Policy responses to reports of gender-based violence against women by Australian sporting organisations and best-practice principles

Abstract

Gender-based violence (GBV) against women remains a persistent issue in Australian sport. The safety of sport participants, known as safeguarding and member protection within sport integrity policy in Australia, is increasingly recognised as a priority for government, violence prevention and response services and sports organisations. Best practice in responding to reports of GBV against women in sport is poorly understood with no overarching principles to support sport organisations in responding. To address this gap, we determined five best-practice principles in responding to reports of GBV through analysis of common themes across three leading trauma and abuse response organisations: accessibility, policy development, empowerment, trauma-informed approach and ongoing evaluation. Next, we mapped and analysed sport policy documents to examine how national sport organisations (NSOs) respond to GBV via policy and their alignment to best-practice principles. We found that sport organisations’ policy documents are both interrelated and interdependent, but often do not align with best-practice principles. Instead, they are often overly complex, inaccessible, and do not centre or empower the person who has experienced GBV. Despite recent developments in sport integrity policy in Australia, more work is needed to ensure that response pathways align with best-practice principles.

Keywords

sport policy integrity document analysis gender-based violence best-practice

Introduction

Gender-based violence (GBV) against women in sport is recognised as a global issue, with significant physical and mental health and social impacts for those who have experienced such violence (Forsdike and Giles, 2024; Lang et al., 2023; United Nations, 2024). GBV is known to affect athletes, coaches, officials and volunteers of all genders and is increasingly being reported in the Australian media at all levels of sport (Forsdike and Giles, 2024; Marshall et al., 2023; Vinal, 2024). While the current study focuses on the Australian sport context and GBV against women, the research is relevant for the international sport community where GBV against women is also increasingly recognised as a serious issue that requires urgent, evidence-based action (UNESCO, 2023).

In Australia, since 2020, national sport policy has been developed to address integrity breaches in sport and the safety of sport participants. This includes the establishment of the Sport Integrity Australia (SIA) Act and the development of the National Integrity Framework (governed by SIA), which includes a suite of policies covering child safeguarding, member protection, match fixing and doping. However, while such policies have been developed (Sport Integrity Australia, n.d.-a), whether these policies align with best-practice responses to GBV, and indeed what best-practice looks like for sport organisations, is not understood.

This article reports on a two-part study that explored best-practice principles for responding to reports of GBV against women in sport, and analysed the policies of three Australian sports organisations for evidence of those principles.

Background

Gender-based violence in sport

Sport is a gendered institution where GBV remains an issue (Forsdike and Fullagar, 2021; Lang et al., 2023; Shaw and Slack, 2002). There has been little consensus over the definition of GBV in sport, with this form of violence included within terms such as non-accidental violence, interpersonal violence, safeguarding and violence against women (Mountjoy et al., 2016; Tuakli-Wosornu et al., 2024; United Nations, 2024). The terms ‘gender-based violence’ and ‘violence against women’ are often used across both policy and academic literature interchangeably, but often policy and academic literature argue that GBV is an umbrella term of which violence against women specifically is one form (Bloom, 2008; Bradbury-Jones et al., 2019). While we recognise that GBV can affect all genders, for the current study our focus was on GBV against women. For the rest of the article, the term GBV is used to represent GBV against women.

Our use of the term GBV against women aligns with both the definition provided in Article 3 of the Istanbul Convention, in that GBV against women is ‘violence that is directed against a woman because she is a woman or that affects women disproportionately’ (Council of Europe, 2011: 3), as well as the United Nation's (UN) definition of violence against women found in Article 1 of the UN's Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women (1993: 2):

Any act of gender-based violence that results in, or is likely to result in, physical, sexual or psychological harm or suffering to women, including threats of such acts, coercion or arbitrary deprivation of liberty, whether occurring in public or in private life.

In establishing the Declaration, the UN stated that it is ‘recognizing that violence against women is a manifestation of historically unequal power relations between men and women, which have led to domination over and discrimination against women by men and to the prevention of the full advancement of women, and that violence against women is one of the crucial social mechanisms by which women are forced into a subordinate position compared with men’ (p. 1).

Gender-based violence is pervasive throughout sport, occurring at every level and across all forms of participation (Forsdike and Giles, 2024; Lang et al., 2023). Studies have shown that GBV in sport exists, and needs to be addressed, within and between each of the four socio-ecological levels, from individual and relational, to organisational and socio-cultural (Forsdike et al., 2022; Forsdike and Giles, 2024; Spaaij and Schaillée, 2019). However, sport organisations have ‘a distinct lack of consistent comprehensive practical and applicable policy, developed using a gendered lens’ with which to guide them to prevent and respond to the issue of GBV (Forsdike and Fullagar, 2021: 483), and research analysing Australia sport policy does not document the extent to which policies address responses to disclosures and formal reports of GBV in sport.

Disclosure response

Disclosing and reporting are two distinct actions that women who have experienced GBV in sport may take, and likely will expect sport organisations to respond to both at an organisational and at an individual level. We differentiate it in the following manner: A disclosure occurs when someone reveals either in written or verbal form their experiences of abuse to someone else, who receives and (ideally) effectively responds interpersonally to this disclosure (Woessner et al., 2024). Reporting refers to a more formal and procedural step that someone who has experienced violence will follow to inform the organisation of an incident (Radziszewski et al., 2024). It may also include filing a complaint (Radziszewski et al., 2024; Woessner et al., 2024). We focus on the action of reporting an incident of GBV in sport which includes the filing of a complaint. This is an area where sport has lacked established reporting pathways or, where they exist, has often failed to respond appropriately, often causing harm to those making a report or resulting in women leaving sport (Forsdike and Giles, 2024; Vertommen et al., 2015).

A recent review by Radziszewski et al. (2024) examined reporting and complaint mechanisms for interpersonal violence in sport. The authors identified 18 recommendations across four key areas: organisational accountability, awareness and accessibility, adapted processes and ongoing evaluation. Whilst their review makes recommendations to inform the development of best-practice reporting mechanisms in sport, it does so from the perspective of academic literature only and without a gendered lens. Such principles are also yet to be used in practice. Specialist services, working across trauma or abuse, have established practice guidelines for responding to reports of GBV, for example, across mental health service delivery, health systems response to disclosures of intimate partner violence and child safeguarding. However, their applicability to the sport context has only recently been considered (McMahon and McGannon, 2024).

Australian sport policy context

In Australia, GBV in sport has fallen within the broader umbrella term of integrity in sport. Following the 2018 Wood review, which assessed the national sport regulatory environment, the Australian government established Sport Integrity Australia (SIA) 2018 through the Sport Integrity Australia Act 2020. SIA consolidates various integrity functions (match fixing, doping, sport wagering, child safeguarding and member protection) into one agency, with an overarching mandate to:

Work with sports to support their existing integrity functions or develop new capabilities, so they can protect their athletes and the competitions they govern. We provide resources, capability and education to help sports, as well as offering an independent complaint handling model to address serious integrity issues that arise in sport around discrimination, abuse and the safeguarding of children (Sport Integrity Australia, n.d.-c: 4).

To address sport integrity issues, SIA developed the National Integrity Framework (NIF) to formalise mechanisms and processes for breaches of integrity for and with National Sport Organisations (NSOs), within the federated governance model of Australian sport. The federated model creates a tiered organisational structure. National Sport Organisations are governing bodies for each sport, and are responsible for the development and implementation of two competing policy goals including elite pathways and performance and community participation as well as policy development (Dowling et al., 2014; Stewart et al., 2004). At the state and territory level, most sports have State Sporting Associations that collaborate with their respective NSO as well as leagues and local clubs to implement NSO policy and comply with relevant regulatory frameworks from state and federal governments, coordinate competitions and grow their sport (Stewart et al., 2004). Finally, at the local level, clubs are the infrastructure to facilitate participation and sometimes elite pathway development and performance (Stewart et al., 2004). National Sports Organisations, as federal level governing bodies recognised and funded by the Australian Sports Commission, were invited to adopt the NIF. While 96 NSOs have signed up to the NIF (Sport Integrity Australia, n.d.-a), nine have opted to retain or develop their own integrity policies and mechanisms. National Sports Organisations signed up to the NIF gain access to SIA's independent reporting mechanism and complaints handling process. For NSOs who have chosen not to sign up to the NIF, the responsibility for managing reports and complaints remains within the sport, without the benefit of an independent body to examine integrity breaches.

The above review suggests that policy development and practices in relation to responding to GBV in sport is complex. In addition the near absence of sport policy research on this specific topic suggests that current policies guiding responses to disclosures and reports of GBV in sport are not informed by evidence. In one of the few studies, Kerr et al. (2014) examined child protection strategies in sport to determine whether they were evidence based and empirically evaluated, and found that they were not. No such research exists to the author's knowledge on the evidence of GBV against adult women prevention and response initiatives in sport. This is problematic because it is important to understand whether sport policies are aligned with ‘evidence-based best practice’ to ensure that sport participants across the Australian sport sector are safer and able to easily able to access support in the event of an incident of GBV. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the extent to which sport policies aligned with evidence-based best-practice on responses to reports of GBV.

Methods

The study was conducted in two parts. The first part sought to establish a framework of evidence-based best-practice principles in responding to GBV to inform our analysis.

The second part sought to identify, through document analysis, the extent to which exemplar sports organisations aligned with these best-practice principles. As such, the study followed a sequential qualitative design; the first part established a framework of best-practice principles for responding to disclosures and reporting of GBV which could then applied in the second part.

We adopted a pragmatic approach and conducted a textual analysis of policy documents. Textual analysis is advocated by Everley (2025), who argues that policy content is a key mechanism for institutional change in sport. However, the literature on GBV prevention in sport has largely overlooked the messages conveyed within policy texts. We argue that textual analysis will be effective to unpack how policies detail reporting and organisations’ responses and how well they align with best-practice. Using a pragmatic approach best enables us to identify evidence based, best-practice principles that could be used to highlight gaps in current policies’ alignment with evidence, and that could be used by policy developers working in a field with limited precedent.

Part one: best-practice principles development

The absence of best-practice principles for responding to GBV in sport reflects a broader gap in sport governance, where integrity frameworks have historically focused on issues such as doping, match-fixing, and child safeguarding, but have not adequately addressed GBV. In order to address this gap and examine sport organisation's alignment with evidence-based best-practice, we first developed an analytical framework drawing from evidence-based guidelines from sectors that are specialised in responding to interpersonal violence and GBV, including specialist services responding to domestic, family and sexual violence, mental health services, and the child protection/safeguarding sector. Drawing on our disciplinary expertise and professional experience and networks in these three sectors, we identified and selected well-established and evidence-based guidelines for responding to disclosures and reports of interpersonal violence, including GBV, and that are nationally and internationally recognised standards of best-practice. These include: The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Standards Administration's (SAMHSA) Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed Approach; The Child Safe Standard by the Victorian governments Commission for Children and Young People (Standard 7: Processes for complaints and concerns are child-focused), and the World Health Organisation's (WHO; 2021a) training curriculum for responding to violence against women, all outlined in more detail below. By integrating these sources, we aim to offer a more rigorous foundation for policy development in sport.

The SAMHSA (2014) guidelines offer a trauma-informed approach to reporting mechanisms and processes, across service systems. The guidelines incorporate trauma-focused research, survivor experiences, and practice-based knowledge to minimise the risk of compounding trauma for victim-survivors while they make a report. The evidence for the guidelines is based on Harris and Fallot (2001) research on trauma theory and designing service systems. They are recognised as the pre-eminent guide in undertaking a trauma-informed approach when interacting with people who have experienced trauma in sport (McMahon and McGannon, 2024). The second guideline identified was the principles of Child Safe Standard 7, which outlines the requirements and indicators of ‘Processes for complaints and concerns’ (Commission For Children And Young People, n.d.). Evidence from findings of a Royal Commission and survivor experiences was used to develop the Standards, and they are regularly reviewed (Commission For Children And Young People, n.d.). They aim to build capacity and deliver child safety and wellbeing in organisations, preventing future harm. The National Principles for Child Safe Organisations outline 10 fundamental elements for making organisations safe for children, recognising that children need protection but also have agency and rights (Powell et al., 2020). We argue that some of these principles are relevant and can be applied to make reporting processes safe for women. Finally, we chose the World Health Organisation (2021a) training curriculum for responding to violence against women based on the WHO's research on violence against women (World Health Organisation, 2021b), as well as their research and guidelines on how healthcare providers respond (World Health Organisation, 2013, 2014) and evidence on why trauma-informed prevention and response are essential (World Health Organisation, 2005). The WHO training curriculum provides health-care providers with a foundation for responding to domestic, intimate partner and sexual violence against women. A health care setting is a key setting for women to disclose such violence, with screening practices in healthcare well established and evaluated (Miller et al., 2021; O’Doherty et al., 2015). Whilst there may be additional guidelines that we could have engaged with, these three provided comprehensive evidence-based detail of best-practice responses that centred the individual.

These three guidelines were selected because they each offer comprehensive, evidence-based detail on best-practice responses that centre the individual. Collectively, they prioritise safety, agency, and wellbeing in response processes, drawing from robust research, practitioner expertise, and survivor-informed principles. Their applicability across different settings, including healthcare, child safety and trauma-informed service delivery, ensures a holistic foundation for developing response principles that are person-centred and able to be applied to broader contexts, in this case, sport, which currently lacks its own dedicated, evidence-based guidelines for responding to GBV. Each guideline chosen is evidence-based and regarded as a leading framework in their field. Each also has relevance to the sport context with SAMHSA already regarded as a leading framework for trauma informed practice in the sport setting, Child Safe Standards representing high quality standards applicable to populations at risk of harm, and WHO's training curriculum showing practice of response in complex organisational settings. Together these have clear connections or relevance to the sport setting.

Analysis

We undertook a thematic analysis of the three guidelines to establish overarching principles (Braun and Clarke, 2022). The lead author read and re-read the guidelines making preliminary notes on recurring language, priorities, structures and overarching principles. Using manual coding in Excel, identified preliminary themes were coded inductively. An iterative approach was then used to cluster the themes, using coloured highlighting to indicate similar themes across different guiding frameworks, and then cross-checked with the other authors for consensus. Five core themes were identified: accessibility, policy development, empowerment, trauma-informed approach and ongoing evaluation (Table 1). These were used to compare sport organisations’ policies adherence to best-practice principles of responding to reports of GBV.

Table 1.

Best-practice principles to respond to reports of GBV in sport organisations.

Best-practice principle	Description	Source document
Accessibility	Complaint process should be easy to understand, culturally safe, and accessible to the community. Must be transparent and consistently implemented across the workforce through training.	- SAMHSA (2014) - CCYP Child Safety Standards (n.d.)
Policy development	Emphasise collaboration, address cultural, historical, and gender issues. Involve survivors and communities in design. Ensure prompt responses to complaints and meet legal obligations.	- SAMHSA (2014) - CCYP Child Safety Standards (n.d.)
Empowerment	Recognise the impact of trauma, ensure safety, and resist re-traumatisation. Provide peer support, empower complainants with voice and choice. Offer information and counselling.	- SAMHSA (2014) - CCYP Child Safety Standards (n.d.) - WHO (2021a)
Trauma-informed	Take reports seriously, act promptly, and centre the victim/survivor. Understand and address power imbalances. Have clear reporting pathways to respond to abuses of power.	- CCYP Child Safety Standards (n.d.) - WHO (2021a)
Ongoing evaluation	Continuously evaluate response to GBV. Focus on progress monitoring and quality assurance. Keep detailed records of complaints and how they are handled.	- SAMHSA (2014) - CCYP Child Safety Standards (n.d.)

Finally, the final themes that were developed were compared to and validated against Radziszewski et al.'s (2024) rapid review of academic literature for their relevance to the sport context to ensure the relevance and rigour of the proposed best-practice principles. Radziszewski et al. (2024) reviewed academic, peer-reviewed studies in and outside the sport context that evaluated formal complaint mechanisms. We compared our five themes against the 18 research-based recommendations identified in the review by Radziszewski et al. (2024). We mapped each of our principles to the corresponding recommendations in the review, examining areas of alignment, complementarity, and divergence. The comparison confirmed that our principles were consistent with the broader academic evidence base on effective complaint mechanisms for responding to reports of GBV.

Part two: document analysis

Following the establishing of best-practice principles, we analysed exemplar sport organisation's current policies (including one signed up with the NIF and one not) and practices relating to reporting GBV (see Supplementary material). Data collection and analysis was based on the READ technique (Dalglish et al., 2021) and methodology used by Spurdens and Bloyce (2022). The READ approach is a systematic method developed for health policy research by Dalglish et al. (2021). This four-step process involved: (1) Ready your materials to define the scope, inclusion criteria, and organise the documents; (2) Extract data and systematically collect relevant information using a structured spreadsheets; (3) Analyse data by applying qualitative methods, specifically a discourse analysis based on the technique used by Spurdens and Bloyce (2022), to identify patterns, trends, and gaps; and (4) Distil finding and synthesise insights to answer our research questions and develop policy-relevant conclusions. This approach ensured analytical rigour in the document analysis. The lead author undertook deductive coding using the identified best-practice principles (trauma informed responses, accessibility, empowerment, document and policy development, and ongoing evaluation).

Policy documents from the following sport organisations were selected: SIA, AusTriathlon (signed up to the NIF), and Football Australia (soccer, not signed up to the NIF). The juxtaposition of the different policy approaches and alignment across the national authority (SIA), a sport signed up to the NIF (AusTriathlon) and one not signed up to the NIF (Football Australia) provides a meaningful basis for identifying how response to GBV is addressed in policy across different organisational approaches. These two sport organisations were purposively selected to enable a comparative analysis of GBV reporting pathways within different governance contexts, both Olympic sports, but with very different organisational and governance set-ups. AusTriathlon is a NSO that has signed up to the NIF. It does not have associated State Sport Associations (SSAs) in the eight states and territories across Australia. Conversely, Football Australia (soccer) has a more typical structure in the federated Australian sport system, operating as an NSO with eight SSAs underneath (one of which, Football Victoria, is highlighted in Figure 1 below), and clubs and associations operating at the local level. Football Australia has not signed up to the NIF. Both NSOs are responsible for developing national policy for their sport and participants and high-level governance. At the national level, Sport Integrity Australia (SIA), is the third organisation included in the analysis, and is a branch of the Australian Sports Commission. It is the national agency responsible for safeguarding integrity in sport, including anti-doping, child safeguarding, and the prevention of abuse and discrimination.

Data was systematically collected by mapping the websites of SIA, AusTriathlon, and Football Australia at a single point in time in May, 2024. First, the homepages of the official organisation websites were searched, and each link was clicked on. Documents were most often found in the ‘Resources’, ‘About’, ‘Safeguarding’ and ‘Official Documents’ tabs. Next, the webpage search bar was used, and pre-determined search terms, including ‘safeguarding’, ‘report’, ‘member protection’, ‘women and girls’ and ‘abuse’ (Table 2), were used to find any documents missed in the initial website sweep. Across the three organisations’ websites, 55 relevant webpages and documents were found, including policies, resources, factsheets and strategies. These were downloaded and saved, keeping a record of their purpose, where they sat on their home website, and if they linked to other webpages or external websites relevant in this study (for example, if an AusTriathlon webpage linked to a SIA resource).

Table 2.

Website relationship mapping process.

Step	Description
Establish a process of document selection.	Website sweep Each organisation's website systematically navigated, moving from the homepage and to each ‘tab’ or link. Documents relating to: adult women (as opposed to child protection policies) all roles that women engage in. Review all formal rules and documents publicly available: Safeguarding Member protection National code of conduct and ethics Whistle-blower policy Spectator code of conduct Ad hoc historical complaints Racism and discrimination Annual reports Women and girls’ specific documents Inclusion and diversity Policy review system Human resource documents. Search for terms including ‘reporting’ ‘gender-based violence’ ‘integrity’ ‘abuse’ and ‘harassment’.
Policy and page identification and link mapping	Webpages and documents identified and catalogued. Identification of links to other relevant pages or policies within recorded webpages and documents. Links between webpages and external sites (e.g., SIA) documented to show web of connections.
Data analysis	Visual map analysed to identify patterns and disparities in the integration of policies across the organizations relating to GBV. Key points of analysis included: Extent of each organization's reliance on SIA for policies Differences in the structure and accessibility of reporting mechanisms for GBV. Potential gaps or areas for improvement in the interconnectedness of resources.

Step

Description

Establish a process of document selection.

Website sweep

Each organisation's website systematically navigated, moving from the homepage and to each ‘tab’ or link.

Documents relating to:

adult women (as opposed to child protection policies)

all roles that women engage in.

Review all formal rules and documents publicly available:

Safeguarding

Member protection

National code of conduct and ethics

Whistle-blower policy

Spectator code of conduct

Ad hoc historical complaints

Racism and discrimination

Annual reports

Women and girls’ specific documents

Inclusion and diversity

Policy review system

Human resource documents.

Search for terms including ‘reporting’ ‘gender-based violence’ ‘integrity’ ‘abuse’ and ‘harassment’.

Policy and page identification and link mapping

Webpages and documents identified and catalogued.

Identification of links to other relevant pages or policies within recorded webpages and documents.

Links between webpages and external sites (e.g., SIA) documented to show web of connections.

Data analysis

Visual map analysed to identify patterns and disparities in the integration of policies across the organizations relating to GBV. Key points of analysis included:

Extent of each organization's reliance on SIA for policies

Differences in the structure and accessibility of reporting mechanisms for GBV.

Potential gaps or areas for improvement in the interconnectedness of resources.

Relationship map

The links between SIA, as a government agency and NSOs like AusTriathlon and Football Australia, can best be described for the current study as a policy network. Rhodes (2009: 426) describes policy networks as ‘sets of formal institutional and informal linkages between governmental and other actors structured around shared if endlessly negotiated beliefs and interests in public policy making and implementation’. We undertook a policy network analysis approach where we sought to map the links between the resources and organisations, situating SIA as the crucial organising element leading policy (Rhodes, 2009: 249). Network analysis involved mapping the relationships between documents, hyperlinks, and policies to visualise how information flowed and where reporting pathways or gaps exist. Key points of analysis included the identification of links to other webpages or external websites, revealing a complex web of connections, the differing extent of AusTriathlon and Football Australia's reliance on SIA's policies and resources, and differences in the structure and accessibility of reporting mechanisms for GBV. The lead author developed a visually complex, intricate ‘Relationship Map’ using the online software Miro, a collaborative online whiteboard (Figure 1). The specific steps undertaken in this process and the creation of the Relationship Map are outlined in Table 2.

Figure 1.

Mind map of documents included in the document analysis.

After the network analysis was finalised, the document analysis process began. All documents outlined in Figure 1, except those relating to the SSA Football Victoria were analysed. The network analysis and relationship map were essential to identify all the documents that needed to be analysed, where they were situated on the organisation's website, and how they were linked to other documents included in the analysis. The first 10% of documents were coded by two co-authors to ensure validity in the process, before the first author coded the remaining documents. All authors then reviewed the analysis process and results on a fortnightly basis.

Results

We start by presenting the relationship map to demonstrate the interdependent policy network, the wealth of policy and procedure documents and webpages, and the complexity of navigating the policy landscape within the different organisations (Figure 1). We then present the results of the document analysis, comparing the policy documents identified against the five best-practice principles in responding to reports of GBV in sport (from part 1).

Network analysis

The Relationship Map (Figure 1) visually illustrates the connections and gaps between SIA and triathlon and football policy in relation to responding to GBV. AusTriathlon's (NIF adopted) had more links to SIA's webpage and fewer internally developed policies and resources compared to Football Australia.

In contrast Football Australia takes a more independent approach, leading to a more complex navigation of the website to identify relevant policies and reporting processes for women who have experienced violence in the sport, marginalising women's voices. However, because complaints will remain in Football Australia and not be going via SIA, it is likely that there is reduced complexity for a woman wishing to report.

Document analysis

The document analysis with a pragmatic, gendered interpretation helped to further identify the complexity, as well as the strengths and weaknesses within each organisation's response to GBV, in relation to the five best-practice principles.

Accessibility

Accessibility of policies and documents relates to the ease and transparency of the process associated with making a GBV report (Table 1). The reporting process must also be culturally safe, easily found by members of the public, and consistently implemented by all staff members.

The SIA complaints process is clearly outlined and easily followed on their website, but what happens once a report is made is less clear. SIA has created accessible resources to promote the Safe Sport Hotline, making it easy for the public to seek support and ask questions. A visual and concise guide called ‘Standards and Prohibited Conduct,’ (Sport Integrity Australia, n.d.-e), which summarises various policies is also available from SIA. Unfortunately, this document is not easily accessible nor visible on the website. Also, SIA's resources are only available in English, and there is no mention of a translator for hotline calls. Women with intersectional identities are therefore further marginalised from accessing the complaints process and reporting incidences of GBV.

AusTriathlon has developed and implemented education for their staff, volunteers and club members to prevent breaches of their Member Protection Policy (2023b) in line with SIA's requirements for being signed up to the NIF. The education piece, which SIA helped to design, aims to improve understanding of individual's rights and responsibilities, but does not have a gender lens. AusTriathlon also provide the number for SIA's safe sport hotline prominently on their website, but there is no mention of cultural safety, translations of policies into other languages or disability accessibility.

Football Australia's Member Protection Framework is easily found on their website. They have developed a Frequently Asked Questions webpage (FAQs;, 2024) which details what is covered under their complaints policy and the informal steps to first take. It also details how a complaint will be handled, and how to appeal or escalate a complaint. While this information makes the policy more clearly understood and transparent, it does not appear to be available in other languages or in audio for vision-impaired individuals. The Safeguarding Policy (2020a) for Football Australia also supports ‘continued education and training for all people involved in football to ensure that safeguarding information is provided on an ongoing basis’ (p. 6). This ensures staff and volunteers are aware of the signs and indicators of abuse, so that the policy can be consistently implemented by Football Australia members. Whether this education training has a gender lens and informs participants about the gender inequality and the drivers of GBV was not clear however.

Across all organisations, there were a considerable number of documents and policies. In total SIA had 127 pages on safeguarding found during the website review, AusTriathlon had 75 and Football Australia had 330 pages, indicative of the sheer volume of information an individual needs to be across for the complicated process of reporting an incident of GBV in this policy network. Many of those documents had complicated legal terminology, disclaimers around institutional protection and frequently directed the reader to other lengthy policies. The result was all websites were ultimately a complex interwoven web of documents that is at best, inaccessible, and at worst, could actively deter women seeking to report and indicating a pattern of exclusion.

Policy development

The second best-practice principle is policy development. This calls for the creation of clear, coherent, and survivor-centred policies that guide how an organisation handles reports and investigations of GBV. Good policy development ensures that policies are not only legally compliant but also ethically sound, trauma-informed and accessible to all stakeholders, especially women who have experienced violence. Policies should also work to ensure prompt responses and involve survivors and communities in design to ensure women are believed and supported.

The development of SIA's policy framework does not specify the involvement of communities or women survivors in design. Critically, the remit of the NIF dictates whether or not SIA ‘will decide on the most appropriate resolution process’ (Sport Integrity Australia, n.d.-a: 9), or send the complaint to the NSO to address. SIA's mandate in response to the issue of abuse was to ‘provide assistance’ (Sport Integrity Australia, n.d.-f), and their remit is time dependent in that they cannot address cases prior to the time the relevant NSO signed up to the NIF. Whether this means that responses are prompt is not clear. SIA's remit is also specific, in that they can only act when a person has been discriminated against because of a protected characteristic as part of the (largely gender-blind) ‘member protection policy’ (2021a) or abused as a child under 18 years, as part of the ‘child safeguarding policy’ (2021b). Under SIA's NIF (n.d.-a), a ‘protected characteristic’ refers to specific attributes that are legally safeguarded against discrimination in Australian law, for example the Sex Discrimination Act, 1984. In practice, this means they are only able to investigate in cases of discrimination or child abuse from the point at which a sport signed up to the NIF. SIA cannot respond to women experiencing GBV in sport, as it falls out of remit of their constitution and hence is not included in the NIF policies, so the matter will revert to the relevant NSO.

The policy development process fundamentally differed between Football Australia and AusTriathlon because AusTriathlon, as a sport signed up to the NIF, relies on the templates developed by SIA, whereas Football Australia has developed their own. Despite this difference in process, the documents under analysis are largely similar in design, do not refer to gender beyond discrimination or the historical male-dominance of sport, obscuring the gendered nature of violence against women, are highly formal and legalistic in nature, and none reference the involvement of victim/survivors in their design or development. All organisations do outline the response to complaints process, as suggested by SAHMSA (2014), the Commission for Children and Young People (n.d.), and the World Health Organisation (2021a). Of the documents analysed across the organisations, very few emphasised collaboration or addressed cultural, historical, and gender issues.

In their public-facing documents AusTriathlon's process for policy development (i.e., their adoption of the NIF) is clearly outlined. The policy templates from SIA are available on the SIA website, and the sections that need to be modified to be made specific to the sport in question, in this case triathlon, are highlighted. Once those sections are changed, the policy can come into effect and the sport is operating under the NIF. In this process, there is therefore a focus on meeting legal obligations, rather than understanding the specific needs of victim/survivors in the context of the specific sport and how to prevent and respond to gendered violence.

Similarly, while the policy development process of Football Australia is less clear from their website, the documents analysed repeatedly refer to the protection of Football Australia's reputation as one of the reasons to establish the Code of Conduct (2021): Football Australia ‘may immediately suspend someone pending investigation to protect safety, in case of serious criminal offence where continued participation may damage football's reputation, and other circumstances where reputation of Football may be damaged’ (p. 14). Prioritising institutional reputation above the wellbeing of victim survivors can cause further trauma and avoids addressing the systemic and gendered nature of the violence.

Empowerment

The third best-practice principle in responding to reports of GBV in sport was empowerment, which required the response processes of sport organisations to recognise the impact of trauma, ensure safety and options for peer support, while empowering women who reported an incident with choice. Organisations should also offer help-seeking information and counselling where needed.

None of the policies analysed explicitly discussed the impacts of trauma from GBV, or provided a platform for women making a report to choose the direction of the response to that report. As such, policy conditions to empower the individual were not obvious in this analysis. Both Football Australia and AusTriathlon have policies that do discuss empowering women within their sport, but in a general sense, and not specifically relating to responses to incidences of GBV. For example, one of Football Australia's XI Principles (2020b) guiding their strategic direction is empowering women through fair representation of women on boards/committees and in management, administration, and elite coaching and refereeing. This is valuable but not specific to the response to reports of GBV. In their Safeguarding Policy (2020a), Football Australia states that ‘administrators must take the necessary steps to ensure that the Child is supported, feels as though they have been heard and believed, protected and cared for’ (p. 36). This is empowering language, but is specific to children and not gendered. The inclusion of adult women is clarified earlier in the document which states ‘due to Adults at Risk also having an increased risk of being subjected to Abuse and Harm, all references to Child or Children should, where appropriate, also be read and applied as if replaced by Adult at Risk or Adults at Risk (as applicable)’ (p. 5). While this statement may indicate an acknowledgement of an empowerment approach, the complexity makes empowerment questionable. We argue that the term ‘Adult at Risk’ is not inherently gendered and may not adequately capture the specific vulnerabilities and systemic inequalities that adult women face in sport contexts. The lack of explicit gendered language and the reliance on a broad risk-based categorisation is likely to limit the policy's effectiveness in addressing gender-based violence.

AusTriathlon, in their Safeguarding Children and Young People Policy (2023c) similarly aim to empower children who are at risk or make a report, to ‘ensure that Children and Young People are empowered about their rights, participate in decisions affecting them and are taken seriously, providing information, seeking informed consent and respecting the diverse and potentially complex needs of Children and Young People with increased vulnerabilities’ (p. 16). However, the same is not stated about women in the Member Protection Policy (2023b) which covers abuse of adults but is largely gender-blind.

On SIA's Making an Integrity Complaint or Report webpage (n.d.-c), they specify that it is a safe space to raise concerns, and directs people on how to make a complaint. A report is identified as less formal and can be submitted anonymously, but this limits SIA's ability to respond to the matter. A complaint cannot be anonymous and triggers a formal complaints process for SIA to determine if the matter is within their remit (limited, as described above) and if so, act according to the relevant policy. According to this best-practice principle, SIA should be providing peer support and offering information and counselling to help women make their own decisions, but it is not clear on their website that there is provision for these actions. Staff within SIA may empower individuals by undertaking these behaviours informally, but it is not specified through their policies and policy templates. Empowerment is not mentioned in any of the documents from SIA included in this analysis.

Trauma-informed response

According to our best-practice principles, a trauma-informed response is one that centres the victim/survivor in the process. The response must also address gendered power imbalances in the process and ensure the reporting pathways are clear.

None of the documents included for analysis from any organisation specifically discussed incorporating a trauma-informed response in their safeguarding policies or procedures. Across all organisations the primary focus appeared to be their legal obligations and outlining the complaints process. No direction to centre the victim/survivor was found in the documents during the analysis, and there were no structures in place to support victim/survivors.

Football Australia acknowledged power imbalances as factors that can increase the likelihood of abuse and in their Code of Conduct and Ethics they state ‘A constituent must not abuse their relative position of power or inappropriately take advantage of a relationship where a power imbalance exists (such as coach/player)’ (2021: 4). While an understanding of the power dynamic that can lead to abuse is important, the gendered aspect of power is not mentioned, and it is unclear how this statement would be enforced. The start of the online form to report a complaint does have a brief statement from the CEO thanking the individual for taking time to make a complaint, but that is the only clear point of acknowledgement. A person must formally make the complaint to see how Football Australia responds and this action was beyond the scope of this study. As such, there is no obvious and public trauma-informed response with a gendered lens in the initial stages of making a report from Football Australia.

AusTriathlon similarly acknowledges abuses of power in their NIF Safeguarding Policy (n.d.-d), indicating it may be more likely to lead to bullying and sexual abuse, but again does not mention gender. Sexual abuse is defined at the beginning of the policy as occurring when ‘an adult or person in authority takes advantage of power for their own benefit, ranging from sexual comments to intercourse’ (p. 4). AusTriathlon's Technical Officials Code of Conduct (n.d.) also ‘Place[s] safety and welfare of the athletes above all else, and promote[s] respect for all people’ (p. 1), but once again, a trauma-informed approach is not specified for the organisation, and actions to ensure this happens and enforcement strategies when there are breaches of the code are not made clear.

SIA also does not mention a trauma-informed response in their publicly facing documents on their webpage, but does mention the complainant by stating that it is important to acknowledge receipt of the complaint in a timely way in their Investigation of Complaint Guidelines (n.d.-b). They also have an anonymous reporting mechanism for people who have been discriminated against through their Safe Sport Hotline, but the link to GBV is not clear. On their Safeguarding webpage (n.d.-d) they state that child safety must be embedded in every Australian sport organisation culture, and understood and practised at all levels. While these place children at the centre of the conversation, they do not detail trauma informed care and do not mention adults or gender. Moreover, the assistance provided to those making a complaint is not made clear, which does not meet the CCYP Child Safety Standards compliance indicators (n.d.). There is also limited mention of the importance of responding to the emotional and physical safety and support needs of the complainant, or instruction to identify their needs or concerns, all of which are part of the WHO training principles (2021a) when responding to GBV.

Ongoing evaluation

The ongoing evaluation of policies, response pathways, and actual responses is a critical component of best practice.

Football Australia, in their Member Protection Framework: Safeguarding Policy (2020a) commit to maintaining and improving safeguarding and member protection policies, procedures and practices annually as part of the ongoing compliance with safeguarding requirements. In the same policy, Football Australia also note the importance of keeping records of reports to prevent perpetrators moving across football clubs and jurisdictions in the complex sport environment of football.

AusTriathlon, because of their signing up to SIA's NIF, are due to have their Complaints, Disputes and Discipline Policy (2023a) reviewed in 2025, 18 months after it was first implemented. As part of their Member Protection Policy (2023b) AusTriathlon also state that they will engage with SIA for maintenance of the education plan around that policy. AusTriathlon also commit to undertaking formal reviews of their Safeguarding Children and Young People Policy ‘at least annually to identify and document potential risks to children and young people associated with service delivery’ (2023c: 18). The inclusion of a gendered lens and understanding of how the male dominated context of sport makes GBV more likely is not discussed or noted for future reviews in this document.

The ongoing evaluation set out in the policies of both FA and AusTriathlon is in line with the recommendations of response to reports of GBV. SIA is less obvious in public facing documents on their own evaluation processes, but state that their NIF templates are due to be reviewed in 2025, 2 years to 18 months after their adoption by sport organisations.

Discussion

The aim of this study was to examine national sport policies and their adherence to best-practice response to GBV. The document analysis compared the five identified best-practice principles in responding to reports of GBV in sport to the policies of three different sport organisations. The main findings of this study demonstrated that the current policy documents of two NSOs in Australia and the main national government integrity sport agency do not align with best-practice principles of responding to GBV in sport.

The lack of existing best-practice principles for responding to GBV in the sport sector indicates that sport organisations are often ill-equipped to respond to disclosures of GBV in ways that are trauma-informed, survivor-centred, and procedurally sound. Drawing on established guidelines from other sectors provides a necessary starting point for sport to build its capacity and accountability in this area. The absence also reflects a broader gap in sport governance, where integrity frameworks have historically focused on issues such as doping, match-fixing, and child safeguarding, but have not adequately addressed GBV. As a result, sport organisations are often ill-equipped to respond to disclosures of GBV in ways that are trauma-informed, survivor-centred, and procedurally sound. Drawing on established guidelines from other sectors provided a necessary starting point for sport to build its capacity and accountability in this area. The external frameworks used to develop our principles offer transferable principles that can be adapted to the unique dynamics of sport. Another challenge is that uptake of best-practice principles is rarely linear and there are barriers to the integration of evidence in policy development (Head, 2010; Oliver et al., 2014). Specifically in sport, as Kerr et al. (2014) found in their evaluation of child protection initiatives, many sport policies are not empirically derived or systematically evaluated, reflecting a broader pattern of reactive or reputationally driven policy development in sport. While some sport organisations reference evidence-informed approaches, the basis for these claims or the evidence used to inform the approach is often unclear. Our study also suggests a lack of evidence-based best-practice responses in the context of GBV in sport, where the need for gender-responsive, survivor-centred, and evidence-based responses is critical. Our development of best-practice principles draws on three well-established frameworks from outside the sport sector, each grounded in empirical research and expert consensus to fill this gap.

Of the five core principles identified above, policy development and evaluation stood as out as the principles best adhered to by sport organisations included in our analysis. The process of policy development and review was clearly outlined on the organisation websites, and the procedure to make a complaint was clear and easily found. What the response procedure was, and how timely that response was, was less clear from this document analysis. It was also not clear in this analysis the extent to which survivors and communities were involved in the design of the policies and websites, as this was not mentioned in the public facing documents of this analysis. Regarding evaluation, major policies for all organisations had a review scheduled once the policies were implemented to update them. However, how the policies were evaluated for effectiveness and quality assurance was not detailed, nor whether primary stakeholders (women who have experienced GBV in sport) were involved.

The best-practice principle that was adhered to most poorly was the application of a trauma-informed response. While individuals working in sport organisations and enacting these policies may in practice deliver a trauma-informed response and centre the victim/survivor in the process, the policies themselves do not have this principle or guidance embedded within them. As such, responses are likely to differ depending on what organisation you disclose to, and the case manager for your report or complaint. Such ambiguity, variability and inconsistency inherently opposes best-practice principles of trauma-informed care (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2014).

The limited remit of Sport Integrity Australia (SIA) under the National Integrity Framework (NIF) presents a significant governance gap in addressing GBV in sport. Because the NIF is voluntary and SIA's jurisdiction only applies from the point at which a sport opts in, there is fragmented coverage across the sector. Furthermore, GBV against adult women falls outside of SIA's remit, unless it can be proven to be discrimination based on sex or gender (as a protected characteristic) and that the gender-based violence impacted or voided the victim-survivor's fundamental human right to participate in sport. This exclusion leaves women experiencing GBV in sport without a clear or consistent pathway for reporting and redress. When these matters inevitably fall outside SIA's scope, responsibility reverts to individual NSOs. Our analysis demonstrates that NSOs lack the expertise, resources, or frameworks to respond appropriately, even when they have their own policy and are not signed up to the NIF. A decentralised and inconsistent approach such as this reflects a broader systemic failure to embed GBV response within sport integrity governance. Without national leadership and mandatory standards that recognise GBV as a core integrity issue, NSOs are left to navigate complex and sensitive matters in isolation, often to the detriment of victim-survivors.

It is clear that policy development has been extensive (see Relationship Map in Figure 1). However, they do not specifically address GBV. Where violence or abuse is mentioned, it is usually in relation to children only. Furthermore, the documents are overly complicated and use legalistic language and framing, which reduces accessibility and opportunities for empowerment and trauma-informed responses. The combination of lack of GBV being identified explicitly, complexity of documentation and legalistic language can deter reporting and engagement with organisational processes, particularly for vulnerable populations (Kerr et al., 2020).

The complexity and legalistic framing of the policies, as well as the lack of an empowering, trauma-informed and accessible approach in the findings of this document analysis may be due to the historical legacy of integrity issues in sport. Since SIA was a result of merging the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority (ASADA) model, designed for addressing match-fixing and doping violations using a more regulatory approach, and broader integrity issues, it appears that policies may have applied an anti-doping approach. Using this approach in response to GBV cases that are likely to involve trauma and gendered drivers is not appropriate.

A clear finding in the current study is that SIA was not founded as a specialist response-to-violence service, which would be better able to implement best-practice principles of responses to GBV. We query whether the current scope of integrity issues, encompassing the broad range of integrity issues sport organisations are confronted with, can even be managed with a one-size-fits-all framework such as the NIF.

Further to this point, the examined sport organisations tended to include gender merely as one protected characteristic among many, failing to acknowledge or address the systemic and disproportionate impact of GBV on women and gender-diverse individuals. This gender-neutral approach, while seemingly inclusive, reflects an equality paradigm that treats all forms of harm as equivalent and all individuals as equally vulnerable. In practice, this obscures the structural and cultural conditions that make women and gender-diverse people disproportionately vulnerable to GBV in sport and inadvertently perpetuates existing power imbalances (Hartill, 2016; Mountjoy et al., 2016). Male-dominated governance structures, entrenched hierarchies and the normalisation of hypermasculine behaviours contribute to environments where violence is both underreported and inadequately addressed. By failing to formally name these gendered dynamics in policy and procedure, sport organisations risk perpetuating harm through policies that are procedurally fair but substantively unjust.

Football Australia's commitment to gender parity by 2027 and their acknowledgement of the need to reshape historically male-dominated football structures, as well as AusTriathlon's acknowledgment of the harm of abuses of power, demonstrates clear intentions for progress and inclusion. However, the disconnection between these statements and the operational policies that govern responses to GBV suggests they may be more symbolic than effective interventions. As Brackenridge and Fasting (2005) argue, meaningful change requires concrete policy mechanisms that address the root causes of GBV. Such mechanisms were not found in the policies analysed in this study.

Recommendations

Organisational response to reports of GBV is clearly a critical area for sport organisations to address. It is worth noting that policies and the policy network are prolific (see Figure 1), but poorly connected, non-accessible and not in line with best-practice. The impact of poor policy development such as this has been documented in other fields. In the tertiary education sector, it was identified that poor policy development contributed to one in six students being sexually harassed at university in Australia (Heywood et al., 2021). However, while significant scholarship has been dedicated to the development of policy and reporting pathways for GBV in universities (Perkins and Warner, 2017; Towl and Walker, 2019), and the Australian Government has by developed the National Code Against Gender-based Violence in Higher Education (National Code; 2025), there has been far less attention to the governance and organisational response to GBV within the sport sector. We advocate for similar scholarship, policy development and national legislation that reforms structural, root causes of GBV in the sport sector. While, like the National Code for universities, the NIF presents a unified and national standard as the nexus of the policy network, unlike the National Code it is optional for sports to sign up to, is largely gender-blind, does not address the gendered context of sport and drivers behind GBV, and has limited accountability.

While the key points of each of the five principles are outlined in Table 1, our study demonstrates that these points must be incorporated from the beginning of policy development. Policies should not be one-size-fits-all from a non-gendered lens. Best-practice policy development for GBV reports must explicitly acknowledge sport's historical male-dominance to create truly trauma-informed, empowering, and accessible responses. Policies that fail to address gendered power structures risk perpetuating the drivers that enable violence. Effective policies must prioritise empowerment by offering choice in reporting pathways and providing accessible language that recognises the courage required to disclose an incident of GBV to what is often a male-dominated leadership structure. Without addressing sport's gendered institutional context, policies remain superficial responses that maintain rather than challenge the systemic conditions enabling and facilitating GBV (Forsdike et al., 2022; Forsdike and Fullagar, 2021).

Limitations and future research

A limitation of the document analysis methodology is that during policy development, organisations could have adhered to best-practice principles and involved communities and victim/survivors in the design of the process, and not mentioned that part of the process in their public facing documents. There may also be further documents and/or practices that are not publicly available that might address the weaknesses we have exposed. Although this study has centred on the Australian sport context and GBV against women, its findings hold broader relevance for the international sport community, where the recognition of GBV as a critical issue continues to grow and demands urgent, evidence-informed responses.

Future qualitative research that interviews policy developers and implementers would be able to more accurately determine if this was the case. However, given best-practice includes accessibility, looking at only public facing documents on publicly available websites is a valid approach. Additionally, reviewing only two sports meant that the scope of this study was limited. Future research could apply these best-practice principles to other sports and geographic contexts to further advance the literature in this field, evaluate other policy responses and strengthen the sector's collective capacity to prevent and respond to GBV against women and people of all genders. Further work should build on this research by exploring context-specific interventions and refining the best-practice principles identified here.

Conclusion

The current study demonstrated that, based on current national sport policy documents, responses to women reporting instances of GBV against women in sport to Australian NSOs does not follow best-practice principles. Five best-practice principles were identified from analysis of three guidelines from which overarching principles for responses to reports of GBV could be developed. The five best-practice principles were: accessibility; policy development; empowerment; trauma-informed; and, ongoing evaluation. A policy network analysis revealed a complex and interrelated setting of integrity and safeguarding in sport organisations. The policy network was organised around SIA for both a sport organisation signed up to the NIF, and one that had developed it's own policy. The limited references to violence and abuse were mostly child focused. Document analysis of these three organisations demonstrated that explicit responses to GBV in Australian sport policy is lacking and does not align with best-practice response. Further, the current study makes a theoretical contribution to gender study in sport as it expands the conceptualisation of how, by omitting gender from policy and relying on the historical legacy of integrity in sport and anti-doping sport organisation for reporting processes, responses to reports of GBV are, ironically, deeply gendered and may be perpetuating harm to women and people of diverse genders.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-irs-10.1177_10126902261421583 - Supplemental material for Policy responses to reports of gender-based violence against women by Australian sporting organisations and best-practice principles

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-irs-10.1177_10126902261421583 for Policy responses to reports of gender-based violence against women by Australian sporting organisations and best-practice principles by Samantha Marshall, Natalie Galea, Aurelie Pankowiak, Mary Woessner and Kirsty Forsdike in International Review for the Sociology of Sport

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was not required for this study.

Funding

Funding from this study was received from an Advanced Olympic Research Grant from the IOC Olympic Studies Centre (Olympic Foundation for Culture and Heritage).

ORCID iDs

Samantha Marshall

Natalie Galea

Mary Woessner

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

AusTriathlon (2023a) National Integrity Framework: Complaints, Disputes and Discipline Policy. https://www.triathlon.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/AusTriathlon-NIF-ComplaintsDisputesandDiscipline-Policy-2023.pdf.

AusTriathlon (2023b) National Integrity Framework: Member Protection Policy. https://www.triathlon.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/AusTriathlon-NIF-MemberProtection-Policy-2023.pdf.

AusTriathlon (2023c) National Integrity Framework: Safeguarding Children and Young People Policy. https://www.triathlon.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/AusTriathlon-NIF-SafeguardingChildrenandYoungPeoplePolicy-2023.pdf.

AusTriathlon (n.d.) Triathlon Australia Technical Official Code of Conduct & Code of Behaviour Code of Conduct. Retrieved July 29, 2025, from https://www.triathlon.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Technical-Officials-Code-of-Conduct-and-Code-of-Behaviour-2022.pdf.

Bloom

(2008) Violence against Women and Girls. A Compendium of Monitoring and Evaluation Indicators. https://www.measureevaluation.org/resources/publications/ms-08-30/at_download/document.

Brackenridge

Fasting

(2005) The grooming process in sport: Narratives of sexual harassment and abuse. Auto/Biography 13: 33–52.

Bradbury-Jones

Appleton

Clark

, et al. (2019) A profile of gender-based violence research in Europe: Findings from a focused mapping review and synthesis. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse 20(4): 470–483.

Braun

Clarke

(2022) Conceptual and design thinking for thematic analysis. Qualitative Psychology 9(1): 3–26.

Commission For Children And Young People (n.d.) Standard 7: Processes for complaints and concerns are child-focused. Retrieved June 1, 2024, from https://ccyp.vic.gov.au/child-safe-standards/the-11-child-safe-standards/standard-7/.

10.

Council of Europe (2011) Convention on preventing and combating violence against women and domestic violence (Istanbul Convention), Article 3. https://rm.coe.int/168008482e.

11.

Dalglish

Khalid

McMahon

(2021) Document analysis in health policy research: The READ approach. Health Policy and Planning 35(10): 1424–1431.

12.

Department of Education (2025) Proposed National Higher Education Code to Prevent and Respond to Gender-based Violence. https://www.education.gov.au/action-plan-addressing-genderbased-violence-higher-education/resources/proposed-national-higher-education-code-prevent-and-respond-genderbased-violence-2025.

13.

Dowling

Edwards

Washington

(2014) Understanding the concept of professionalisation in sport management research. Sport Management Review 17(4): 520–529.

14.

Everley

(2025) ‘Where’ are the children in safeguarding policies of sport? An analysis of national and international discourses in policy documentation. Child Abuse Review 34(2): 1–11.

15.

Football Australia (2020a) Member Protection Framework: Safeguarding policy. https://www.footballaustralia.com.au/sites/ffa/files/2020-12/20-1220-20Member20Protection20Framework20-20Safeguarding20Policy2028Final29_0.pdf.

16.

Football Australia (2020b) XI Principles for the future of Australian football. https://www.footballaustralia.com.au/sites/ffa/files/2022-11/19508_FA_One20Football20Strategy_Nov%202022_v7.pdf.

17.

Football Australia (2021) National code of conduct and ethics. https://www.footballaustralia.com.au/sites/ffa/files/2021-04/FA20Code20of20Conduct20and20Ethics2028202129.pdf.

18.

Football Australia (2024) Complaints Procedure: FAQ. https://www.footballaustralia.com.au/member-protection/complaints-procedure/FAQ.

19.

Forsdike

Donaldson

Seal

(2022) Responding to violence against women in sport: Challenges facing sport organizations in Victoria, Australia. Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 93(2): 352–367.

20.

Forsdike

Fullagar

(2021) Addressing the complexity of violence against women in sport: Using the world café method to inform organizational response. Journal of Sport Management 36(5): 473–487.

21.

Forsdike

Giles

(2024) Women’s experiences of gender-based interpersonal violence in sport: A qualitative meta-synthesis. Trauma, Violence, and Abuse 25(4): 3254–3268.

22.

Harris

Fallot

(2001) Envisioning a trauma-informed service system: A vital paradigm shift. New Directions for Mental Health Services 2001(89): 3–22.

23.

Hartill

(2016) Sexual Abuse in Youth Sport. Routledge.

24.

Head

(2010) Reconsidering evidence-based policy: Key issues and challenges. Policy and Society 29(2): 77–94.

25.

Heywood

Myers

Powell

, et al. (2021) National Student Safety Survey: Report on the prevalence of sexual harassment and sexual assault among university students in 2021. https://cdn.prod.website-files.com/61c2583e4730c0d5b054b8ab/623ba530bc6676dfcdb1d5dc_202120NSSS20National%20Report.pdf.

26.

Kerr

Kidd

Donnelly

(2020) One step forward, two steps back: The struggle for child protection in Canadian sport. In: Social Sciences (Vol. 9, Issue 5). MDPI AG.

27.

Kerr

Stirling

MacPherson

(2014) A critical examination of child protection initiatives in sport contexts. Social Sciences 3(4): 742–757.

28.

Lang

Mergaert

Arnaut

, et al. (2023) Gender-based violence in sport: Prevalence and problems. European Journal for Sport and Society 20(1): 57–78.

29.

Marshall

McNeil

Seal

, et al. (2023) The ‘boys’ club’, sexual harassment, and discriminatory resourcing: An exploration of the barriers faced by women sport officials in Australian basketball. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 58(6): 971–995.

30.

McMahon

McGannon

(2024) Introduction. In: Trauma-Informed Research in Sport, Exercise, and Health. Routledge, 1–12.

31.

Miller

Adjognon

Brady

, et al. (2021) Screening for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings: An implementation-oriented systematic review. Implementation Research and Practice 2. 10.1177/26334895211039894.

32.

Mountjoy

Brackenridge

Arrington

, et al. (2016) International Olympic committee consensus statement: Harassment and abuse (non-accidental violence) in sport. British Journal of Sports Medicine 50(17): 1019–1029.

33.

O’Doherty

Hegarty

Ramsay

, et al. (2015) Screening women for intimate partner violence in healthcare settings. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2015(8). 10.1002/14651858.CD007007.pub3.

34.

Oliver

Lorenc

Innvær

(2014) New directions in evidence-based policy research: A critical analysis of the literature. Health Research Policy and Systems 12(1): 34. http://www.health-policy-systems.com/content/12/1/34 .

35.

Perkins

Warner

(2017) Sexual violence response and prevention: Studies of campus policies and practices. Journal of School Violence 16(3): 237–242.

36.

Powell

Graham

Canosa

, et al. (2020) Child safety in policy: Who is being kept safe and from what? Social Policy & Administration 54(7): 1160–1178.

37.

Radziszewski

Parent

St-Pierre

, et al. (2024) A rapid review on complaint mechanisms for interpersonal violence: Integrating research-based recommendations from multiple sectors to inform sport settings. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse 25(5): 3488–3503.

38.

Rhodes

RAW

(2009) Policy network analysis. In: Goodin

Moran

Rein

(eds) The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy. Oxford University Press, 425–447.

39.

Shaw

Slack

(2002) ‘It’s been like that for donkey’s years’: The construction of gender relations and the cultures of sports organizations. Culture, Sport, Society 5(1): 86–106.

40.

Spaaij

Schaillée

(2019) Unsanctioned aggression and violence in amateur sport: A multidisciplinary synthesis. Aggression and Violent Behavior 44: 36–46.

41.

Sport Integrity Australia (2021a) National Integrity Framework: Member Protection Policy Template.

42.

Sport Integrity Australia (2021b) Safeguarding Children and Young People. https://www.sportintegrity.gov.au/what-we-do/safeguarding-sport/safeguarding-children-and-young-people.

43.

Sport Integrity Australia (n.d.-a) Integrity Policy Offerings. Retrieved July 28, 2025, from https://www.sportintegrity.gov.au/what-we-do/national-integrity-framework/integrity-policy-offerings.

44.

Sport Integrity Australia (n.d.-b) Investigation of Complaints Guidelines: A short guide to assist sporting organisations investigate complaints. Retrieved June 2, 2024, from https://www.sportintegrity.gov.au/sites/default/files/Investigation20of20Complaints%20Guidelines.pdf.

45.

Sport Integrity Australia (n.d.-c) Making an integrity complaint or report. Retrieved June 2, 2024, from https://www.sportintegrity.gov.au/what-we-do/national-integrity-framework/making-integrity-complaint-or-report.

46.

Sport Integrity Australia (n.d.-d) Safeguarding. Retrieved June 3, 2024, from https://www.sportintegrity.gov.au/what-we-do/safeguarding.

47.

Sport Integrity Australia (n.d.-e) Standards & prohibited conduct: a guide the national integrity framework. Retrieved June 2, 2024, from https://www.sportintegrity.gov.au/sites/default/files/SIA112-012320STANDARDS202620PROHIB20CONDUCT20FACT%20SHEET_ACCESSIBLE_1.pdf.

48.

Sport Integrity Australia (n.d.-f) Who We Are. Retrieved July 28, 2025, from https://www.sportintegrity.gov.au/about-us/who-we-are.

49.

Spurdens

Bloyce

(2022) Beyond the rainbow: A discourse analysis of English sports organisations LGBT+equality diversity and inclusion policies. International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics 14(3): 507–527.

50.

Stewart

Nicholson

Smith

, et al. (2004) Australian sport: Better by design? In: Stewart

(eds) The evolution of Australian sport policy. Routledge.

51.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) (2014) SAMHSA’s concept of trauma and guidance for a trauma-informed approach. https://library.samhsa.gov/sites/default/files/sma14-4884.pdf.

52.

Towl

Walker

(2019) Tackling Sexual Violence at Universities. Routledge.

53.

Tuakli-Wosornu

Burrows

Fasting

, et al. (2024) IOC Consensus statement: Interpersonal violence and safeguarding in sport. British Journal of Sports Medicine 58(22): 1322–1344.

54.

UNESCO (2023) Tackling violence against women and girls in sport: A handbook for policy makers and sports practitioners. UNESCO.

55.

United Nations (1993) Declaration on the Elimination of Violence against Women. . https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/eliminationvaw.pdf.

56.

United Nations (2024) Report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women and girls, its causes and consequences: Violence against women and girls in sports. https://docs.un.org/en/A/79/325.

57.

Vertommen

Schipper-van Veldhoven

Nicolette HMJ

Hartill

Michael J

, et al. (2015) Sexual harassment and abuse in sport: The NOC*NSF helpline. International Review for the Sociology of Sport 50(7): 822–839.

58.

Vinal

(2024) Dakota Davidson latest AFLW player to be target of abuse this season. ABC News. Dakota Davidson latest AFLW player to be target of abuse this season.

59.

Woessner

Pankowiak

Kavanagh

, et al. (2024) Telling adults about it: Children’s experience of disclosing interpersonal violence in community sport. Sport in Society 27(5): 661–680.

60.

World Health Organisation (2005) WHO multi-country study on women’s health and domestic violence against women: summary report – Initial results on prevalence, health outcomes and women’s responses. Geneva: World Health Organisation. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/924159358X .

61.

World Health Organisation (2013) Responding to intimate partner violence and sexual violence against women: WHO clinical and policy guidelines. Geneva: World Health Organisation. https://iris.who.int/server/api/core/bitstreams/7685869e-cd94-4a24-acaa-4245f89482b7/content .

62.

World Health Organisation (2014) Health care for women subjected to intimate partner violence or sexual violence: a clinical handbook. Geneva: World Health Organisation. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-RHR-14.26 .

63.

World Health Organisation (2021a, November 25) Caring for women subjected to violence: A WHO curriculum for training health-care providers, revised edition, 2021. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240039803.

64.

World Health Organization (2021b) Violence against women prevalence estimates, 2018: Global, regional and national prevalence estimates for intimate partner violence against women and global and regional prevalence estimates for non-partner sexual violence against women. World Health Organization. ISBN: 978-92-4-00-2225-6.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.04 MB