DCMS ‘lacks compelling vision’ on sport for England, says committee

The government committed to delivering a lasting legacy as part of the £8.8 billion London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games, including increasing the number of adults participating in sports. But in a report today the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee says the benefits have failed to materialise, with the proportion of adults participating in sport at least once a week actually falling in the first three years following the Games.    

In 2015, government refocused its strategy on local based approaches and the least active having initially relied too heavily on a national event to deliver increased participation. But the Committee says this change of tack has not yet resulted in meaningful change in national participation rates.     

Community sport and physical activity brought an estimated contribution of £85.5 billion in social and economic benefits to England in 2017-18, including £9.5 billion from improved physical and mental health.     

But despite Sport England spending an average of £323 million each year since 2015, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport and Sport England have made little progress in tackling inequalities and the barriers to participation.  Of £1.5 billion in grants distributed by Sport England since 2016 it only knows where £450 million went, and the percentage of active adults increased by only 1.2 percentage points from 2016 to 2019. Nearly two in five adults in England still do not meet the Chief Medical Officer’s guidelines for recommended activity.   

Dame Meg Hillier MP, Chair of the Committee, said: “After the short-term financial boost there's been precious little to show by way of legacy, even in my immediate area of East London where the 2012 Games were held. Resets since 2015 have not begun to bring the levelling-up benefits intended.  The lack of vision and drive has seen Sport England pay out £1.5 billion of taxpayers’ money without knowing where two-thirds of it went, and there’s a paltry 1.2% increase in active adults to show for it.  

“More waste, more loss of desperately needed public money.  As the cost-of-living crisis bites hard, DCMS must set out what it will do differently to achieve change where it has not succeeded.”

Lead PAC Member Nick Smith MP said: ““Gyms and parks will be flooded this January with people resolving to get a bit fitter and more active, we should be better equipped to capture this enthusiasm and support grassroots sports and more active lifestyles throughout the year.  

“The committee has challenged Sports England to overcome the barriers that prevent people from having the motivation, confidence and opportunity to get active. 

“There are good practice examples such as parkrun, which could be part of the answer. As a later-in-life parkrunner and Chair of the Parkrun All-Party Parliamentary Group I’ve seen parkrun support people from all walks of life into getting more active. 

“Coming up with a mix of sporting opportunities which are affordable, local and inclusive could help people sustain their activities into February and through the rest of the year.” 

PAC report conclusions and recommendations 

1.      The 2012 Olympic games delivered substantial economic benefits to the UK, but its participation legacy fell short of expectations. The government committed to a lasting legacy from the Games, including an increase in the number of adults participating in sport. The Games delivered £14.2 billion in economic value by 2014 against a spend of £8.8 billion. But national participation in sport declined in the three years following the Games. The Department does not know the long-term participation legacy of the Games as it stopped tracking this in 2016 to focus on its new 2015 strategy for grassroots sport and physical activity. Sport England acknowledges it relied too heavily on a national event to deliver increased participation and that elite sports success doesn’t necessarily inspire activity at a grassroots level. The Department has applied some, but not all, of its learning from the 2012 Olympic games to the hosting of the 2022 Birmingham Commonwealth Games. It aimed to create a legacy from the Commonwealth Games at a local level, including a £3 million programme in the West Midlands to tackle inactivity, which it says has helped nearly 75,000 people to become active. But it has no mechanisms in place to monitor the long-term participation legacy from the Commonwealth Games. It is, however, developing a revised framework to assist future major event organisers in delivering a legacy. 

Recommendation 1: Using its learning from hosting recent major sporting events, the Department should clearly set out in its Treasury Minute response, the intended participation outcomes from hosting future events. In-particular this should focus on the performance metrics it intends to use and the long-term approach for monitoring these.   

2.      Sport England’s focus on local initiatives and encouraging those who are least active to take part has not yet resulted in meaningful change in national participation rates. The government’s 2015 strategy for an active nation committed to focusing on those groups who were the least active, believing this would deliver the biggest gains for spending. Sport England adapted its approach accordingly, with initiatives including 12 community pilots with local partners to tackle inactivity. Initial results were positive and inactivity levels reduced at a faster rate in areas with a community pilot than those without. However, Sport England has not been able to translate local results into national gains. Nationally, the percentage of adults who were active increased by only 1.2 percentage points between November 2016 and November 2019, from 62.1% to 63.3%. Nearly two in five adults in England still do not meet the Chief Medical Officer’s guidelines for recommended activity. The percentage of adults who were active then fell to the lowest level on record during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sport England’s new strategy, published in 2021, has committed to understanding how its initiatives can influence change at a national level, but it has not yet set out concrete proposals for this. 

Recommendation 2: In its Treasury Minute response, Sport England should report back to the Committee on how it expects each of its initiatives will translate into change in participation rates at a national level, and how it will evaluate this.   

3.      The Department has not yet set out how it will determine whether its efforts to tackle persistent inactivity levels are a success. The cost-of-living crisis risks further reductions in activity as households look to cut back on discretionary spending. But this challenge is not reflected in the pace of the Department and Sport England’s new strategic approaches. Sport England had targets for increasing activity levels among some, but not all, groups identified as priorities in its 2016-2021 strategy. It asserts that it is not in a position to set out the key performance measures to monitor progress against its new 2021 strategy until government has published its new strategy for sports participation. Yet the Department is unable to say when its new strategy will be published. The new strategy is intended to tackle persistent inactivity, with an emphasis on improving data monitoring and tailoring approaches to local needs. The Department could not articulate what practical measures its strategy would include, the specific outcomes it is aiming to achieve nor how it will deliver increased activity levels where previous strategies have failed.  

Recommendation 3: In its new strategy, the Department should set out the specific outcomes it is aiming to achieve with inactive groups, what targets it is working towards, and how it will measure progress.   

4.      Sport England has not yet translated its understanding of the barriers to participation into action to enable inactive groups to participate in sport and physical activity.  Sport England recognises three key requirements to get inactive groups to participate: motivation, confidence and opportunity. It recognises that some groups face greater barriers to participating in sport and physical activity, including women, lower socio-economic groups and disabled people. Sport England set itself targets to increase activity levels between 2016 and 2020 for women aged 16-60 by 250,000 and lower socio-economic groups in targeted communities by 100,000. Immediately prior to the pandemic, it was on track to deliver against its target for lower socio-economic groups, but significantly off track on its women’s target. Among inactive groups which did not have targets, activity levels among the over-75s and disabled people increased before the pandemic, but there was no such increase in activity levels within Black or Asian ethnicity groups. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated some of the existing inequalities in activity for the least affluent, Asian people and disabled people. Sport England accepts that its past work on addressing barriers has over-relied on creating opportunities to participate, through a focus on building facilities and opening up clubs, incorrectly assuming this would be enough to generate activity. Sport England says that its new strategy looks at how to build people’s confidence and motivation, but it did not provide us with any concrete examples of what this looks like in practice. 

Recommendation 4: Sport England should, by June 2023, write to us with details of the barriers for the least active groups, and what action it is taking to address them to ensure people have the motivation, confidence and opportunity to participate in physical activity. 

5.      It is unacceptable that Sport England does not know where in the country its grants are spent or whether these are genuinely helping those most in need. Sport England distributed £1.5 billion in grants in the five years starting 2016-17, but only knows which local authorities this funding went to for £450 million of this spending. It does not know where in the country the remaining two-thirds of grants awarded were spent, as it does not track the distribution of grants issued to national organisations. Sport England therefore cannot fully assess whether it is meeting its objective to target spending at less active groups, including lower socio-economic groups. The share of the £450 million received by the most deprived local authorities has fallen since 2016-17. Sport England could not explain this fall and we would expect it to have a far better grasp of where its money is spent. In recent years, spending on grassroots sports has been disproportionately concentrated in areas hosting major sporting events, rather than according to local need. For example, there are large discrepancies in grant funding per head between some London boroughs according to whether or not they hosted 2012 Olympic Games facilities. 

Recommendation 5: Sport England should, as part of its 2023-24 Annual Report and Accounts, clearly set out a full geographical breakdown of where its funding is being spent and how it is ensuring spending is targeted at deprived and less active communities. If this is not possible, it should write to us and explain why that is the case and commit to implementing in future annual reports.   

6.      The Department’s approach to working in partnership with other organisations to encourage people to take part in sport and physical activity is not yet effective. The Department recognises the importance of working with a variety of government departments, local organisations and charities to deliver increased levels of physical activity. It has committed to ensuring greater joining up between government departments. Sport England has also sought to expand the number of organisations it works with, with a six-fold increase in the number of organisations awarded grant funding in 2020-21 during the COVID-19 pandemic, compared to 2019-20. However, Sport England could not explain how increasing its network of grant recipients would deliver increased activity levels. It is not clear what the Department has learnt from its previous efforts at increased collaboration following its 2015 strategy, which were short-lived. There is more that Sport England could do to develop a partnership approach and integrate incentives for activity into the agendas of businesses and other bodies. 

Recommendation 6: In its new strategy, the Department should set out what it and Sport England will do differently to ensure sustained integration and collaboration with other bodies to achieve increased levels of physical activity. 

7.      The Department does not know if leisure facilities are financially sustainable or are delivering the sports facilities that communities need. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Sport England and the Department distributed over £900 million to support sports clubs and leisure centres. But leisure facilities now face new challenges. The energy bill for the leisure sector is expected to rise from £500 million in 2019 to £1-1.2 billion for 2022. Some 70% of councils are considering scaling back their leisure services in response to these financial pressures. Sport England recognises the fragile financial position of some leisure providers, but lacks understanding of the support the sector may need. Leisure facilities also face longer standing challenges. Many types of sporting facilities have an average age of more than 30 years and are in poor condition. For example, 45% of public park tennis courts are categorised as being in poor, very poor or unplayable condition. The Department asserts that it is working with the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to help the sector deal with the impact of rising energy costs. But it is unable to point to a strategy with the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities for the maintenance or development of leisure facilities. 

Recommendation 7: The Department should urgently review the condition of leisure facilities and, working with the Department for Levelling Up, Housing & Communities and other government departments, take action to ensure their financial sustainability. The Department should write to us with an update on this review by June 2023. /ENDS   

Notes:

Full inquiry info including evidence received Participation in grassroots sport