Inside the Olympic Safeguarding System

Games-Times Safeguarding said to be the most robust framework yet.

2014 Winter Olympics/ M. Smelter, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

A week from now, the Milano–Cortina 2026 Winter Olympic Games will begin.

For two weeks, nearly 2,900 athletes from more than 90 National Olympic Committees will live, train, compete, and socialize together across multiple Olympic Villages in Italy. While the Olympic Village operates under strict rules — including restrictions on access for family and friends and restrictions on alcohol, there have long been accounts of socializing and partying among athletes, particularly as competition schedules wind down.

The mixing of athletes from around the world is often described as one of the most memorable and enjoyable aspects of the Olympic Games. But athletes also arrive with vastly different ages, nationalities, languages, and life experiences — from teenagers attending their first global competition to veteran Olympians pursuing a final medal. That diversity, combined with shared housing, intense schedules, and the pressure of the world’s biggest sporting stage, also raises important questions about athlete safety and the systems in place to protect them.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) does not impose a universal minimum age for Olympic participation. Instead, age eligibility is set sport by sport by international federations, resulting in significant variation across disciplines. The Milano–Cortina games will have athletes as young as 15 and as old as 54.

That reality is one of the reasons safeguarding has become a growing focus of Olympic planning over the past decade.

So how does the International Olympic Committee design and execute a safeguarding plan to keep athletes safe during the Games?

Games-Time Safeguarding Framework

The IOC only introduced a formal Games-Time Safeguarding Framework starting at the Rio 2016 Summer Olympics.

That marked the first time the Olympic Movement implemented a dedicated, event-specific system designed to prevent and respond to harassment and abuse during the Games themselves. Alongside the framework, the IOC developed guidelines for National Olympic Committees and International Federations to establish their own safeguarding policies.

Ahead of the PyeongChang 2018 Winter Games, the IOC expanded this work by launching a safeguarding toolkit to help federations and national committees implement consistent prevention and reporting systems.

Since then, the Games-Time framework has been refined and expanded at each Olympic and Youth Olympic Games, responding to increased awareness of abuse in sport and criticism that athletes lacked independent, trusted avenues for help while at the Games.

Safeguarding Milano–Cortina 2026

At the centre of the IOC’s Games-Time approach is a support system intended to operate across the Olympic Villages.

One component is the presence of trained Safeguarding Officers employed by the IOC. These are subject-matter experts, internationally certified safeguarding professionals, and certified mental health first aiders. Their role, according to the IOC, is to implement prevention strategies, coordinate responses when concerns arise, and liaise with relevant stakeholders, including national delegations and international federations.

Alongside them are Welfare Officers.

Since Beijing 2022, the IOC has allocated a quota of Welfare Officer accreditations to National Olympic Committees (NOC). These individuals are typically nationally certified mental health practitioners or internationally certified safeguarding specialists. They serve as confidential, on-site points of contact for athletes and entourage members, providing support, advice, and referrals.

At the Paris 2024 Summer Olympics, there were more than 150 accredited Welfare Officers representing 74 national delegations, along with welfare focal points appointed by International Federations. For Milano–Cortina, each NOC delegation may have up to five Welfare Officers, depending on its size and how athletes are housed. According to the IOC, the exact numbers will only be known after the Games.

For athletes under 16, the IOC has introduced additional measures.

Since Tokyo 2020, National Olympic Committees have been eligible for chaperone accreditations to support younger athletes during the Games. These accreditations are designed to ensure minors have appropriate supervision and care while living in the Olympic Village. The IOC told Broken Ice that, for safeguarding reasons, details about how many chaperone accreditations — if any — have been issued, and for which sports or countries, are not publicly available.

Support spaces, hotlines, and online protections

Safeguarding at the Games is not limited to reporting mechanisms.

According to the IOC, each Olympic Village will include an Athlete365 Mind Zone — a dedicated space designed for rest, decompression, and confidential support. First piloted at Paris 2024, the IOC says the Mind Zones received strong feedback from athletes. For 2026, the IOC plans to add private consultation pods, allowing athletes and entourage members to speak discreetly with Safeguarding Officers.

Athletes will also have access to the Mentally Fit Helpline, a 24/7 confidential support service available in more than 70 languages. Introduced at the Tokyo 2020 Games, the helpline is designed to support both crisis situations and everyday stressors.

Online abuse is another area of focus.

All Olympic and Paralympic athletes at Milano–Cortina 2026 will be automatically enrolled in the IOC’s Cyber Abuse Protection System. The AI-powered system monitors social media in real time and works to identify and remove harmful content before it reaches athletes. First deployed at scale at Paris 2024, it was described by the IOC as the largest online abuse prevention program ever conducted in sport.

National Safe Sport Bodies

While the IOC oversees Games-Time safeguarding inside the Olympic Villages, some national sport-integrity bodies also play a role — and that role varies by country.

For U.S. athletes, the U.S. Center for SafeSport, the independent body that investigates abuse and misconduct in U.S. Olympic and Paralympic sport, confirmed to Broken Ice that they will have a physical presence at the Milano–Cortina Olympic and Paralympic Games. Center staff will be in Italy to receive reports of misconduct, coordinate with professionals in real time, assess and implement temporary measures when warranted, and communicate with affected parties as required or requested. The Center says its staff will work closely with the U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee and national governing bodies to respond to concerns in a trauma-informed way, with the stated goal of keeping athletes safe during the Games.

The approach for Canadian athletes will be different. Sport Integrity Canada, which oversees abuse and misconduct reporting and investigations in federally funded Canadian sport, will not have staff onsite at the Olympics or Paralympics. However, they told Broken Ice that its reporting and support services will remain available to all Canadian Olympians and Paralympians throughout both Games. In the lead-up to Milano–Cortina, Sport Integrity Canada says it worked with the Canadian Olympic Committee (COC) to help inform its onsite response to safe sport matters that may arise and says it will be on call to provide real-time support to the COC as needed.

The Limits of Olympic Safeguarding

The IOC’s Games-Time Safeguarding Framework represents a significant evolution from earlier Olympics, when athletes largely relied on their own federations or team officials for support.

Still, the framework has limits.

It operates during the Games themselves, over a short and intense period of time. Jurisdictional authority remains shared among the IOC, International Federations, National Olympic Committees, and, in some cases, external sport integrity bodies or national legal systems.

For athletes — particularly minors — navigating those systems can still be complex.

While the safeguarding structures in place are more robust than ever before, whether they are sufficient — and how effectively they work in practice — is a question that will continue well beyond the closing ceremony.