Encouraging people in sport to speak up is important.
But asking people to raise concerns is only part of the picture.
Across SafeSport26, attendees and presenters repeatedly returned to the role of trust, power, fear of consequences, accessibility and confidence in what happens next when somebody considers reporting a concern. The Attendee Insights Report identifies prevention, reporting pathways and trust as one of seven recurring themes emerging from the conference.
That raises a more difficult question.
What makes somebody feel safe enough to speak in the first place?
Reporting begins before somebody reports
A reporting pathway can exist on paper.
A policy can explain who to contact.
An organisation can publish procedures and reporting forms.
But none of those things, on their own, tell us how somebody will experience the decision to raise a concern.
For the person considering speaking up, the questions may be much more personal:
Will I be believed?
Who will find out?
What happens next?
Could this affect my place in the team, my career or my relationships?
Will anything actually change?
Could speaking up make things worse?
SafeSport26 attendee feedback repeatedly highlighted the importance of reporting routes being visible, accessible and trusted, alongside the need for early action, prevention and clear information about where people can go for support.
So the existence of a reporting system is only one part of the story.
The other is whether people feel able to use it.
Trust and power shape the decision to speak
Sporting environments are rarely free from power.
Athletes may depend on coaches for selection.
Young people may depend on adults for access to sport.
Staff may depend on senior colleagues for progression.
Volunteers may worry about damaging relationships or reputations.
People may also be uncertain whether what they have experienced is “serious enough” to report.
These dynamics can make speaking up difficult even when a formal reporting route exists.
SafeSport26 discussions repeatedly highlighted that safeguarding systems need to be understood not simply as technical processes, but as part of a wider culture shaped by relationships, leadership and confidence in how concerns will be handled. The conference reflections also emphasised that safeguarding cannot remain a paper exercise; systems need to function in practice and be trusted by the people expected to use them.
Recognising concerns matters too
People cannot report what they do not recognise.
Safeguarding concerns do not always arrive in obvious or clearly defined forms.
Sometimes they appear as:
- behaviour that makes somebody uncomfortable;
- a pattern of exclusion or intimidation;
- blurred professional boundaries;
- discriminatory behaviour that has become normalised;
- repeated low-level concerns;
- conduct that is difficult to categorise;
- or something that simply does not feel right.
That makes awareness and education an important part of reporting.
The Attendee Insights Report reflects this emphasis on prevention and early action, including helping people recognise harm and understand where to go when concerns arise.
Accessible reporting is more than publishing an email address
A reporting system may technically exist and still be difficult to use.
People may not know where to find it.
The language may be too formal.
The process may feel intimidating.
It may rely on digital access that not everybody has.
It may not take account of age, disability, language, culture or different levels of confidence.
Or people may simply not trust the person or organisation receiving the report.
SafeSport26 attendee feedback highlighted the importance of clear, independent and trusted reporting structures, alongside the need for systems that work in practice rather than existing only as policy.
The question therefore becomes broader than:
“Do we have a reporting process?”
It becomes:
“Can people understand it, access it and trust it?”
What happens after somebody speaks?
Reporting does not end when somebody raises a concern.
The next stage matters too.
SafeSport26 reflections highlighted the importance of person-centred and trauma-informed approaches, support through disclosure and recovery, and the emotional demands associated with safeguarding processes.
This is particularly important because somebody who speaks up may be entering a process they do not fully understand.
They may want reassurance.
They may fear losing control.
They may be worried about confidentiality.
They may be unsure who else will become involved.
And they may have no idea how long the process will take or what the outcome could be.
That is why trust does not depend only on the existence of a reporting route.
It also depends on what happens after it is used.
Listening and initial response
The first response somebody receives can shape how they experience the safeguarding process.
That does not mean there is one universal script for receiving a concern.
But SafeSport26 reflections repeatedly pointed towards the importance of empathy, emotional safety, clarity and support when difficult conversations take place.
The question for organisations is therefore not simply:
“Did somebody report?”
It is also:
“What did the reporting experience feel like?”
Were they heard?
Did they understand what would happen next?
Did the process create greater trust — or less?
Protection from retaliation
Fear of consequences can be one of the biggest barriers to speaking up.
The consequences people fear may be formal.
But they may also be informal:
- losing selection;
- damaging relationships;
- being labelled difficult;
- being excluded socially;
- damaging a career;
- losing access to opportunities;
- or being treated differently after raising a concern.
This is where power becomes particularly important.
A reporting system may be technically available while people still feel that using it carries unacceptable personal risk.
SafeSport26 presenter and attendee reflections repeatedly highlighted the relationship between power, trust and the willingness to raise concerns.
Athlete voice can help us understand the system differently
One of the strongest themes across SafeSport26 was the importance of athlete voice, participation and lived experience.
The Attendee Insights Report highlights the need for athletes and participants to be active partners in shaping safeguarding systems and responses, rather than simply being consulted after decisions have already been made.
That matters for reporting too.
People using a system may notice things that are invisible to those who designed it.
They may identify:
- language that is confusing;
- steps that feel intimidating;
- barriers that were not anticipated;
- people they are more likely to trust;
- risks of retaliation;
- or gaps between the written process and how it actually works.
Co-design does not mean handing over all responsibility.
It means recognising that people experiencing the system can help organisations understand how that system is actually functioning.
From recognition to remedy
Reporting sits within a much wider safeguarding pathway.
SSI’s wider work has framed safeguarding through the 5Rs:
Readiness. Recognition. Reporting. Response. Remedy.
That framing matters because reporting is not an isolated act.
It depends on whether people recognise concerns.
It depends on whether they know where to go.
It depends on how the organisation responds.
And it depends on whether meaningful support, accountability and remedy follow.
The Presenter Summary Report repeatedly returns to the importance of operationally effective systems, implementation and accountability rather than policy alone.
Questions worth asking
Rather than asking only whether a reporting procedure exists, organisations may find it more useful to reflect on questions such as:
- Do people know where to go?
- Do they understand what can be reported?
- Do they trust the people receiving concerns?
- Are reporting routes genuinely accessible?
- Do people understand what will happen next?
- Are fears of retaliation recognised and addressed?
- Are athletes and participants involved in shaping reporting systems?
- How do we know whether people actually experience the process as safe and fair?
- What happens after a concern is raised?
- And what do we learn when systems do not work as intended?
These are not intended as a formal reporting standard or universal model.
They reflect recurring issues raised across SafeSport26 and provide a basis for further discussion and learning.
Speaking up takes courage
Creating trusted reporting systems is not simply about asking people to be brave enough to speak.
It is about understanding the conditions that influence whether people feel able to do so.
SafeSport26 reinforced that trust, power, accessibility, response and lived experience all matter when people consider raising concerns.
So perhaps the most important question is not:
“Why didn’t they speak up?”
But:
“What did our environment, culture and systems communicate to them about what would happen if they did?”
That is where the deeper work begins.
Explore the SafeSport26 evidence
SafeSport26 Conference Attendee Insights Report