1️⃣ ANALYTICAL SUMMARY

Context and issues — making the voices of affected individuals structural, not decorative

The report is part of UNESCO's development of global standards for inclusive, equitable and safe sport and physical education, intended to be adopted at MINEPS VIII in 2027, in response to the call from 110 member states at MINEPS VII and Decision 220EX/43 of October 2024 (74 states co-sponsoring). Interpersonal violence is described as widespread: external reviews place its lifetime prevalence between 44 % and 86 %, with increased risks based on gender, disability, sexual orientation and age — these figures are drawn from the cited literature, not from the consultation. To anchor the standards in lived experience, UNESCO and the SRA conducted a two-phase consultation with approximately 150 people, in 24 countries and 17 sports: survivors, athletes, coaches, leaders and advocates. The target audience is specialised: decision-makers, safeguarding professionals, actors in the sports system, civil society.

Operational inputs — a ‘trauma-informed’ method and a framework of recommendations

The document provides two actionable items. Firstly, a method of documented consultation that takes into account trauma: voluntary participation, no obligation to testify, agency of participants, trained referents, psychologist on site, safe room, breaks, listening contacts (box p. 21; annex II p. 39) — a reusable model. Secondly, a structured set of recommendations organised into six areas (clarity of language; survivor-centred engagement; independent governance and accountability; education and prevention; legal alignment; monitoring and data), each translatable into local action: materials in plain language, confidential and independent reporting, whistleblower protection, generalisation of safeguarding training. Caveat: the report feeds into standards not yet public, and its survey data are illustrative, not representative.

2️⃣ KEY POINTS OF THE DOCUMENT

1️⃣ A consultation in two phases, deliberately non-representative. Phase 1: online survey (25 Sept.–15 Oct. 2025), 138 respondents, 24 countries, 17 sports. Phase 2: in-person meeting (21 Nov. 2025, UNESCO headquarters), 10 people with lived experience, 8 countries, 7 sports. The authors themselves describe the sample as ‘ illustrative rather than fully representative’. (p. 20-22)

2️⃣ Perceptions largely favourable to future standards, with reservations. On the survey side: 90% find the framework ‘useful’, 80% believe it can harmonise approaches, 76% think it can enhance impact, and 75% find the language easy to understand. But 38% consider the resources necessary for implementation ‘non-existent’. (p. 13, 26-27)

3️⃣ The language of standards deemed too technical. In person, the understanding of the framework only receives 3.1/5. Participants request materials in plain language, infographics, "how-to" guides, and translations. (p. 23, 29-30)

4️⃣ Reporting, the response and follow-up placed at the heart of protection. Reporting channels are considered insufficient if they do not include confidential, independent, rapid follow-up, human contact, and guarantees against retaliation; the failures in protecting whistleblowers are recurrent. (p. 30, 32)

5️⃣ An ethical imperative: engage survivors without instrumentalising them. The report demands "non-tokenistic", ongoing participation, with recognition and compensation for expertise, to avoid "extractive" practices. (p. 15, 32; definitions p. 16)

3️⃣ ACTIONS FOR LOCAL ACTORS

1️⃣ Reproduce the emotional safety framework from box 4. For every meeting on a sensitive topic: voluntary participation, no obligation to testify, trained contacts, retreat space, breaks, listening contacts. Transposable to a workshop, a focus group or a user consultation. (p. 21)

2️⃣ Clarify and harmonise the vocabulary before any action. Define with the target audiences "violence", "safeguarding", "survivor-centred approach": a shared lexicon conditions reporting and avoids divergent interpretations. (glossaire p. 16 ; reco. p. 31)

3️⃣ Structurer un circuit de signalement complet, pas seulement une adresse mail. Canal confidentiel/anonyme, suivi indépendant et rapide, contact humain, soutien émotionnel et juridique, garanties anti-représailles. En France, articuler avec Signal-Sports et les numéros 119 / 3018. (p. 30, 32)

4️⃣ Protéger explicitement les personnes qui alertent et les référents « sauvegarde ». Dispositifs « filet de sécurité », protection contre le licenciement ou les sanctions de carrière, appui psychosocial et juridique, redevabilité de ceux qui exercent des représailles. (p. 32-33)

5️⃣ Généraliser une formation à la sauvegarde différenciée selon le risque. Socle commun (encadrants, bénévoles, parents, athlètes) et formation spécialisée pour les rôles au contact de mineurs. Intégrer prévention des violences et droits de l'enfant aux cursus d'éducation physique. (p. 15, 33)

6️⃣ Produire localement des supports en langage clair et des outils de communication. Infographies, guides « comment faire », traductions, pour rendre la politique lisible par tous. Besoin non couvert : ces outils sont annoncés comme « prochaines étapes » dans le rapport, mais pas encore fournis. (p. 14, 31-32)

4️⃣ RÉFÉRENCES COMPLÉMENTAIRES

Interne — Pratiques en Santé  - suer le thème de la lutte contre les violences - https://www.pratiquesensante.com/blog/tag/lutte-contre-les-violences-14

Commission on the future of sport in Canada, Final report (24 March 2026, 98 calls to action). National study based on lived experience (including 175 victim/survivor individuals); concludes that there is abuse that is "widespread, systemic and persistent." canada.ca — final report

Ministry of Sports (France), Signal-Sports — assessment 2025 (April 2026). National operational reporting system for violence in sport; mandatory posting since 19 Nov. 2025. sports.gouv.fr — Signal-Sports

5️⃣ FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ)

1️⃣ What is the purpose of this report?

It feeds into the future Global Standards of UNESCO (non-binding framework for States), with a view to adoption at MINEPS VIII in 2027 (p. 12, 17-18).

2️⃣ Are the figures representative?

No. The authors specify that the sample is "illustrative": voluntary participation via "safe sport" networks, and only 26 respondents out of 138 answered all questions (p. 22, note; p. 38). The percentages reflect perceptions.

3️⃣ Where does the range 44%–86% come from?

From external literature reviews (including the IOC consensus 2024), and not from this consultation. It describes the prevalence, over a lifetime, of interpersonal violence in sport (p. 10, 12; notes).

4️⃣ What does " trauma-informed approach" mean?

A cross-cutting framework — and not a clinical intervention — that prioritises safety, trust, choice, collaboration and empowerment, and aims to avoid re-traumatisation (definition p. 16; frameworks p. 21).

5️⃣ What do the consulted individuals prioritise?

Clarify the vocabulary, simplify the language, build reliable reporting and monitoring mechanisms, and sustainably integrate lived experience (p. 28-32).

6️⃣ How to protect whistleblowers?

Through explicit protections: confidential channels, legal guarantees against dismissal or sanctions, legal and psychosocial support, and accountability for those who retaliate (p. 32-33).

7️⃣ How to secure a consultation with survivor individuals?

By replicating the safeguards from the report: transparency, agency, trained bilingual referents, medical staff and psychologist, safe space, listening contacts, breaks (p. 21; p. 39).

6️⃣ REWRITING IN EASY TO READ AND UNDERSTAND (FALC)

What does the report talk about?

• Sport can be beneficial. But there is also violence in sport.

• This violence can be physical blows, hurtful words, or sexual acts.

• UNESCO is writing new rules to make sport safer.

• To write these rules, UNESCO asked for the opinions of people who have experienced this violence.

How did they do it?

• They conducted an online survey. 138 people responded. They come from 24 countries.

• Then, 10 people gathered in Paris. They talked about their experience.

• Note : this is not a figure that applies to everyone. It is the opinion of these individuals.

What do these individuals say?

• The words of the rules are too complicated. Simple words are needed.

• One must be able to speak about violence easily. One must be listened to and protected.

• One must protect the people who speak. They must not be punished.

• One must train the coaches and volunteers.

• One must respect the people who testify. They are not to be used.

How can one listen well to a person who has experienced violence?

• One never forces them to recount.

• One provides a quiet room to rest.

• One provides help numbers.

• One takes breaks.

7️⃣ CROSS-ANALYSIS — VALUES OF HEALTH PRACTICES

Literacy : The report highlights overly technical language and calls for materials in plain language, infographics and translations, still to be produced (p. 29-32).

Empowerment : Survivors are positioned as partners holding knowledge, with recognition and compensation for their expertise (p. 15, 32).

Participation : The approach co-constructs the standards through a two-phase consultation, based on "meaningful participation" (def. OHCHR, p. 16).

Community health: The collective dimension is present through a multi-level approach (from local to global) and a knowledge-sharing "hub" (p. 15, 28, 34).

Ethics : A "care ethics" structures the process; the report names and seeks to avoid tokenism and extractive practices (p. 15, 16, 31).

Human rights: Access to safe sport is established as a fundamental right, in alignment with the CRC, the CRPD, the CEDAW and ILO Convention No. 190 (p. 34).

Intersectorality : The report recommends coordination between ministries (equality, justice, health, education), sports bodies and international actors (p. 28, 34).

Partnership : Collaborations are formalised via the SRA and the Global Safe Sport Taskforce, co-chaired by the SRA and the African Union Sports Council (22 organisations) (p. 5, 18).

Fight against discrimination: The document acknowledges increased and intersecting risks for women and girls, youth, LGBTQI individuals and those with disabilities, and advocates for a non-judgmental stance (p. 12, 15, 32).

8️⃣ ASSESSMENT OF RESOURCE RELIABILITY

Scientific relevance

• Institutional publication (UNESCO/SRA), freely accessible, with a DOI and an ISBN; the cited prevalence data refer to identifiable external sources (IOC consensus 2024, Hartill 2023, etc.).

• Major limitation: the data specific to the consultation are not representative (self-selection via "safe sport" networks, low completion — 26/138 —, low numbers per question). To be read as perceptions, not as epidemiological estimates.

• Minor internal inconsistencies of percentages noted in the file (e.g. women 66 %/67 %; affected individuals 52 %/53 %).

• Level of confidence: high regarding the nature and intent of the document; moderate to low on any quantitative reading of the results.

Operational relevance

• Directly usable: the trauma-informed consultation model (box 4) and the framework of recommendations.

• Less usable as it stands: this is not a ready-to-use practical guide ; it informs about standards that are not yet public, and the field tools (plain language, infographics) are announced as « next steps ». Real operational utility, but indirect.

9️⃣ STRATEGIC HASHTAGS

#healthpractices #SafeSport #ViolencePrevention #SafeSport #ChildProtection #TraumaInformedApproach #HumanRights #VictimsVoices