Why Government data is failing the sport and physical activity sector – By Spencer Moore, Chief Strategy Officer, CIMSPA
What if 91% of your sector was hidden in plain sight?
That’s the uncomfortable reality facing the UK’s sport and physical activity workforce today. Despite being a sector that makes a growing contribution to the UK economy, as well as being a vital partner in improving the nation’s health and wellbeing, and reducing economic inactivity, our sector remains largely invisible when you look at official government data.
Why is this you ask? It’s because the classification systems used to measure and report on economic, sectoral and workforce activity, known as Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) and Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) codes, are not fit for purpose when it comes to measuring our sector.
It’s important to recognise and understand the role that these classification have. This isn’t just a technical issue for statisticians because these codes have a crucial role in how sectors of industry are seen and perceived, how policy that impacts them is determined, and how they are funded.
What are SIC and SOC Codes and why do they matter?
SIC codes categorise businesses by their primary economic activity. SOC codes classify job roles across the workforce. Together, they form the structural backbone of how the UK government collects and interprets data on jobs, business activity, and economic growth.
These systems are used by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) and across Whitehall to:
- Measure GDP and sector-specific growth.
- Track employment trends and labour market performance.
- Shape funding and investment priorities.
- Forecast productivity and skills gaps.
- Monitor public health and social outcomes.
- Support industrial strategy and levelling-up efforts.
If a sector isn’t properly represented by these codes, it becomes invisible in the datasets that inform everything from NHS spending to apprenticeships policy. In short, if you’re not counted properly as a sector, you don’t count when it comes to government decision making.
A system frozen in time
It’s important to note that the last major update to SIC codes was in 2007 – almost 20 years ago. Take a moment to think about what has changed in that time. In societal, digital and economic terms, it is a completely different era.
The sport and physical activity sector has evolved dramatically in that time, blurring traditional industry lines (which weren’t that well defined in the first place) and embracing digital delivery, community health, and preventative wellness. However, the classifications and codes that describe us, and crucially that are used to measure us, have remained static.
This relevance of the classification issue is compounded by the fact that businesses self-select their codes, with little verification, which means that in the absence of a more relevant alternative, it’s common for physical activity organisations to fall under completely unrelated sectors, such as hospitality, tech, or retail. This means that the data becomes fragmented and unreliable, making it hard to understand the sector’s true footprint.
Within the classification for businesses, there are ‘not elsewhere classified’ categories. These are categories where a business that cannot identify a SIC code ‘home’ are placed. If you need an indication of why the current classifications don’t work, consider that there are almost three quarters of a million companies in the ‘not elsewhere classified’ categories – that’s around 15% of all businesses. It is at a scale where it can’t be overlooked as an administrative issue, it has to be acknowledged as a strategic failure and the consequences that it has need to be recognised.
The invisible 91%
Our sector is dominated by small and medium-sized enterprises which make up 91% of all businesses in our sector. Many of these operate outside traditional leisure or sports facilities. They’re embedded in workplaces, schools, healthcare settings, digital platforms, and local communities.
These organisations are often misclassified, and therefore their economic activity and contribution is missed entirely when the sector is being measured.
This also translates to the classification of professionals working in the sector. The prevalence of hybrid roles where, for example, a personal trainer is also coaching, teaching yoga and providing specialist support for pre-/post-natal clients, or a coach delivering rehab in clinical environments, is rarely captured accurately.
“Freelancers and hybrid workers form the backbone of the sector, yet current SOC codes do not capture the true scale or diversity of these roles.” — CIMSPA
What’s at stake
When classification codes don’t reflect the reality of the workforce or the businesses within it, the effects are wide-ranging and damaging.
For businesses:
- Missed funding opportunities – Grant programmes and investment schemes are often based on sector classification and unfortunately if you’re coded incorrectly, you’re excluded from eligibility.
- Policy blind spots – Economic support, business rates reform, and regulatory change frequently rely on sector-specific evidence that doesn’t include misclassified businesses.
- Ineffective business support – Local enterprise partnerships and growth hubs can’t design meaningful support without an accurate understanding of the sector’s size and needs.
For professionals:
- Lack of recognition – Career pathways and progression are harder to evidence and advocate for when job roles don’t appear in workforce statistics.
- Barriers to funding and training – Misaligned SOC codes impact access to skills funding, training subsidies, and apprenticeships.
- Poor strategic planning – Workforce development initiatives may target the wrong job families or miss key groups entirely.
For the sector as a whole:
- Under-representation in national strategies – From health to education to net zero, the sector’s contribution remains under-acknowledged in cross-government plans.
- Missed opportunities to scale – Without accurate data, the sector cannot fully evidence its economic impact or its role in prevention, recovery and community wellbeing.
- Increased risk during crises – During the COVID-19 pandemic, misclassified businesses and professionals found themselves excluded from key support schemes.
“The physical activity sector’s workforce goes undercounted and under-recognised due to misaligned national classification codes.” — ukactive
So, as you can see, invisibility comes at a cost, and its one that the sector, and the nation, can no longer afford to pay if we are to harness the full potential of physical activity on wellbeing, health, the economy and societal cohesion.
We’re not alone – other sectors left behind by the codes
The physical activity sector isn’t the only part of the UK economy being misrepresented by SIC and SOC codes.
Other modern, evolving industries face similar frustrations including:
- Creative industries – From gaming to digital production, many creative jobs straddle sectors and are hidden in vague classifications.
- Green and low-carbon jobs – Emerging green technologies and retrofitting roles don’t align neatly with legacy industrial codes.
- Wellness and lifestyle services – Hybrid roles in nutrition, holistic health, and corporate wellbeing are often classified under unrelated headings.
- Gig economy and digital platform work – The SOC system struggles to capture freelancers and tech-enabled service workers whose roles are fluid and non-traditional.
All of these sectors, like our own, are essential to the future economy and the government’s plans for growth, and all of them are calling for change.
Leading the change – what CIMSPA is doing
At CIMSPA, we believe the sector must take the lead in solving this problem because we can no longer afford to wait. There is an update to SIC codes due next year but it is expected to bring only minor changes and will not address the significant misclassification issues that are impacting our sector. Part of the issue with any changes to the UK classification system, is that it needs to align with international standards. This limits any changes that ONS makes to SIC and SOC.
Through the Sport and Physical Activity Workforce Observatory and CIMSPA Insight Hub, we are creating a new, more inclusive approach to workforce data. We’re working with universities, employers, and policymakers to build a clearer picture of our sector’s shape, scope, and contribution to the economy and society.
Central to this is our SAFE Principles Framework, which ensures that data is:
- Standardised – using consistent language and classifications
- Accessible – usable and shareable across organisations
- Federated – gathered from multiple trusted sources
- Ethical – underpinned by transparency, consent, and purpose
We’ve also published a Statement of Compliance with the UK Statistics Authority’s Code of Practice which ensures that our work is grounded in quality and credibility.
Let’s be counted
If we truly want to ‘connect the dots’ between economic growth, public health, and community wellbeing, then we must start by seeing the sector clearly.
That means fixing the outdated industry and workforce measuring systems that have kept the full extent and recognition of our work hidden for too long. The solution is investing in better workforce intelligence and supporting the sector-led initiatives, like the Sport and Physical Activity Workforce Observatory, that are already building a credible, ethical alternative.
This is not just a CIMSPA issue. It’s a whole-sector issue. One that affects our partners in education, health, active wellbeing, sport, private enterprise, and across local communities.
The time has come for our sector and its workforce to be seen, counted, and recognised for the impact we make every day, because we are not just a support sector, we are a solutions sector, and one that the country can’t afford to miscount any longer.