Understanding the Functional Movement Screen and Its Role in Off-Season Preparation

In elite and amateur sports alike, the off-season presents a critical window for rebuilding athletic capacity. Yet many athletes arrive at preseason training carrying unresolved movement dysfunctions that limit performance and heighten injury risk. A Functional Movement Screen (FMS) provides a systematic, evidence-based method to evaluate fundamental movement patterns, identify asymmetries, and determine whether an athlete is truly ready to progress into higher-intensity training. Rather than measuring strength or endurance, the FMS assesses how well an athlete can control their body through basic positions and transitions.

The FMS was developed by physical therapists Gray Cook and Lee Burton as a screening tool designed to bridge the gap between pre-participation physical exams and performance testing. It ranks movement quality on a standardized scale, giving coaches and medical staff actionable data to guide programming decisions. When deployed during the off-season, the FMS serves as a baseline assessment that informs corrective exercise strategies and monitors progress over time. For a deeper understanding of the origin and validation of the FMS system, explore the official Functional Movement Systems resource.

The Seven Core FMS Tests: A Detailed Breakdown

A standard FMS includes seven fundamental movement tests, each scored from zero to three. These tests are designed to place the athlete in positions where weaknesses, imbalances, and compensations become observable. Understanding each test in depth allows trainers to interpret results with greater precision and design interventions that target specific deficits.

Deep Squat

The deep squat challenges full-body mechanics, requiring mobility in the ankles, knees, hips, and thoracic spine alongside stability in the core and shoulders. The athlete begins with feet shoulder-width apart, holding a dowel overhead, then descends into a full squat. Common compensations include heels lifting, excessive forward lean, or the dowel drifting forward. A score of three requires the torso to remain upright, the dowel to stay over the feet, and the thighs to reach parallel or below. This test is particularly relevant for athletes in sports that demand lower-body power and trunk control, such as basketball, football, and weightlifting.

Hurdle Step

The hurdle step evaluates single-leg balance, hip mobility, and stability during a stepping motion. The athlete stands with feet together, toes touching the base of a hurdle set at tibial tuberosity height. They step over the hurdle with one leg, touch the heel to the floor, and return to the starting position without losing balance. The assessor watches for excessive trunk sway, wobbling, or raising of the stance foot. Poor results often indicate hip flexor tightness, weak gluteal stability, or poor proprioception. This test relates directly to gait mechanics and running efficiency.

In-Line Lunge

This test assesses hip and ankle mobility, quadriceps and hamstring flexibility, and core stability during a narrow-stance lunge. The athlete holds a dowel behind the back, contacting the sacrum and the cervical spine. They assume a lunge position with the rear knee touching a line drawn on the floor behind the front heel. Maintaining an upright torso is essential for a high score. Restrictions in hip extension or ankle dorsiflexion will produce visible compensations. The in-line lunge is a strong predictor of lower-extremity injury risk in field and court sports.

Shoulder Mobility

This test measures bilateral shoulder range of motion by having the athlete reach one arm over the shoulder and the other arm up the back, attempting to touch or overlap the fists. The distance between the fists is measured relative to hand length. Restrictions may indicate posterior capsule tightness, pectoral shortening, or scapular dyskinesis. Because overhead athletes frequently develop asymmetrical shoulder mobility, this test is essential for baseball, tennis, and volleyball players. A clearing exam known as the impingement test accompanies this movement to rule out pain.

Active Straight Leg Raise

The active straight leg raise tests hamstring flexibility and the ability to maintain pelvic stability while moving the leg. The athlete lies supine with arms at the sides and lifts one leg as high as possible while keeping the opposite leg flat on the ground. The assessor notes the angle of the lifted leg relative to the ground. A low score often correlates with posterior chain tightness or core instability. This test is especially important for athletes who rely on sprinting and kicking mechanics, as restricted hip flexion during high-speed running can lead to hamstring strains.

Trunk Stability Push-Up

This test evaluates core stability and shoulder girdle control in the sagittal plane. The athlete performs a push-up beginning in a prone position with hands placed at a specific width depending on the test level. Men start with thumbs at forehead height, women at chin height. A successful repetition requires the body to lift as one unit without sagging or arching. Scoring emphasizes movement symmetry and the ability to resist spinal buckling under load. A low score may indicate poor core recruitment, which compromises force transfer during running, jumping, and changing direction.

Rotary Stability

The rotary stability test challenges multi-plane trunk stability and neuromuscular coordination. The athlete begins in a quadruped position and lifts the same arm and leg simultaneously, bringing the elbow and knee together without losing balance. This motion requires rotational control of the spine and reflexive stability through the hips and shoulders. Difficulty performing this movement suggests poor dissociation between the upper and lower body, a trait associated with lower back pain and inefficient athletic movement. A clearing test for spinal flexion is performed beforehand to rule out pain.

Scoring the FMS: Turning Movement Quality Into Quantifiable Data

Each test receives a score of zero, one, two, or three according to strict criteria:

  • Three indicates that the movement is performed perfectly without any compensations.
  • Two means the movement is completed but with some form of compensation or deviation from the ideal pattern.
  • One signifies that the athlete cannot complete the movement or cannot assume the required position.
  • Zero is given if pain occurs anywhere during the test.

The maximum total score for the FMS is 21. Research indicates that athletes scoring 14 or below have a significantly higher likelihood of non-contact injury during the competitive season. As documented in a landmark study published in the North American Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, scores at or below the 14-point threshold predicted injury with moderate sensitivity and specificity in professional football players. The off-season is the ideal time to administer the screen because athletes are not under the pressure of daily competition, allowing for a clearer picture of their baseline movement quality. For a detailed review of FMS scoring norms across various populations, refer to the National Strength and Conditioning Association's summary.

Building Your Off-Season FMS Protocol: A Practical Guide

Selecting a Standardized Testing Environment

Consistency is paramount. The testing area should have adequate floor space, controlled lighting, and a flat surface. Mark the testing stations with tape or cones to ensure each athlete experiences identical conditions. Use the official FMS kit or an approved equivalent to guarantee that hurdle heights, dowel lengths, and measurement tools remain standardized across testing sessions.

Establishing an Assessment Schedule

For most off-season programs, two to three FMS assessments are sufficient. An initial screen at the beginning of the off-season establishes the baseline. A follow-up screen four to six weeks later measures the effectiveness of any corrective interventions. A final screen at the conclusion of the off-season provides pre-season clearance data and informs program design for the competitive block. If an athlete scores below 14 at the initial screen, consider re-testing every two to three weeks until scores improve.

Training Your Assessment Team

Inter-rater reliability is a known concern with the FMS. Anyone administering the screen should undergo formal training through the FMS certification course. At minimum, all assessors should practice scoring together using video examples until they achieve consistent results across trials. Using a two-assessor system where one directs the movement and the other records scores can reduce bias. Drift in scoring standards can be mitigated by reviewing video of challenging cases as a team every two weeks during the assessment period.

Preparing Athletes for Testing Day

Athletes should arrive hydrated and wearing clothing that does not restrict movement. They should avoid strenuous lower-body training for 24 hours prior to the screen. Brief them on the purpose of the FMS well in advance so they understand that this is not a competition but an evaluation of movement quality. Emphasize that honest, uncoached performance produces the most useful data. Perform a standardized warm-up of five minutes of light cardio and dynamic stretching before beginning the tests to reduce the influence of acute stiffness on scores.

Connecting FMS Results to Corrective Programming

The value of the FMS is not in the score itself but in how that score shapes subsequent training. An athlete scoring 14 or lower should not progress into high-intensity sport-specific training until their movement quality improves. Instead, they should follow a corrective exercise sequence based on their specific deficits.

Organizing Corrective Strategies by Pattern

Each FMS test corresponds to common movement dysfunctions with known corrective solutions:

  • Deep squat deficits often require ankle mobilization, thoracic extension drills, and hip hinge retraining.
  • Poor hurdle step performance typically responds to single-leg balance work, hip flexor stretching, and glute activation exercises.
  • Low shoulder mobility scores indicate a need for thoracic spine rotation drills, pec stretching, and scapular stabilization.
  • Trunk stability push-up failures suggest core bracing retraining and dead bug progressions.
  • Rotary instability responds well to quadruped bird-dog variations and anti-rotation exercises.

Group athletes with similar deficits into small training clusters within your off-season program. This allows for efficient coaching while still individualizing the corrective stimulus. As each athlete achieves a score of three on a given test, move them to maintenance work and shift attention to their next limitation.

Documenting Progress With Video Analysis

Still photos and written notes can capture only so much detail. Record video of each athlete performing their problematic tests during the initial screen and again at each re-test. Side-by-side comparisons of these clips provide powerful feedback for both the athlete and the coach. Seeing the improvement in their own movement often motivates athletes to adhere to corrective exercises more consistently. Store videos in a secure digital platform where they can be accessed during yearly comparisons to track long-term movement trends.

Sport-Specific Considerations for the Off-Season FMS

While the seven FMS tests are standardized, the interpretation of results and the corrective priorities should reflect the demands of each sport. A soccer player, a swimmer, and a golfer will each have different asymmetries that require different corrective emphases.

Field and Court Sports

Athletes in soccer, basketball, American football, and rugby rely heavily on lower-body power, agility, and multi-directional movement. Deficits in the in-line lunge, hurdle step, and rotary stability tests are especially concerning because they indicate poor control during cutting and landing mechanics. Off-season FMS scores in these populations should be linked to subsequent plyometric readiness assessments. An athlete with a deep squat score below two should not begin depth jumping or high-velocity change-of-direction drills until their squat mechanics improve.

Overhead and Throwing Athletes

Baseball, softball, tennis, volleyball, and javelin athletes frequently develop unilateral adaptations that create asymmetrical shoulder mobility and thoracic rotation. The shoulder mobility test often reveals a side-to-side discrepancy of two to three inches or more in this population. Corrective programming should prioritize restoring symmetrical shoulder extension capacity and strengthening scapular retractors. Off-season is the perfect time to address these imbalances because the reduced training volume allows for dedicated mobility work without compromising sport skill development.

Endurance Athletes

Runners, cyclists, and triathletes often present with excellent lower-body endurance but poor core stability and limited hip mobility. The trunk stability push-up and active straight leg raise tests frequently expose these weaknesses. Corrective work for endurance athletes should avoid adding fatigue that interferes with their cardio training. Instead, embed corrective exercises into warm-up circuits and dedicate 10 to 15 minutes post-session to mobility maintenance. The off-season, with its lower training volume, offers an opportunity to rebuild foundational movement without compromising race-specific training.

Common Pitfalls in FMS Implementation and How to Avoid Them

Even knowledgeable coaches can fall into traps that reduce the effectiveness of the FMS. Recognizing these pitfalls ahead of time saves frustration and preserves the integrity of the data.

Using the FMS as a Performance Test

The FMS is not a strength test or a conditioning challenge. Coaches who push athletes to achieve higher scores by coaching them into compensatory patterns miss the point entirely. If an athlete cannot perform a movement correctly without verbal cueing, their underlying movement deficit remains. Score the movement as it appears naturally on the first attempt, then use subsequent attempts to educate the athlete on their limitations.

Neglecting the Clearing Exams

Every test that includes a clearing exam, such as the shoulder impingement test and the spinal flexion test, must be performed. These exams determine whether an athlete receives a zero on the test due to pain. Skipping clearing exams invalidates the score and may allow an underlying injury to go undetected. Train your assessors to administer clearing exams immediately after the primary test, before the athlete leaves the station.

Overemphasizing the Total Score

While the 14-point cutoff has predictive validity, the total score can mask important asymmetries. An athlete with a score of 16 but a two-point difference between left and right sides on the hurdle step may be at higher risk than an athlete with a symmetric score of 13. Always analyze individual test scores and side-to-side differences before summarizing an athlete's readiness status. Use a dashboard or spreadsheet that flags asymmetries of one point or more as a priority intervention target.

Failing to Re-Test

A single FMS screen provides a snapshot, not a trend. Without re-testing, you cannot know whether your corrective program is working. Schedule re-tests at consistent intervals and use the same assessors and conditions each time to ensure comparability. If scores are not improving after four to six weeks of consistent corrective work, reassess your programming or consider a referral to a physical therapist.

Integrating the FMS Into a Broader Off-Season Assessment Battery

The FMS is most powerful when used as part of a comprehensive readiness assessment that includes other validated tools. Combining movement screening with performance testing and health history questionnaires gives a complete picture of each athlete.

Pairing FMS With Performance Tests

After establishing baseline movement quality, administer performance tests such as the 40-yard dash, vertical jump, broad jump, and pro-agility shuttle. Athletes with high FMS scores typically produce more reliable and symmetrical performance results. Conversely, low FMS scores often correlate with performance asymmetries that limit peak output. Use the performance data to prioritize which movement deficits are most limiting. For example, an athlete who scores low on rotary stability and also shows a large difference between left and right broad jump distances likely needs core and hip stability work more than pure strength training.

Incorporating Subjective Readiness Questionnaires

Not all readiness issues appear in movement screens. Fatigue, sleep quality, nutrition status, and mental health all affect an athlete's ability to train safely. Pair the FMS with an athlete-reported outcome measure such as the Recovery-Stress Questionnaire or the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index. If an athlete scores poorly on both the FMS and a subjective wellness tool, consider adjusting their training load and addressing lifestyle factors before pushing corrective exercises.

Referring When Necessary

When an athlete scores zero on any FMS test due to pain, or when scores fail to improve after eight weeks of structured corrective training, refer them to a sports medicine professional. The FMS is a screening tool, not a diagnostic instrument. Persistent pain or entrenched dysfunction may indicate a structural issue that requires manual therapy, imaging, or a more detailed clinical assessment. Maintain a list of trusted physical therapists and athletic trainers who can accept referrals from your program.

Real-World Application: A Case Study Example

Consider a college soccer player entering the off-season after a spring competitive season. Her initial FMS total score is 12, with notable deficits in the deep squat (score of one) and the in-line lunge (score of one on the left leg, two on the right). She also shows a two-inch asymmetry in shoulder mobility. During the screening, she reports no pain but admits to occasional lower back tightness following long training sessions.

Her corrective program focuses on three priorities: ankle and hip mobility to improve the deep squat, left-leg stability and hip flexor mobility to resolve the lunge asymmetry, and thoracic rotation drills to normalize shoulder mobility. She performs these exercises as a warm-up before her strength sessions and as a cool-down afterward. Four weeks later, her re-test total score rises to 15. The deep squat improves to a score of two, the left in-line lunge reaches a two, and shoulder asymmetry reduces to one inch. At the eight-week mark, she scores a 17 and is cleared to progress into full preseason training. Her lower back tightness resolves as her squat and lunge mechanics improve.

This scenario illustrates how the FMS transforms subjective concerns into objective targets, allowing coaches to track progress with real data rather than guesswork.

Final Recommendations for Off-Season FMS Deployment

The off-season presents a rare opportunity to prioritize movement quality without the competing demands of a competitive schedule. To maximize the value of your FMS program:

  • Administer the screen within the first two weeks of the off-season to establish a baseline before any structured training begins.
  • Use a standardized scoring protocol and invest in assessor training to ensure reliable results year after year.
  • Link every low-scoring test to a specific corrective intervention rather than applying generic mobility or stability work.
  • Re-test at regular intervals to gauge progress and adjust programming as athletes improve.
  • Combine FMS data with performance metrics and subjective wellness scores for a holistic view of readiness.
  • Maintain records across seasons to identify recurring patterns in individual athletes or team-wide trends that may indicate systemic issues in training design.

When implemented with discipline and interpreted with nuance, the FMS transforms the off-season from a period of passive recovery into an active phase of foundational development. Athletes who enter preseason camp with symmetrical, pain-free movement patterns are better equipped to handle the physical demands of competition and are less likely to suffer non-contact injuries. By assessing readiness early and intervening thoughtfully, coaches and trainers fulfill their primary responsibility: keeping athletes on the field and performing at their best when it matters most. For additional guidance on integrating movement screening into athletic development, the NSCA's resource library offers practical implementation strategies that complement the material covered here.