Emphasising the economic impact of physical activity and sport – how it creates jobs, promotes growth and drives exports – is a fundamental part of our Towards an Active Nation strategy.
We want organisations to consider not just how they contribute to the nation’s health or wellbeing, but to the economy as well, both nationally and locally.
The evaluation tools featured on this page are designed to help measure the impact sport and physical activities can have on the population’s health and the economy. Each resource can be used by you as part of your wider case for retaining or securing additional investment in sport and physical activity.
What is MOVES?
Designed to be used by people within the sport and activity sector, MOVES is a tool that shows you the return on investment of projects, programmes and interventions for the health sector.
How does it work?
MOVES has been developed by us and the University of East Anglia’s Medical School Health Economics Consulting Group.Read more
At the heart of MOVES is an epidemiological engine – the study of the patterns, causes, and effects of health and disease – that contains UK data relating to population, age and gender, and the related disease rates for conditions that could be improved through sport and physical activity.
The tool compares groups that engage in physical activity with the same group as if they hadn’t taken part. It estimates the reduction in risk of seven long-term conditions and hip fracture from increased physical activity. The tool then assigns an economic value to the resulting health improvements created by the physical activity.
Are there different versions of MOVES?
The initial version of the tool was launched in September 2015, with version 2.0 of the tool (published in November 2016) featuring updated data sources and the latest evidence and economic analysis principles.Read more
We recommend that those who’ve downloaded and saved the original version of the tool delete that version and use MOVES 2.0 for all future modelling.
Due to the changes in functionality and the updating of the underlying principles in the tool, the outcomes from MOVES 1.0 and MOVES 2.0 are not comparable.