The Safeguarding Adults in Sport Framework is an online assessment tool that supports sport and physical activity organisations to implement best practice in safeguarding adults.
The Framework moved to a new operating system in February 2026. Since them, we have been able to access new insights into what the Framework is telling us. We can also offer some further practical information around the review process itself.
Conditionally Met is a good place to be!
We have recently celebrated two NGBS who have been through the Framework process. Both shared their successes, yet the vast majority of organisations will rate as “conditionally met”.
“Conditionally met” means:
There appears to be a sound base of safeguarding measures in place to support adults involved in your organisation. It may be that you have not yet addressed all of the “essential” criteria. Or, it may be that you have not provided sufficient evidence in your submission. However, you have identified actions demonstrating how you plan to address these gaps, along with your further development plans. This means your organisation has shown a commitment to developing and embedding the practice of safeguarding adults.
This is a good place to be! It is also understandable that many organisations will rate as “conditionally met”, as adult safeguarding may still be a relatively new concept for some.
Please also note that we have updated some key Framework supporting documents, including the FAQs and the Top Tips. If you have not yet made your Framework submission, hopefully you’ll find some of the information on these pages useful.
Please don’t include everything!
As noted in the Top Tips, we really need you to think about the evidence you supply to support your statements. It is vital that you only include information that will support what you have stated.
A maximum of four pieces of evidence per statement would be helpful, as this will help ensure that we can continue to support you with robust feedback on your submission.
In the past, we strove to read every piece of information organisations sent us. However, we may have to reconsider this in light of the size of some of the Framework submissions currently coming through. To help prevent us from having to make that decision, please try to limit your evidence to information that supports your statements!
Read our full suggested evidence list here.
What is happening right now?
The picture on submitted Frameworks is changing each day at the moment, so here is a tiny snapshot captured from 20 July 2026.
On this date we had 81 finalised Frameworks in the system, with 10 recently completed and in the process of being reviewed, and a further 13 in draft. So it is a pretty busy time!
Of those 81 reviewed, and with a focus for now on the 10 essentials, here’s a general idea of how organisations are faring across all categories.
Please note that these organisations are National Governing Bodies (England Wales & UK), Active Partnerships, and National System Partners:
Percentages on Essential criteria
| Criteria number. | Percentage Met | Percentage Conditionally Met | |
| 1.2 | The board or management committee monitors safeguarding activity against an annual action/implementation plan and receives regular updates. | 36 | 37 |
| 1.3 | The organisation has a Safeguarding Adults Policy and Procedures in place which is reviewed and updated at least every 3 years and approved by the board. | 39 | 32 |
| 2.7 | Safeguarding adult policy, procedures and resources are known and visible. | 46 | 28 |
| 2.8 | An action plan is developed and implemented that identifies the organisation’s approach and strategy to safeguard adults with clear tasks and timescales. This needs to be agreed, sanctioned, and signed off by the board. | 35 | 36 |
| 3.1 | There is an organisational training plan that ensures all roles receive the right level of safeguarding adult training, appropriate to their role and responsibilities. | 40 | 28 |
| 4.1 | The organisation sets out safe recruitment procedures and ensures these are implemented throughout the sport/organisation. | 48 | 23 |
| 4.5 | There is a commitment to the legal requirement to referring a person to DBS (or other agency) barred list in relevant circumstances. | 43 | 17 |
| 5.2 | All those involved in sport and activity understand their Code of Conduct and have declared to uphold it. | 33 | 37 |
| 6.1 | There is a process in place for managing safeguarding adult cases and queries. | 38 | 30 |
| 6.5 | The organisation ensures they use all available safeguarding information, including learning from managed cases, to monitor and evaluate themes and inform the review and development of all relevant policies, procedures and processes. | 28 | 29 |
This is good news: For the vast majority of essential criteria, approximately 70% of organisations are meeting the requirement. Scoring at 60% are “learning from cases” and a commitment to the referral of a person to the DBS in relevant circumstances.
Where are organisations excelling?
A few of the criteria identified with the highest percentage of Met are:
| Criteria number. | Percentage Met | |
| 5.6 | The Code of Conduct makes clear that diversity is valued and all adult participants should be treated with dignity and respect. | 57 |
| 4.6 | Safe recruitment processes includes and meets the requirements of equal opportunity legislation and good practice in safeguarding adults. | 51 |
| 4.1 * | The organisation sets out safe recruitment procedures and ensures these are implemented throughout the sport/organisation. | 48 |
| 2.7 * | Safeguarding adult policy, procedures and resources are known and visible. | 46 |
* noted as Essential Criteria
It is great to see the importance organisations are giving to their Codes of Conduct and the value of diversity, dignity and respect. We can also see that organisations are implementing safe recruitment processes. Interestingly, while safeguarding policies and procedures are known and visible, they are outscored by both Codes of Conduct and safer recruitment processes.
Which areas are organisations finding tricky?
| Criteria number. | Percentage Not Met | |
| 3.4 | There is a process to assess effectiveness/impact of training received. | 54 |
| 2.6 | There are procedures in place to support the individual welfare needs of participants, including developing personal risk assessments where needed. | 51 |
| 3.6 | Safeguarding adults is threaded through complementary training courses such as equality, diversity and inclusion. | 47 |
| 2.10 | Feedback from stakeholders, on safeguarding adult policy and procedures, is welcomed and encouraged to continually improve safeguarding practice and demonstrate shared ownership. | 45 |
As you can seen, more than half of organisations are yet to create a process to assess the impact of safeguarding training they have received. Procedures to support the individual needs of participants is another area that needs further consideration. We have also found that some are yet to make the connection between EDI and adult safeguarding in training programmes, and that further work needs to take place regarding stakeholder engagement.
As we review further Framework submissions, we will look to dive a little deeper into these baseline figures and offer some further supporting resources.
In the meantime, if you are not already booked to start the Framework process, then please get in touch!