and cannot be removed without a cause. | □ | |
| The rules provide a clear set of applicable sanctions proportionate to the offence. | □ | |
| Victims have the right to submit (written) observations and evidence and to be consistently promptly informed about the progress and outcomes of the proceedings, including being notified of the final decision. | □ | |
| The organisation maintains a table of decisions and sanctions on its website, detailing basic information, such as the individuals or organisations currently under sanction, along with the specific rules they breach. | □ | |
| Less severe cases, such as poor practices, can be resolved through alternative measures (e.g. mediation, guidance, training). | □ | |
| Advanced | The organisation allows and supports victims seeking remedies throughout the resolution process. | □ |
| An assessment of risk and legal obligations shapes the overall adjudication approach, and supportive engagement with victims is upheld. | □ | |
| The organisation can impose measures other than disciplinary to hold members accountable. | □ | |
| The organisation can show evidence of the implementation of the procedures, monitor their effectiveness, and improve them according to lessons learned through practical implementation. | □ | |
| The organisation appropriately publishes decisions and sanctions in force, providing brief reasons, detailed reports, or summaries as necessary, while respecting personal data. | □ | |
| The organisation maintains adjudication case records for a reasonable and proportional period. | □ | |
| The organisation requires its members associations to report any sanction imposed, with potential sanctions for non-compliance. | □ |
