Our first Kyniska report ‘Stamping Out Sexual Violence in Sport’ in 2022 called for the introduction of a national coach licensing register. When CIMSPA, supported by Sport England and Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS), invited us to review its proposed National Coaching Register and Code of Conduct Checker tool, it marked a substantive step forward.

Why this work matters 

As it stands, a coach could receive a ban for abuse from one sport, and quite easily begin coaching in another. That’s because there’s no centralised system for NGBs to share information on coach licensing or disciplinary decisions. While some NGBs share case outcomes on their websites, these are often difficult to locate.   

A national coaching register has the potential to:

• Create greater consistency of publicly available information on coach licensing across sports

• Improve transparency around standards and sanctions

• Provide athletes and parents with clearer information about who is coaching them

• Prevent coaches with records of abuse perpetrating further harm.

However, its impact depends entirely on how it is designed and implemented.

Our role was to examine whether the register would function not only as an administrative system for sport, but as a meaningful safeguarding tool for athletes and caregivers.

A centralised register only works when it is comprehensive, accessible and unambiguous. Where there are gaps, risk increases.

The lens we applied

Kyniska is athlete- and lived experience-led. We approached this review through a safe sport lens, with the following questions in mind:

• How will this reduce the risk of abuse and harm?

• How will it address known safeguarding gaps in the current landscape?

• What will the experience be for the individual user searching the register?

Scope of the Review 

Our review covered both policy and technical elements.

Model Code of Conduct:

As part of the assessment of NGBs for the register, NGBs need to upload their coach code of conduct. These codes are reviewed against a ‘model Code of Conduct’ form inclusion of content and language, and produces a score for the NGB. 

We examined the structure and language of the model Code of Conduct, with particular attention to clarity of safeguarding expectations, boundaries around power and professional conduct, reporting responsibilities and the importance of collaborative co-design in development.

The Code of Conduct Checker includes AI-supported elements. We reviewed language on data storage and processing transparency, clarity for users on how information is handled, and the extent of human oversight beyond automated checks.

Framework guidelines for NGBs & proposed accreditation standards

We reviewed the guidance provided to National Governing Bodies responsible for implementing the register, including:

• Registration criteria for the NGB

• Registration and listing criteria for the coach

• Maintenance and renewal requirements

• De-registration processes

• Complaints and investigation handling

• Communication expectations

We assessed whether the proposed standards would improve public transparency, reduce inconsistencies between sports, address risks associated with coaches moving between sport governing bodies, and provide clarity around inclusion and exclusion from the register.

Outcome

Our review aimed to ensure that the ambition of the national register held true in practice: to reduce and prevent instances of abuse and harm in sport.  

The process strengthened focus on:

• Transparency for athletes and parents

• Clear communication of standards and sanctions

• Cross-sport consistency

A national coaching register has real potential to improve safeguarding across sport. Its effectiveness will depend on comprehensive implementation.