This commentary is on the review by Verschuren et al. on pages 798–808 of this issue. Verschuren et al.1 have written a compelling article highlighting the importance of physical activity across the activity spectrum to address cardiovascular risk factors and muscle strength in children with cerebral palsy (CP). In addition to the health benefits of physical activity, it is clinically assumed that increasing fitness levels and muscle strength will translate into improvements in mobility and participation. For some children, this may be true; however, it is important to consider that engagement in an enjoyable physical activity program is participation. If the physical activity is enjoyable and meaningful to the child and family, participation is an important outcome in itself. Many families are focussed on psychosocial outcomes such as psychological well-being, socialization, inclusion, and participation in community activities. Participation in community physical activity programs, even if below the presumed therapeutic ‘dose’, may enable still families to achieve these goals. Verschuren et al.1 highlight the importance of long-term engagement in physical activity in order to sustain health benefits and the need for consideration of behaviour change strategies. This point raises an important question for rehabilitation professionals. What role should we play in facilitating sustainable physical activity for individuals with disabilities? In addition to the universal challenges associated with changing routines and behaviours, families with children with disabilities experience significant barriers to accessing community-based exercise programs. Families report poor accessibility, lack of knowledgeable trained staff who can adapt activities for children with disabilities, and attitudinal barriers.2 At a macro-level, advocates for the inclusion of individuals with disabilities can play a role in facilitating community change to encourage increased healthy behaviours for all children, including children with disabilities. Community-based guidelines for the inclusion of people with disabilities in healthy living activities can increase awareness of universal supports for inclusion. Communities can be encouraged to evaluate supports for facilitating the participation of individuals with disabilities in community programs. At a local level, the development of formal partnerships between rehabilitation and community-based fitness facilities can bridge the gap between hospitals and community by increasing awareness of access barriers and providing opportunities for families, therapists, and trainers collaboratively to develop safe, effective fitness programs.3 Finally, therapists can ensure that families are aware of the opportunities in their communities and work with families to explore programs and activities for their children. Given the breadth of family preferences regarding physical activity programs it is unlikely that a one-size-fits-all approach will be effective for long-term behaviour change. The authors point out the importance of applying knowledge about behaviour change when encouraging increased physical activity. A recent randomized controlled trial found that a 4-month physical activity program combined with motivational interviewing and home-based physical therapy did not increase the physical activity levels of children with CP compared to a regular therapy control group.4 Perhaps we need to focus more on the crucial role of psychosocial factors in decision-making regarding long-term participation in physical activity programs. Self-efficacy, a desire to be active, enjoyment of the activity, opportunities for fun and interaction, and feeling accepted as part of a group may influence the decision to engage in physical activity.5 All of these factors should be considered in multi-faceted strategies for encouraging increased physical activity. Thanks to Verschuren et al. for providing such a comprehensive and clinically relevant review of the literature on fitness for children CP.