The Standard · requirements browser

See what changes from Bronze to Diamond.

One framework grows through four maturity levels. The current Standard Pilot draft contains twenty-five indicators and one hundred requirement records across all five pillar packs.

Draft architecture—public. Final requirement wording—not yet approved.

Thresholds and examples are working specifications for expert challenge, not a shortcut to claiming an award.

How decisions work

Candidate update · IOC Toolkit evidence review

What the proposed v0.3 delta changes here

This is a controlled change layer over the v0.2 authoring bank. It strengthens literacy, pathways, action planning, safe return, screening safeguards, entourage guidance, inclusion and transition without treating an IOC product as mandatory.

Primary source located and checkedNamed expert review still required

proposed changes

new scored questions

question revisions

context selectors

Draft only: none of these records can be used for certification until named clinical, lived-experience, privacy, accessibility, measurement and governance reviews are logged.

Open the IOC source

The controlled source wording is currently English. French normative translation remains a separate approval workstream.

Inspect the proposed controlled records

MM-IOC-01P1 · P1.3Proposed

Make recurring athlete mental-health education an explicit organisational responsibility.

Proposed change

Extend P1.3 so communication is not limited to service details. Organisations should help athletes understand common warning signs, when further help may be useful, confidentiality and its limits, how to support another person, and where routine or urgent help is found. Education must remain non-diagnostic and proportionate.

Question wording

Which statement best describes how the organisation provides recurring, practical mental-health education to athletes and checks whether it is understood?

Routing / applicability

Universal from Silver; Bronze may be satisfied by induction-level information already in P1.3-BR.

Evidence / audit impact

Add education materials, reach records, update history and protected comprehension sampling.

Required review

Clinical; lived experience; accessibility; translation.

Source pages

35, 37, 50-51

MM-IOC-02P1 · P1.4Proposed

Add a safe and supported return-to-participation process after a mental-health-related absence.

Proposed change

Where an organisation controls return to training, competition or selection after a health-related absence, it should have a coordinated process that respects athlete choice, uses appropriate qualified input, shares only necessary functional information, allows temporary adjustments and prevents both premature return and unnecessary exclusion.

Question wording

Which statement best describes how a return to training or competition is coordinated after a mental-health-related absence?

Routing / applicability

Route to organisations that control return-to-training, return-to-competition or participation decisions.

Evidence / audit impact

Add return-process document, anonymised plan sample, decision-role map and protected athlete corroboration at Diamond.

Required review

Clinical; legal; lived experience; performance operations.

Source pages

25, 67

MM-IOC-03Cross-framework · RA-11Proposed

Identify organisations that use formal mental-health screening or digital identification tools.

Proposed change

Add a neutral context selector before the assessment asks any screening-specific questions. Screening must not become a universal MindsMelt requirement merely because the IOC toolkit recommends it.

Question wording

Does the assessed scope use a questionnaire, digital tool or formal screening process intended to identify possible mental-health concerns?

Routing / applicability

Always visible; Yes activates RA-11 and Q-R-SCREEN-P14-07.

Evidence / audit impact

Context response must be verified against onboarding, health-check and digital-tool records.

Required review

Clinical; privacy; legal; measurement.

Source pages

37, 63

MM-IOC-04P1 · P1.4 / P1.5Proposed

Create a clinical-screening safeguard module for organisations that choose to screen.

Proposed change

Where screening exists, test voluntariness or other lawful authority, qualified selection and interpretation of the tool, clear pre-screen information, referral after concerning results, limits of rating scales, data minimisation and separation from coaching, selection and employment decisions.

Question wording

Which statement best describes the safeguards around formal mental-health screening in the assessed scope?

Routing / applicability

Only if CTX-SERVICE-SCREENING-01 = Yes.

Evidence / audit impact

Tool rationale, consent wording, data flow, access list, follow-up protocol, referral sample and privacy review.

Required review

Clinical mandatory; privacy/legal; measurement; lived experience.

Source pages

37, 63

MM-IOC-05P2 · P2.2Proposed

Broaden recognition training beyond visible distress caused directly by sport.

Proposed change

State explicitly that relevant people may notice concerns connected to competitive, personal or organisational pressures. They are not expected to solve family, financial or personal problems; they must respond respectfully, reduce immediate avoidable stress where appropriate and connect the person to support.

Question wording

Which statement best describes how competence is verified for recognising possible concerns linked to competitive, personal or organisational pressures and responding within role boundaries?

Routing / applicability

Universal; scenario examples should be adapted by role and organisation type.

Evidence / audit impact

Scenario library should include injury/underperformance, grief/family or financial pressure, and leadership/team/logistical stress.

Required review

Clinical; operational; lived experience; cultural review.

Source pages

25, 33

MM-IOC-06P2 · P2.1 / P1.3Proposed

Add proportionate guidance for influential people outside the formal workforce.

Proposed change

Where families, parents, agents, sponsors or other representatives materially influence support, travel, selection or transition, the organisation should provide simple guidance on support routes, urgent action, confidentiality, role boundaries and acting in the athlete's interests. This is not a requirement to train every family member as staff.

Question wording

Where people outside the formal workforce play an important support role, which statement best describes the guidance they receive?

Routing / applicability

Route for minors, residential programmes, formal athlete-agent/representative models or other verified entourage dependence.

Evidence / audit impact

Guidance materials, distribution records, role/consent rules and protected athlete feedback.

Required review

Safeguarding; lived experience; legal; cultural review.

Source pages

25, 27

MM-IOC-07P3 · P3.1Proposed

Require one understandable map of the full prevention-to-care pathway.

Proposed change

The operating framework should show how prevention and education connect to routine support, recognition, referral, urgent response, specialist care and follow-up. Each step should have an owner, a practical route and a clear handoff. This is a map of the system, not one combined clinical/safeguarding procedure.

Question wording

Which statement best describes whether the organisation has mapped the full pathway from prevention and athlete education through routine support, referral, urgent response and follow-up, with clear owners and handoffs?

Routing / applicability

Universal; the depth and format scale with organisation size.

Evidence / audit impact

Add pathway map, responsibility table, routine/urgent branch cross-references and one traced example.

Required review

Clinical; safeguarding; operational; small-organisation review.

Source pages

37, 49-51

MM-IOC-08P3 · P3.5Proposed

Make the organisational mental-health action plan explicit.

Proposed change

Leadership should review a current action plan showing priorities, owners, resources, timeframes, progress measures, known gaps, overdue actions and decisions. Do not create a second parallel planning document if the existing P3.5 implementation/risk/action overview can hold these fields.

Question wording

Which statement best describes the current mental-health and wellbeing action plan reviewed by leadership, including priorities, owners, resources, timeframes, measures, known gaps and overdue actions?

Routing / applicability

Universal; small organisations may use a short action table rather than a formal strategy document.

Evidence / audit impact

Current plan, leadership review record, overdue-action escalation and evidence that measures affect decisions.

Required review

Governance; operational; measurement.

Source pages

49-51

MM-IOC-09P3 · P3.4Proposed

Add qualified multidisciplinary input where proportionate, without forcing a committee on small clubs.

Proposed change

For larger, multi-site or governing organisations, the participation plan should include athlete input and access to suitably qualified mental-health, medical, public-health or safeguarding advice. Small organisations may meet this through external consultation rather than a standing committee.

Question wording

Which statement best describes whether athlete and workforce participation is complemented by the qualified advice needed for the decisions being made?

Routing / applicability

Higher depth for federations, NOCs, large multi-site organisations and organisations providing clinical services.

Evidence / audit impact

Terms of reference or consultation record; expertise and conflict checks; leadership response.

Required review

Governance; clinical; lived experience.

Source pages

50, 52

MM-IOC-10P4 · P4.1 / P4.3Proposed

Make the emergency plan and routine referral plan clearly connected but distinct.

Proposed change

P4.1 should require an emergency plan; P4.3/P1.4 should own non-emergency referral. Each document must point to the other, define the decision boundary and prevent a vague single policy from being credited twice.

Question wording

No new applicant question required. Add a cross-reference check to existing P4.1 and P4.3 help text and auditor prompts.

Routing / applicability

Universal.

Evidence / audit impact

Auditor traces one routine concern and one urgent concern through the correct branches.

Required review

Clinical; safeguarding; operational.

Source pages

MM-IOC-11P5 · P5.2Proposed

Test whether some groups experience lower trust, access or use of support.

Proposed change

At Gold and Diamond, the organisation should use protected evidence to identify whether language, disability, gender, culture, contract status or other power differences create support-access or help-seeking gaps. The aim is practical improvement, not intrusive demographic profiling.

Question wording

Which statement best describes how the organisation identifies and addresses differences in trust, access or use of support between relevant groups?

Routing / applicability

Gold and Diamond; only analyse groups where safe, lawful and statistically meaningful.

Evidence / audit impact

Protected access/trust analysis, action record, small-number safeguards and lived-experience sampling.

Required review

Equality; privacy/legal; lived experience; measurement.

Source pages

25, 35

MM-IOC-12P5 · P5.3Proposed

Make whole-person balance explicitly cover competitive, personal and organisational pressures.

Proposed change

Planning should consider combined demands such as training, competition, travel, study, work, injury, family or grief, financial pressure, media attention, unexpected success, leadership and logistical problems. Organisations do not have to solve private life problems; they should avoid dismissing them and make reasonable adjustments or referrals where appropriate.

Question wording

Which statement best describes how the organisation considers combined competitive, personal and organisational pressures when planning workload, recovery and support?

Routing / applicability

Universal; no requirement to collect detailed private information.

Evidence / audit impact

Planning guidance, adjustment examples, referral route, protected athlete feedback and calendar/pressure review.

Required review

Clinical; lived experience; employment/legal; privacy.

Source pages

25, 33

MM-IOC-13P5 · P5.4Proposed

Add one concise expectation that transition support begins before a foreseeable exit.

Proposed change

Where a transition is foreseeable, support should begin before the person leaves and include simple signposting for health continuity, practical planning, social connection and identity beyond sport. Do not expand this into a large mandatory career-service programme for every organisation.

Question wording

Which statement best describes the support offered before and during major transitions, including health continuity, practical planning and continued connection?

Routing / applicability

Universal, proportionate to the organisation's relationship with the athlete.

Evidence / audit impact

Transition information, timing of offer, signposting and protected feedback.

Required review

Lived experience; operational; clinical.

Source pages

MM-IOC-14Cross-framework · RA-13Proposed

Identify para/disability-sport contexts and classification-related transition risk.

Proposed change

Add a selector so disability access, classification changes and declassification can activate targeted expectations rather than remain hidden inside a generic accessibility statement.

Question wording

Does the assessed scope include para-athletes, athletes with disabilities, or athletes whose eligibility may materially change through classification or declassification?

Routing / applicability

Always visible; Yes activates RA-13 and Q-R-PARA-P54-05.

Evidence / audit impact

Verify against programme scope and participant categories without collecting unnecessary diagnoses.

Required review

Para-athlete lived experience; disability inclusion; legal.

Source pages

MM-IOC-15P5 · P5.4Proposed

Add a para/disability-sport transition and access route.

Proposed change

Where routed, transition support should address classification changes or declassification, disability-specific access, equipment/logistical disruption, continuity of health support and the possibility of simultaneous adjustment to disability and sporting transition.

Question wording

Which statement best describes how transition support addresses classification changes, declassification and disability-specific access needs?

Routing / applicability

Only if CTX-POP-PARA-01 = Yes.

Evidence / audit impact

Accessible transition materials, classification-change route, support examples and protected para-athlete feedback.

Required review

Para-athlete lived experience mandatory; clinical; accessibility; legal.

Source pages

MM-IOC-16Cross-framework · All affected recordsProposed

Add page-level IOC Toolkit references to every changed record.

Proposed change

Create or update one source record for the IOC Mental Health in Elite Athletes Toolkit (2021) and attach page-level notes to each changed requirement, question, evidence request and auditor prompt.

Question wording

Not applicable.

Routing / applicability

All changed records.

Evidence / audit impact

Improves source-to-clause traceability; does not convert an IOC recommendation into automatic MindsMelt policy.

Required review

Content governance.

Source pages

25, 27, 33, 35, 37, 49-51, 61, 63, 67

MM-IOC-17Cross-framework · Clinical and assessment boundariesFixed guardrail

Preserve the current MindsMelt clinical boundaries.

Proposed change

Do not make routine screening universal. Do not make a named IOC course, recognition tool or assessment tool mandatory. Do not allow coaches or entourage members to diagnose, treat or use risk scores to dismiss concerns. Do not weaken confidentiality or separation from selection.

Question wording

No question change.

Routing / applicability

Framework-wide.

Evidence / audit impact

Keep existing clinical, privacy and role-boundary audit controls.

Required review

Clinical; privacy/legal; council.

Source pages

37, 63

MM-IOC-18Cross-framework · Question bank and framework versioningProposed

Apply the changes as a controlled delta, not a full rebuild.

Proposed change

Add only the accepted new records, revise the named existing records, regenerate requirement coverage and sitting simulations, and record every change in the review log. The final question count should follow retained constructs and routing rather than a target.

Question wording

Not applicable.

Routing / applicability

All accepted changes.

Evidence / audit impact

Re-run coverage, duplication and burden checks.

Required review

Content owner; engineering; measurement.

Source pages

Implementation decision

Explore the five pillars

The framework now reads in its intended order.

Start with access to support, then follow competence, governance, crisis response and the lived culture of prevention.

Pillar 1

Support, access and confidentiality

Qualified, reachable and confidential support, with clear routes and protected corroboration.

Open Pillar 1

Pillar 2

Staff training and awareness

Role-specific competence, safe responses, boundaries, supervision and practical readiness.

Open Pillar 2

Pillar 3

Policy, governance and accountability

Authority, resources, participation, oversight, corrective action and public accountability.

Open Pillar 3

Pillar 4

Crisis and safeguarding response

Minimum safety controls, escalation, emergency readiness, reporting and post-incident learning.

Open Pillar 4

Pillar 5

Culture, environment and prevention

The lived environment under pressure: stigma, voice, retaliation, inclusion and prevention.

Open Pillar 5

The framework in one view

Safety gates, maturity requirements and evidence.

Minimum safety foundation

Essential safety and integrity controls will apply wherever the underlying risk is present. Their exact wording and routing are being expert-reviewed; they cannot be bypassed by a high score.

Working indicator architecture

Standard Pilot draft 0.3 contains five pillars, twenty-five indicators and one hundred stage requirements. Detailed content still requires expert review before certification use.

Assurance depth

The evidence journey grows from desk review and sampling to staff interviews, confidential athlete corroboration, remote audit, on-site work and independent panel decision.

The maturity ladder

Higher levels must prove a different kind of reality.

Bronze

Stated foundations

A named owner, defined responsibility or approved policy exists and covers the published scope.

Silver

Operational systems

People can use the system: it is communicated, resourced and supported by current implementation records.

Gold

Systematic practice

Operation is consistent, monitored and corrected. Remote audit and athlete corroboration test the claim.

Diamond

Embedded and verified

Practice is independently corroborated across leadership, staff, records, athletes and an on-site stage.

Four examples

What progression looks like in practice.

These examples explain the direction of the draft. They do not replace the version-controlled requirement text or its acceptable-evidence guidance.

Example	Bronze	Silver	Gold	Diamond
Access to support	A route and responsible owner are defined.	The route is communicated and staff can explain it.	Use, waiting times and barriers are monitored and improved.	Athletes independently confirm they can access it without career penalty.
Crisis response	A current escalation protocol and contacts exist.	Relevant staff are trained and exercises are recorded.	Responses and exercises are reviewed for effectiveness.	On-site testing and interviews corroborate readiness across the scope.
Athlete voice	A safe feedback route and non-retaliation commitment exist.	Athletes know the route and concerns receive tracked responses.	Themes influence decisions and leadership reviews outcomes.	Independent athlete evidence confirms voice has practical influence.
Leadership accountability	A senior owner and reporting duty are named.	Governance receives regular information and records decisions.	Targets, gaps and corrective action are monitored systematically.	The audit traces accountability from the board to athlete experience.

Standard Pilot draft 0.3

Twenty-five indicators form the complete working baseline.

Applicability can be routed by organisation type, size and activity, but applicants cannot remove an inconvenient indicator themselves. Earlier technical database snapshots remain preserved internally for traceability.

P01

Athlete Support Systems

5 working indicators

P1.1 · Qualified and appropriate professional support
Formal care is qualified, correctly described and clinically independent.
P1.2 · Timely, equitable and practical access
People can realistically reach support and receive a safe alternative when the preferred route cannot help.
P1.3 · Clear communication and support navigation
People understand what support exists, what it does, what is private and how to use it.
P1.4 · Voluntary check-ins, referral and continuity
Check-ins respect choice, referrals lead somewhere and support survives delays or transitions.
P1.5 · Confidentiality, autonomy and protection from performance disadvantage
Help-seeking is protected from unnecessary performance access, hidden data reuse and retaliation.

P02

Staff Training & Awareness

5 working indicators

P2.1 · Role-based competence framework and coverage
Every relevant role has proportionate competence expectations and coverage.
P2.2 · Recognition and safe first response
People notice concern, listen respectfully and activate the right next step without diagnosing.
P2.3 · Role boundaries, referral and escalation competence
Personnel understand what they may do, what they must not do and how to hand over safely.
P2.4 · Learning quality, practice and competence assurance
Learning is current, relevant, practised and tested in use—not reduced to attendance.
P2.5 · Competence leadership, supervision and workforce support
People carrying difficult responsibilities can obtain competent advice, supervision, backup and support.

Complete proposal: The detailed pack reorganises role coverage, safe response, boundaries, learning quality and technical support into five indicators; P2.5 remains proposed. Inspect the complete model.

P03

Policy, Governance & Accountability

5 working indicators

P3.1 · Written wellbeing policy
A current, accessible policy defines commitments and boundaries.
P3.2 · Leadership accountability
A governing or executive owner is answerable for delivery.
P3.3 · Adequate resources and delivery capacity
Financial, human and operational capacity make the commitments deliverable.
P3.4 · Athlete voice and policy review
Athletes shape provision and leadership closes the feedback loop.
P3.5 · Oversight, risk, corrective action and transparency
Leadership identifies weakness, acts on evidence and reports progress and limitations without exposing people.

Complete proposal: P3.5 would add oversight, risk, corrective action and transparency, subject to its boundary review with P5.4. Inspect the complete model.

P04

Crisis Response & Safeguarding

5 working indicators

P4.1 · Crisis response protocol
A documented, rehearsed protocol covers foreseeable crises.
P4.2 · Safeguarding officer and incident process
A trained officer owns a visible, non-retaliatory reporting process.
P4.3 · External crisis partnerships
Relationships with qualified external services are established.
P4.4 · Frontline and athlete readiness
Athletes know how to report; frontline staff know what to do.
P4.5 · Post-incident support, system learning and prevention
People receive protected follow-up, while incidents lead to corrective action, learning and recurrence prevention.

Approved architecture: P4.5 covers post-incident support, system learning and prevention. Inspect the complete model.

P05

Culture & Environment

5 working indicators

P5.1 · Psychological safety, openness and non-retaliation
Help-seeking, disagreement and protected feedback are safe from humiliation or unjustified disadvantage.
P5.2 · Dignity, inclusion and protection from harmful practices
Daily conduct prevents degrading, coercive, discriminatory and abusive practice before harm is normalised.
P5.3 · Workload, recovery and whole-person balance
Combined sporting and organisational demands are coordinated and overload can change decisions.
P5.4 · Transitions, injury and continuity of belonging
Entry, injury, relocation, deselection and retirement retain humane communication, continuity and support.
P5.5 · Climate assessment, feedback and continuous improvement
Protected and representative cultural evidence leads to visible system action without exposing individuals.

What happens next

The full requirement set must be challenged before it can govern anyone.

Clinical, safeguarding, legal and athlete experts must review wording, applicability, evidence and failure consequences. Council approval, consultation, translation control and version history come before formal awards open.

Help challenge the framework