REPORT OF THE
NCAA DIVISION I ACADEMICS/ELIGIBILITY/COMPLIANCE CABINET
1. ACTION ITEMS.
· Legislative – Requests for Legislative Action at the July NCAA Division I Management Council Meeting. (See Attachment A for the full text of the proposals forwarded to the Management Council as noncontroversial legislation.)
(1) NCAA Proposal No. 2005-38 (Executive Regulations – Eligibility for Championships – Individual Eligibility – NCAA Division I Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement Representative).
(a) Recommendation.
The NCAA Division I Academics/Eligibility/
Compliance Cabinet unanimously recommends that the Management Council adopt
noncontroversial legislation to eliminate the requirement that the faculty
athletics representative from an institution hosting an NCAA championship serve
as a temporary member of the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement and be
responsible for representing the cabinet during the time of the
championship.
(b) Rationale. Currently, the chair of the committee may designate the faculty athletics representative of the host institution to serve as a temporary, additional member and require the faculty athletics representative to notify the chair of any eligibility problems that may arise during the championship. This bylaw was intended to establish a system to address emergency eligibility situations during a championship. The bylaw, however, has not been used in recent years because committee members have been and continue to be available in emergency eligibility situations. Therefore, eliminating the bylaw promotes consistency and as well as the cabinet's efforts to deregulate the manual and streamline the student-athlete reinstatement process.
(c) Budget Impact. None.
(2) Proposal No. 2005-39 (Committees – Term of Office – Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement).
(a) Recommendation. The cabinet unanimously recommends that the Management Council adopt noncontroversial legislation with an immediate effective date to specify that the term of office for members of the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement begins on the first day of July following the member's appointment.
(b) Rationale. The Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement meets each June. However, the current legislation requires that a committee member's term of office starts (and therefore concludes) June 1. This timeframe prevents a committee member who is completing his or her term from attending the spring meeting in his or her final year of service. The loss of such committee members creates an inefficient disruption in the committee's progress and transition. Moving the start and end date of the term of office to July 1 will increase efficiency and allow a smoother transition for committee members.
(c) Budget Impact. None.
(3) Proposal No. 2005-23 (Eligibility – Hardship Waiver and Season-of-Competition Waiver).
(a) Recommendation. The cabinet unanimously recommends that the Management Council adopt noncontroversial legislation to permit the use of either completed or scheduled contests, whichever is more beneficial to the student-athlete, when administering hardship and season-of-competition waivers. [Note: This proposal was initially referred to as Proposal No. 2005-9 in the February 2005 Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet report.]
(b) Rationale. At
its February meeting, the Academics/
Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet sponsored this proposal as legislation for the
2005-06 legislative cycle. Further discussion at the cabinet's June
meeting revealed reasons that the proposal should be forwarded to the Management
Council for consideration as noncontroversial legislation during its July 2005
meeting. The proposal is noncontroversial as it seeks to remedy an
inconsistency between various waivers using scheduled or completed
contests. Moreover, if it remains in the regular legislative cycle, the
Management Council would not consider this legislation, which will benefit
student-athletes, until January 2006. Lastly, in the interim, the
Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement has instructed the staff to grant all
waivers that meet the requirements of this proposed change.
(c) Budget Impact. None.
(4) Proposal No. 2005-40 (Eligibility – Full-Time Enrollment – Wavier).
(a) Recommendation. The cabinet unanimously recommends the Management Council adopt noncontroversial legislation to permit the NCAA Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet Subcommittee on Continuing Eligibility to review requests to waive the full-time enrollment requirement for competition and practice, excluding those waivers specifically designated to another authority (e.g., conference office, Management Council).
(b) Rationale. Currently, the NCAA Division I Management Council Administrative Review Subcommittee processes requests to waive the full-time enrollment requirement for competition and/or practice. These requests, however, are predominantly academic in nature. The primary purpose of the Subcommittee on Continuing Eligibility is to monitor and, when warranted, waive academic legislation. As such, the subcommittee is a more appropriate governance entity to review requests to waive the full-time enrollment requirement. The cabinet recommends that the proposal be adopted as noncontroversial legislation because the modification is merely a procedural change and would not impact competitive or recruiting equity. Further, because such waiver requests are small in number and the necessary supporting information will not change, the proposal does not financially impact the Association or the membership. This proposal will likely receive broad support from the membership, as the Subcommittee on Continuing Eligibility is authorized to grant waivers for an indefinite period of time (e.g., beyond an academic year or particular playing season), but the Administrative Review Subcommittee may only authorize relief for one to two academic years before encouraging a legislative change. The continued availability of this waiver will positively impact those student-athletes deserving of relief and it will not negatively impact the effect of the new Division I academic standards (initial and continuing eligibility).
(c) Budget Impact. None.
(5) Proposal No. 2005-41 (Membership – Conditions and Obligations of Membership – Student-Athlete Statement – Required Signatures).
(a) Recommendation. The cabinet unanimously recommends that Management Council adopt noncontroversial legislation to eliminate the requirement that the athletics director and head coach in the sport in which the student-athlete participates, sign each student-athlete statement as required by the prescribed form.
(b) Rationale. Currently, the NCAA Student-Athlete Affirmation of Eligibility Form satisfies the NCAA Constitution 3.2.4.6.1 requirement that the athletics director and head coach sign each student-athlete statement. However, Constitution 3.2.4.3 specifies that each active member is responsible for certifying the eligibility of student-athletes under the terms of the constitution, bylaws or other legislation of the Association before permitting a student-athlete to represent the institution in intercollegiate competition. As such, it is redundant and unnecessary to require the athletics director and head coach to sign both the affirmation of eligibility and the student-athlete statement. In lieu of the affirmation of eligibility form, the head coach could sign the squad list form. This act would satisfy the requirements of Constitution 3.2.4.3, while eliminating the additional paperwork (i.e., the affirmation of eligibility form) for institutions and streamline one aspect of the certification process.
(c) Budget Impact. Reduces costs related to the additional form(s).
(6) Proposal No. 2005-42 (Administrative Regulations – Recruiting Calendars – Women's Volleyball).
(a) Recommendation. The cabinet unanimously recommends that the Management Council adopt noncontroversial legislation to amend the women's volleyball recruiting calendar to establish quiet periods from January 1 to the Friday prior to Martin Luther King Day and from May 1 to the Friday prior to Memorial Day.
(b) Rationale. After receiving information from the American Volleyball Coaches Association (AVCA), the cabinet withdrew its initial support of Proposal No. 2004-87, which made several changes to the current women's volleyball calendar. Recently, the AVCA provided the cabinet with additional information that supports the additional quiet periods as being more beneficial to both the coaches and prospective student-athletes.
(c) Budget Impact. Minimal.
2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS.
a. Legislative – Response to Management Council Referral for Clarification of Intent of Pending Proposals.
· Proposal No. 2003-122 (Eligibility – Seasons of Competition – Partial Qualifier and Nonqualifier). This proposal would permit the Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet to grant a fourth season of competition to a partial qualifier or nonqualifier based on objective evidence of circumstances that warrant a waiver of the normal application of the regulation. At its April meeting, the Management Council referred the proposal to the cabinet for more direction regarding the waiver criteria given the adoption of Proposal No. 2004-53 (eligibility – seasons of competition – nonqualifier), which permits a nonqualifier to participate in a fourth season of competition, provided he or she completes 80 percent of the designated degree program prior to his or her fifth year of collegiate enrollment. Proposal No. 2004-53 did not implement the requested change in Proposal No. 2003-122, which is to permit the Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet to grant a fourth season of competition to a partial qualifier or nonqualifier based on objective evidence of circumstances that warrants a waiver of the normal application of the regulation. As such, a student-athlete who fails to achieve the 80 percent standard would still seek relief from the Administrative Review Subcommittee. As stated in the rationale of Proposal No. 2003-122, the Administrative Review Subcommittee acknowledges that it lacks expertise in matters that involve continuing-eligibility issues and has requested the subcommittee provide guidance for its deliberations on waiver requests of Bylaw 14.3.3.1 when a student-athlete has not completed requirements for graduation. It is more appropriate to establish a waiver process whereby the Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet has the authority to hear such requests for a waiver of Bylaw 14.3.3.1 when the student-athlete has not completed his or her baccalaureate degree requirements. Accordingly, the cabinet requests that the Management Council adopt Proposal No. 2003-122. The cabinet noted that the subcommittee will continue to review all waiver requests by applying the intent of the legislation and holding these student-athletes to high, yet fair, review standards.
b. Legislative – Cabinet Sponsored Proposals Scheduled for Initial Consideration in January 2006 and Final Consideration in April 2006. (The full text of these proposals, including rationale statements, may be accessed through the LSDBi and will appear in the NCAA Division I Publication of Proposed Legislation and the NCAA Division I Official Notice.)
(1) Proposal No. 2005-43 (Amateurism – Involvement with Professional Teams – Draft List – Men's Ice Hockey Exception). The cabinet agreed to expand its previously sponsored legislation to permit any enrolled student-athlete in men's ice hockey to enter a professional league's draft one time during his collegiate career without jeopardizing eligibility in that sport. Under the NHL's policy, all men's ice hockey student-athletes who are 19 years of age or older, including those attending a collegiate institution, are automatically considered for the draft without opting in and NHL teams retain the players draft rights until 30 days subsequent to the student-athlete's collegiate graduation. Also, under specified circumstances the NHL now allows players 18 years of age to "opt-in." Under NCAA legislation, prior to enrolling in college a prospective student-athlete may "opt-in" to the NHL draft, be drafted and then enroll and participate in NCAA intercollegiate ice hockey, provided he did not sign a contract with a professional team or agent. However, the current legislation prohibits a student-athlete who is not 19 years old "to-opt in" to the NHL draft subsequent to full-time collegiate enrollment. Therefore, the group of 17- to 19-year old men's ice hockey student-athletes are the only group of men's ice hockey student-athletes not afforded the opportunity to determine their draft status without jeopardizing their college eligibility. The Administrative Review Subcommittee approved a waiver consistent with this legislative proposal. Finally, this is a student-athlete well-being initiative that is supported by the Division I men's ice hockey coaches and ice hockey conference commissioners.
(2) Proposal No. 2005-44 (Financial Aid – Terms and Conditions of Awarding Institutional Financial Aid – Renewals and Nonrenewals – Institutional Obligation). The cabinet sponsored legislation to require institutions to send notifications of renewal, nonrenewal or reduction of athletics aid to student-athletes within two weeks of the last day of finals of the academic year, or within one week of the end of the institution's championship segment, including postseason participation (if any), whichever is later. Further, to specify that for individual sports, the one-week period shall begin for the entire team when the championship segment has ended for all student-athletes. In many cases, the July 1 notification date is too late for a student-athlete to make decisions related to possible transfers or to arrange for other financial sources. This proposal is a student-athlete well-being initiative that allows coaches ample time to make decisions related to financial aid allocations and will require institutions to provide more timely notification to student-athletes.
(3) Proposal No. 2005-45
(Financial Aid – Terms and Conditions of Awarding Institutional Financial
Aid – Hearing
(4) Proposal No. 2005-46 (Financial Aid – Elements of Financial Aid – Summer Financial Aid and Enrolled Student-Athletes). The cabinet sponsored legislation to eliminate the requirements that a student-athlete must receive athletically related financial aid during the previous academic year in order to receive summer financial aid and that such summer aid must be awarded in proportion to the amount of athletically related financial aid the student-athlete received during the previous academic year. Deregulation of the administration of summer school financial aid will allow student-athletes to use summer school as a time to advance their academic pursuits. Further, given the new progress-toward-degree requirements, more student-athletes may need to attend summer school. Finally, the cabinet noted that an institution may use the Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund to finance summer school, thus lessening the competitive/recruiting equity issues. [Six opposed]
(5) Proposal No. 2005-47
(Financial Aid – Elements of Financial Aid –
(6) Proposal No. 2005-48 (Financial Aid – Elements of Financial Aid – Determination of Off-Campus Room and Board Costs). The cabinet sponsored legislation to permit an institution to calculate off-campus room and board costs based on its policies and procedures for calculating the cost of attendance for students generally. Currently, an institution may use the average of the room costs for all students living on campus (based on a weighted average for all students who reside in on-campus facilities) to calculate the off-campus room costs. To determine off-campus board costs, the institution may provide a student-athlete living in noninstitutional facilities with the equivalent of a 7-day or 21-meal plan at that institution. This proposal allows an institution to continue to use the current methods or to use the calculation for the cost of attendance figure for students generally. In instances in which off-campus room and board costs may be higher than on-campus costs, this proposal will allow flexibility to alleviate the financial burden on student-athletes who reside off campus. [Nine opposed]
(7) Proposal No. 2005-49 (Eligibility – Progress Toward Degree – Nontraditional Courses). The cabinet sponsored legislation to permit the use of nontraditional courses (e.g., distance-learning and correspondence courses) completed at institutions other than a student-athlete's certifying institution to meet the 24/36 credit-hour and/or percentage-of-degree requirements, provided the courses satisfy the current legislation on distance-learning courses, receive prior approval by the appropriate academic officials from the certifying institution, and are accepted by the certifying institution for degree credit. A student-athlete should be permitted to use nontraditional courses that are accepted by the institution and satisfy graduation requirements for all students. Further, this proposal will eliminate the need for institutions to determine whether these hours are earned during a particular term or during the regular academic year. Because the annual and term credit-hour requirements are intended to ensure that a student-athlete is earning academic credit during the regular academic year at the certifying institution, such courses cannot be used to satisfy the 18/27 and six credit-hour requirements. [Note: This proposal will not change the current legislation for nontraditional courses completed at the certifying institution.] [Nine opposed]
(8) Proposal No. 2005-50
(Eligibility – Progress Toward Degree – Certification of
Grade-Point-Average Requirement – Transfer Student-Athletes). The
cabinet sponsored legislation to require a transfer student-athlete to satisfy
the applicable grade-point-average requirement at the end of his or her first
full-time term in residence at the certifying institution. Currently, an
institution must certify that each continuing student-athlete who enrolled in
collegiate institution satisfies the applicable grade-point-average requirement
beginning with his or her second year of collegiate enrollment and each term
thereafter. However, a
transfer student-athlete who initially enrolled full-time on or after August 1,
2003, is not subject to the grade-point-average requirement unless he or she is
a midyear transfer, has completed one academic year in residence or has used a
season of competition a the certifying institution. The result of this
application is that a transfer student-athlete is held to a lesser standard
than a student-athlete who is a continuing at the certifying institution.
Requiring a transfer student-athlete to achieve the applicable
grade-point-average requirement after one term of residence at the certifying
institution is consistent with the grade-point-average standard for continuing
student-athletes. Further, as evidenced by research data, this
requirement will place the student-athlete in a better position to reach
graduation within the desired five-year period. [Note: This
proposal does not change the grade-point-average requirements for transfer student-athletes
who enrolled at a collegiate institution prior to
(9) Proposal No. 2005-51
(Eligibility – Transfers – Credit-Hour Requirements). The
cabinet sponsored legislation to require a "
(10) Proposal No. 2005-52 (Eligibility – Five-Year Clock – Transfer Status and Progress Toward Degree). The cabinet sponsored legislation to specify that being registered for a full-time course load on the first day of classes starts the five-year period of eligibility, as well as transfer status at the certifying institution and responsibility for the progress-toward-degree requirements. Currently, there are different "triggers" for the start of a student-athlete's five-year "clock", responsibility for progress-toward-degree requirements and conditions affecting transfer status. This proposal creates a uniform standard for applying each of those eligibility rules. Registering for classes as a full-time student and remaining registered as of the first day of classes at an institution demonstrates an intent to be a student-athlete at that institution. As such, the student-athlete should become subject to the start of his or her five-year clock, progress-toward-degree requirements and transfer status at that time. Further, a student-athlete who is enrolled full time prior to the first day of classes should not be able to avoid these rule applications by simply departing campus on the first day of classes. Finally, a single standard will result in less confusion and promote consistency in the application of these rules. [7 opposed]
(11) Proposal No. 2005-53 (Eligibility – Full-time Enrollment – Graduate Program). The cabinet sponsored legislation to specify that in order to represent an institution in intercollegiate competition, a graduate student-athlete must be enrolled full time as determined by the institution for all graduate students in that program. Currently, to participate in intercollegiate competition, a graduate student-athlete must be enrolled in a minimum of eight credit hours. However, some institutions define full-time enrollment in a graduate program as less than eight credit hours. As a result, some graduate student-athletes are forced to enroll in additional graduate courses for the sole purpose of meeting the NCAA eligibility legislation. This practice can negatively impact the student-athlete's academic progress within the graduate program. Further, information reviewed by the cabinet indicates that certain graduate programs can be more academically rigorous than undergraduate programs. As such, the appropriate balance of coursework hours should be determined by the academic parties at each institution who make such determinations for all students, not the NCAA.
(12) Proposal No. 2005-54
(Eligibility – Graduate Student/
Postbaccalaureate Participation – Transfer Eligibility. The
cabinet sponsored legislation to eliminate the requirement that in order to be
immediately eligible at the certifying institution a transfer student-athlete
who is enrolled in a graduate or professional school must meet the one-time
transfer requirement. This proposal would allow a student-athlete to
enroll in a graduate program at an institution other than the one from which he
or she earned a four-year degree and be immediately eligible for intercollegiate
competition, provided the graduate student has remaining eligibility. A
student-athlete who earned his or her undergraduate degree has achieved the
primary goal of graduation and should be permitted to choose a graduate school
that meets both his or her academic and athletics interests, regardless of his
or her previous transfer history.
(13) Proposal No. 2005-55
(Eligibility –
(14) Proposal No. 2005-56
(Eligibility – Five-Year Clock – Military/
Church Mission Service Exception). The cabinet sponsored
legislation to reduce the service commitment necessary to use the military
service/church mission exception to the transfer residency requirement from 18
to 12 months. Currently, this exception applies only to those
student-athletes whose active duty or church mission assignment was 18 months
or longer. Student-athletes who perform military or church service for a
period of 12 to 17 months are not eligible for the exception, and, as a result,
are required to serve a year in residency before competing for the certifying
institution (unless another transfer exception can be applied). The 18-month
requirement is an arbitrary assessment and exceeds the standard one-year
residency model for other transfer legislation. A student-athlete who
performs duties involving in military or mission service should not be held to
a different eligibility standard than his or her counterparts who may have
enlisted or registered for a slightly longer service commitment.
(15) Proposal No. 2005-57
(Eligibility – Definition –
(16) Proposal No. 2005-58 (Eligibility – High-School All-Star Games, Effects on Eligibility). The cabinet sponsored legislation to eliminate the current restrictions on participation in high-school football or basketball all-star contests. The current legislation regarding a senior prospect's participation in high-school all-star games is overreaching in its application, as it attempts to regulate the scholastic athletics activities of prospective student-athletes while enrolled in high school. In addition, there are no valid reason(s) for treating football and basketball different from all other sports that may conduct all-star events during the high-school academic year. Additionally, the Association has opted not to preclude a prospective student-athlete from participating on Amateur Athletic Union, club or other teams during the prospect's academic year, and these events also may result in missed class time. This proposal deregulates and brings consistency to restrictions regarding participation in high school all-star contests.
(17) Proposal No. 2005-59
(Eligibility – Transfer – Midyear Enrollee – Basketball).
The cabinet sponsored legislation to permit midyear "2-4"
or "
(18) Proposal No. 2005-60 (Eligibility – Progress Toward Degree – Hours Earned or Accepted for Degree Credit). The cabinet sponsored legislation to permit a student-athlete in his or her first two years of collegiate enrollment to use all credits acceptable toward any degree program at the certifying institution. Currently, once a student-athlete declares a degree program, an institution may use only courses that count toward the declared degree program to certify progress-toward-degree requirements. This legislation has resulted in treating those student-athletes who choose to declare a degree during the first two years of college differently than those who wait until they are required to do so by NCAA legislation. In practice, the current legislation encourages a student-athlete to not declare a degree program in the first two years in order to avoid being "penalized" if he or she decides to take courses outside of that program. This occurrence is an unintended consequence and has led to problems with academic advisement and scheduling that can be eliminated with the proposed change. [Eight opposed]
(19) Proposal No. 2005-61 (Eligibility – Exception – Prior Approval of Summer Courses Taken at Other Institutions). The cabinet sponsored legislation to eliminate the need for a student-athlete to receive prior approval of summer courses completed at other institutions to use the credits to meet progress-toward-degree requirements. The current legislation requiring prior approval of summer courses is unnecessary, as most institutions have internal policies and procedures requiring student-athletes to receive approval for any course to be completed at another institution for transferable credit. In other words, the original concerns that resulted in the current prior approval requirement are addressed by institutional requirements. Further, waiver requests reviewed by the staff for student-athletes who did not receive prior approval are consistently granted. The removal of the prior approval requirement will result in less paperwork for institutions and will eliminate a potential delay in the certification of a student-athlete's eligibility. [Nine opposed]
(20) Proposal No. 2005-62 (Eligibility – Progress-Toward-Degree Rule – Exceptions – Nonrecruited, Nonparticipant). The cabinet sponsored legislation to permit a transfer student-athlete to qualify for the nonrecruited, nonparticipant exception to the progress-toward-degree rule during his or her initial season of eligibility at the certifying institution. Currently, the nonrecruited, nonparticipant exception to the progress-toward-degree requirements is available only to those student-athletes who have completed one year in residency at the certifying institution. This residency year requirement, however, predates the adoption of the new progress-toward-degree legislation, which applies to both continuing and transfer student-athletes. In other words, under the new progress-toward-degree legislation, transfer student-athletes must meet credit-hour requirements similar to those of continuing student-athletes. Because transfer student-athletes are now required to satisfy the credit-hour requirements, they should have access to any exceptions that may apply to those rules.
(21) Proposal No. 2005-63 (Administrative Regulations – Women's Basketball Event Certification). The cabinet sponsored legislation to establish additional guidelines, as specified, to strengthen the process for certifying basketball events in which Division I women' basketball coaches are permitted to evaluate prospective women's basketball student-athletes. In order for a women's basketball event to be certified under Bylaw 30.18: (1) the event (and any team participating in the event) must not be operated or managed by any individual or agency involved in the marketing of any individual's athletics reputation or ability; (2) the event (and any team participating in the event) may not receive financial support from any individual or agency involved in marketing any individual's athletics reputation or ability or any representatives of an NCAA member institution's athletics interests that is assisting or has assisted in the recruiting process; and (3) individuals involved in coaching activities must have been approved in accordance with guidelines established by the NCAA basketball certification staff. This proposal will broaden the application of the current criteria for men's basketball certified events to include women's events as well. The criterion for the men's events was aimed at eliminating external influences in the recruitment of prospective basketball student-athletes. Recent history demonstrates an increased involvement of convicted felons or sports agents as coaches of prospective student-athletes. In addition, agent involvement with the administration of women's events appears to be increasing. In an effort to eliminate the negative impact of such involvement on women's basketball, the women's certification legislation should mirror that of the men's.
(22) Proposal No. 2005-64 (Amateurism – Promotional Activities – Media Activities). The cabinet sponsored legislation to remove the 30-mile radius limitation for the receipt of legitimate and normal expenses by a student-athlete for appearances or participation in media activities related to intercollegiate athletics that occur during the playing season; further, to specify that a student-athlete participating in such activities may not miss class. The "30-mile radius rule" is arbitrary and unnecessary. It is in the spirit of deregulation and student-athlete well-being to eliminate this mileage limitation and allow the institution, at its discretion, to monitor the types of media activities in which its student-athletes participate, provided the student-athletes do not miss class.
(23) Proposal No. 2005-65 (Amateurism – General Regulations – Amateur Status if Professional in another Sport). The cabinet sponsored legislation to permit a student-athlete who is a professional in one sport and an amateur in another sport to receive institutional financial assistance in the amateur sport. Many professional athletes receive limited earnings despite achieving the title of "professional." Not all professional athletes earn sufficient income to fund their college education and therefore, such student-athletes should not be prohibited from earning financial aid while competing as an amateur in a different sport. [Six opposed]
(24) Proposal No. 2005-66 (Amateurism – Definitions and Applications – Student-Athlete). The cabinet sponsored legislation to revise the definition of a student-athlete by removing the condition that a student-athlete is any student whose enrollment was solicited by a member of the athletics staff or other representative of athletics interests with a view toward the student's ultimate participation in the intercollegiate athletics program. This proposal will reduce the number of individuals who trigger student-athlete status without ever participating in athletics. This proposal does not change any other factor of the current definition and a student who reports for an intercollegiate squad practice that is under the jurisdiction of the athletics department still will be considered a student-athlete under Division I legislation.
(25) Proposal No. 2005-67 (Amateurism – Promotional Activities – Permissible – Continuation of Modeling and Other Nonathetically Related Promotional Activities after Enrollment). The cabinet sponsored legislation to remove the condition that a student-athlete's involvement in modeling activities must be initiated prior to his or her enrollment at a member institution. Currently, an individual who initiates modeling activities prior to collegiate enrollment at a member institution is permitted to continue modeling, provided the remaining conditions of the bylaw are met. A student-athlete who has the opportunity to model after collegiate enrollment should not be viewed differently than a student-athlete who participated in these activities prior to collegiate enrollment, provided he or she satisfies the specified criteria. This proposal expands that criteria and would permit involvement to include modeling done both prior and subsequent to enrollment at a collegiate institution.
(26) Proposal No. 2005-68 (Amateurism – Promotional Activities – Permissible – Educational Products Related to Sport-Skill Instruction). The cabinet sponsored legislation to permit a student-athlete to receive actual and necessary expenses for participation in activities involving educational products. This proposal will permit student-athletes to receive actual and necessary expenses for participating in the development of educational products relating to sport-skill instruction, which is similar to current legislation permitting student-athlete to receive expenses for participation in promotional and media activities.
(27) Proposal No. 2005-69 (Amateurism – Financial Donations from Outside Organization – Nonprofessional Sports Organizations – Individual Athletics Performance). The cabinet sponsored legislation to permit an institution to accept funds donated from a nonprofessional sports organization based on an individual's national or regional ranking. This proposal will extend the current permissive legislation regarding donations to institutions from a nonprofessional sports organization to include both individual and team sport athletes. As such, it will further the Association's efforts to treat all student-athletes consistently regardless of whether they are participating in a team or individual sport.
(28) Proposal No. 2005-70 (Recruiting – Tryouts – Local Sports Clubs). The cabinet sponsored legislation to permit prospective student-athletes, who reside outside the 50-mile radius, to participate in a local sports club provided the institution documents that the club is the closest opportunity for the student-athlete to participate in the sport. Since June 2000, the majority of Administrative Review Subcommittee waiver requests have been granted with respect to prospects who reside outside a 50-mile radius of the institution and have no other participation opportunity than the institution's local sports club. It is in the best interest of the prospect to be involved with such clubs, provided that the institution verifies the club team is indeed the closest opportunity for such participation.
(29) Proposal No. 2005-71 (Recruiting – Transportation – Unofficial Visit). The cabinet sponsored legislation to permit an institution to provide local transportation for a prospect to attend a home athletics contest during an unofficial visit. Currently, an institution is permitted to transport prospects to institutional facilities and practice or competition sites located within a 30-mile radius and it is logical to apply the same standard for competition. Further, such transportation should be consistent with transportation provided during an official visit.
(30) Proposal No. 2005-72
(Recruiting – Tryouts – Competition Against Prospects).
The cabinet sponsored legislation to preclude an institution from
participating in a contest in any sport against an established outside team
that includes high-school prospects, except for permissible foreign tour
competition, exempted contests against a foreign team in the
(31) Proposal No. 2005-73 (Recruiting – Tryouts – Nonscholastic-Based Basketball). The cabinet sponsored legislation to permit an institution's coach to participate in coaching activities involving nonscholastic-based basketball teams of the opposite gender from which he or she coaches. This proposed change would permit a coach to work with a different gender in a local sports club. For example, a men's head or assistant basketball coach could work with his daughter's nonscholastic basketball team and a women's head or assistant basketball coach could work with his/her son's nonscholastic basketball team. Such involvement does not provide a recruiting advantage to the institution and permits coaches to spend more time with their families and children.
(32) Proposal No. 2005-74 (Recruiting – Tryouts – Developmental Clinics). The cabinet sponsored legislation to eliminate the legislation relating to developmental clinics. The current legislation defining a development clinic is an exception to the tryout legislation and was adopted at a time when camps and clinics were not open to senior prospects in any sport. Given that the camps and clinics legislation is now worded broadly enough to include all prospect-aged individuals, the developmental clinic tryout exception is not needed.
(33) Proposal No. 2005-75 (Recruiting – Contacts and Evaluations – Sports other than Basketball and Football). The cabinet sponsored legislation to eliminate the junior-year contact in sports other than football and men's and women's basketball. The junior contact was originally approved only in men's basketball and was intended to minimize the nonscholastic influences in the basketball recruiting process. The rule was then adopted in all other sports (other than football). This year, basketball rescinded the junior year contact. Further, permitting a junior-year contact has resulted in coaches feeling pressure to use the additional contact and secure early commitments at a time when their focus should be on enrolled student-athletes. Further, eliminating the contact will relieve the pressure on prospects to commit early, is less intrusive and will bring consistency to the application of contact rules.
(34) Proposal No. 2005-76 (Recruiting – Telephone Calls to Prospects – Time Period for Telephone Calls – Sports other than Basketball and Football). The cabinet sponsored legislation to eliminate the one phone call in March of the prospect's junior year currently permitted in sports other than basketball and football. The original intent of the March phone call was to arrange the April contact. The cabinet is recommending the elimination of the April contact, and thus, the March phone call is no longer necessary.
(35) Proposal No. 2005-77 (Personnel – Coaching Limitations – Sports other than Football). The cabinet sponsored legislation to specify that in sports other than football, all recruiting coordination functions (i.e., on-campus evaluation and selection of prospects, phone calls, correspondence) should be performed by countable coaches. Further, in all applicable sports, to permit a volunteer coach to engage in such activities provided the individual has passed the coaches certification exam. This proposal is designed to address concerns related to the proliferation of noncoaching personnel and promote equity and consistency in the recruiting process. [Three opposed]
(36) Proposal No. 2005-78 (Recruiting – Transportation to Enroll). The cabinet sponsored legislation to permit an institution to transport a prospective student-athlete from the nearest airport, bus or train station to the institution's campus for initial enrollment in the institution's summer term. The adoption of Proposal No. 2003-83 revised the definition of a prospective student-athlete to include a prospect that officially registers and enrolls and attends classes during the summer prior to initial enrollment and receives institutional athletics aid. Given this change, it is logical to permit an institution to provide a student-athlete with such transportation under the provisions of Bylaw 13.6.4-(a).
(37) Proposal No. 2005-79 (Recruiting – Contacts and Evaluations – Coaches' Attendance at Elite International Events). The cabinet sponsored legislation to permit institutional coaching staff members to attend Olympic, Pan American, World Championships, World Cup and World University Games competition outside of contact and evaluation periods. Further, the proposal prohibits coaches from attending any qualifying competition for such events outside the contact and evaluation periods if prospective student-athletes will be participating in such qualifying competition. Current legislation and interpretations related to coaches' attendance at elite international events and qualifying competition has not been applied on a consistent basis. Coaches should be permitted to support current student-athletes in international competition by attending the identified events without regard to the recruiting periods. However, qualifying competition for such events now include a greater number of recruitable prospects and coaches' attendance at such events should be subject to the recruiting periods.
c. Legislative – Other Items.
(1) Request to Sponsor Legislation from the National Fastpitch Coaches Association. The cabinet denied a request by the National Fastpitch Coaches Association (NFCA) to sponsor legislation to include softball in the sports prohibited from using the one-time transfer exception. The cabinet noted that the NCAA Division I Management Council Ad Hoc Group to Study the One-Time Transfer Exception submitted its proposals regarding the one-time transfer exception to the Management Council in October 2004, which included legislative proposals to be considered as part of the 2005-06 legislative cycle. The ad hoc group indicated it was not supportive of Proposal No. 2004-48 (eligibility – one-time transfer exception), which would permit the one-time transfer exception to be used by all student-athletes, regardless of sport. However, the ad hoc group did not recommend a change to the one-time transfer exception. Lastly, the cabinet noted that a similar proposal (Proposal No. 2001-9) previously was defeated by the cabinet and the council in 2001. As a result of all of this previous review and lack of support for this change, the cabinet did not support the NFCA's request.
(2) Legislative Interpretation Requests Forwarded to the NCAA Division I Legislation and Interpretations Review Committee. The cabinet unanimously agreed to request that the Legislation and Interpretations Review Committee review the following and issue interpretations: (1) for Proposal Nos. 2004-17 and 2004-17-1 (eligibility – change in eligibility status – eligibility for postseason competition – between terms), to clarify that a "business day" is any weekday that is not recognized as a national holiday, including any weekday that an institution is closed (e.g., holiday break); (2) to permit the use of courses earned at an institution other than the certifying institution to satisfy the progress-toward-degree credit-hour requirements (i.e., six and 18/27), provided the courses taken concurrently at the second institution and counted toward meeting the minimum 12-hour enrollment requirement as defined by Bylaw 14.1.8.2.4 (concurrent courses at two institutions): (3) to clarify that the phrase "personal contact" as it relates to a staff member's presence at the site of a prospect's National Letter of Intent signing where representatives of the media are also present, precludes coaching staff members from being present at the signing site.
(3) Review of Status of Proposal Nos. 2002-82 (Financial Aid – Counters – Football or Basketball, Varsity Competition) and 2003-23-A (Financial Aid – Countable Financial Aid – Team Limits). The cabinet discussed the status of these proposals and the fact that the NCAA Division I Board of Directors referred them back to the Management Council for further review. The cabinet made suggestions to the staff and the suggestions will be included in the materials that will be presented to the Management Council for its review.
d. Nonlegislative.
(1) NCAA Amateurism Clearinghouse. The cabinet unanimously endorsed the creation of an NCAA Amateurism Clearinghouse for both domestic and international student-athletes. The Amateurism Clearinghouse will serve as the processing center for determining the amateurism eligibility of Divisions I and II freshmen and international collegiate transfer student-athletes. Both the prospective student-athlete and the relevant institution will be apprised of the prospect's amateur status prior to his or her participation in intercollegiate athletics at a Division I or II institution. The Amateurism Clearinghouse will begin certifying domestic and international prospective student-athletes for collegiate participation for the fall of 2006.
(2) Initial Eligibility – Obvious-Waiver Scale for Individuals Lacking One or Fewer Core Courses in an Area other than English. The cabinet approved an academic profile under which the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse will apply "obvious" waivers for prospective student-athletes who are lacking one or fewer core courses in an area other than English (Attachment B). The approved profile carried a false-positive rate of seven percent. The Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse staff has been advised that it is responsible for "flagging" students that satisfy the profile prior to a final certification decision being forwarded to the student and/or institution. Such students will receive a final certification report from the Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse noting the deficiency, but the final status will be certified.
(3) Initial and Continuing Eligibility – Temporary Certification Period. The cabinet reviewed two concepts that would provide all student-athletes (recruited and nonrecruited) with an identical 45-day temporary certification period to practice while their initial-eligibility and/or continuing-eligibility status is pending. The cabinet did not support this concept and noted that recruited prospective student-athletes generally do not need an extended period of time to receive their certification status. During its review of the concept, however, the cabinet noted that the current legislation is inconsistent in its use of "days" for nonrecruited, prospective student-athletes and "weeks" for recruited prospects. The cabinet directed the staff to editorially revise Bylaw 14.3.5.1.1 to reflect one consistent standard (i.e., change two weeks to 14 days).
(4) NCAA Division I Progress-Toward-Degree Waivers Committee and NCAA Division I Initial-Eligibility Waivers Committee – Policies and Procedures Manuals. The cabinet reviewed and approved the Progress-Toward-Degree and Initial Eligibility Waivers Committee's policies and procedures manual for the 2005-06 academic year. The cabinet agreed to add language to the initial-eligibility policies and procedures manual that permits the use of documentation from any source (e.g., high school) that is related to a waiver case. The cabinet further agreed to revise the policy for initial-eligibility waivers to state that a subcommittee of the Initial-Eligibility Waivers Committee or the Subcommittee on Initial-Eligibility Issues may affirm or deny an appeal, but may not overturn a partial approval. A similar decision was made for partial approvals of progress-toward-degree waivers and, as a result, similar language will be added. (See Item No. 5 below.)
(5) Progress Toward Degree – Waiver Policy Regarding Overturning Partial Approvals. The cabinet approved a revision to the progress-toward-degree waiver policies and procedures clarifying that partial approvals issued by NCAA staff cannot be overturned on appeal. An institution may be reluctant to appeal or seek full qualifier status of a staff or waiver committee's partial approval decision if there is the possibility that the partial relief will be revoked by the full committee. Additionally, the student-athlete and institution may have acted in reliance on the relief provided (e.g., the institution may have permitted the student-athlete to practice or compete). Permitting another body to revoke that partial relief, could result in serious unintended consequences such as a student-athlete competing while ineligible or receiving impermissible expenses relate to competition. Finally, overturning partial relief may be seen as contrary to the notion of student-athlete well-being.
(6) Progress Toward Degree – Misadvisement and/or Misapplication of Legislation. The cabinet approved revisions to the waiver policies and procedures regarding the use of misadvisement as a mitigating factor in progress-toward-degree waivers and noted the revisions should be added for the 2005-06 academic year (Attachment C). The revisions require an institution to demonstrate that a student-athlete relied, in good faith, on incorrect information given by someone who specifically had authority to do so and who claims responsibility for his or her actions. The policies and procedures further require development of institutional recovery plans outlining institutional procedural changes designed to prevent such problems in the future.
(7) Progress Toward Degree – Credit-Hour Limitation for Remedial Courses. The cabinet reviewed the current credit-hour limitation for use of remedial coursework to satisfy the progress toward degree legislation and decided not revise the standard at this time. The cabinet noted that in light of the academic reform legislation and its intent to encourage steady student-athlete progression toward graduation, the credit-hour limitation on the use of remedial coursework should not be increased.
(8) Creation of Additional Student-Athlete Reinstatement Forms. The cabinet approved the creation of two new student-athlete reinstatement forms (Attachment D). Recent advancements in technology allow institutions to file requests for reinstatement and waivers with the reinstatement staff online by completing and submitting forms through LSDBi. The two new forms promote efficiency and consistency, as well as assist the staff in ensuring all relevant information is included within a reinstatement request.
(9) Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement – Policies and Procedures. The cabinet approved two amendments to the committee's policies and procedures. The first change permits the use of expert advice in the reinstatement process for cases involving learning disabilities, depression, alcoholism, drug addiction or other psychiatric disorders. More specifically, if a reinstatement request involves a learning disability, depression, alcoholism, drug addiction or other psychiatric disorders, the case information may be shared with an expert in the appropriate field. The expert will review the information and provide an analysis that will be included in the written record of the case. The purpose of the analysis is to assist the staff and committee in understanding the issues cited by the student-athlete in his or her request for relief. The second change reflects current practices and pertains to the condition of repayment. The change merely clarifies that repayment must be made by the student-athlete or his or her legal guardian (e.g., fund-raising or donations may not be used to repay the benefit). Any limited exception to this must policy be approved by the committee or student-athlete reinstatement staff.
(10) Division I Student-Athlete Reinstatement Guidelines. The cabinet received a report from the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement regarding its approval of a Division I-specific guidelines document. The document outlines all guidelines established by the committee for the processing of reinstatement requests. Although a similar document has existed for some time, it contained guidelines for all three divisions and became cumbersome and confusing to review. Each division now has its own guidelines document that will be updated after each committee meeting. The most updated version of the Division I guidelines document is posted on the student-athlete reinstatement section of the NCAA Web site.
(11) Application of Reinstatement Conditions to Transfer Student-Athletes. The cabinet received a report from the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement regarding the application of reinstatement conditions to transfer student-athletes who have been involved in violations and, in some cases, had reinstatement conditions imposed on them. Reinstatement conditions across divisions are not always consistent and, in some cases, may be more or less significant. The committee clarified that a student-athlete who transfers to a Division I institution and was previously involved in a rule violation would be subject to Division I reinstatement standards and conditions. As such, a Division I institution that determines a student-athlete was involved in a violation at his or her previous Division II or Division III institution, must contact the former institution, gather the facts and report the case to the reinstatement staff. The reinstatement staff will then assess the case in the context of Division I standards. Further, the review and application of Division I reinstatement standards apply regardless of whether a student-athlete had been reinstated for a violation while attending a Division II or III institution; however, staff will consider any condition in assessing the appropriate penalty. Finally, institutions are advised to include a question on transfer release forms that inquires whether a student-athlete has been involved in any NCAA violation(s).
(12) Five-Year/10-Semester Period of Eligibility Legislation. The cabinet received a report from the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement regarding waiver or reinstatement cases that involve mental health issues, alcoholism, drug addiction, eating disorders and learning disabilities. Due to the uniqueness of these areas the established documentation standards typical for physical injuries may not always be appropriate. However, although exceptions may be made to the documentation standard, requests must include documentation indicating that the mental illness, depression, alcoholism, drug addiction, eating disorder or learning disability prevented student-athlete from competing in athletics.
(13) Expiration of Five-Year Period of Eligibility during the Regular Season. The cabinet received a report from the Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement in which the committee reaffirmed the guideline that extensions of the five-year period of eligibility be granted to a foreign student-athlete who exhausted his or her eligibility during the season because the student-athlete initially enrolled full time at a foreign institution with an unconventional academic calendar (e.g., basketball student-athlete who enrolled in February). The committee will grant such requests to allow the student-athlete to finish the semester or quarter during which the clock expires. Further, staff was directed to apply this same guideline to domestic student-athletes who start their five-year period of eligibility at a semester institution and transfer to a quarter institution.
(14) Recruiting – Coaches Certification Exam. NCAA staff reported that online exam statistics indicated a 95 percent passing rate for the Division I coaches certification exam. The cabinet agreed to request that the Collegiate Commissioners Association of Compliance Administrators (CCACA) review future exam questions prior to the exam's release. Further, the cabinet stated that, given the creation of the Amateurism Clearinghouse, it would be beneficial for the exam to include questions related to amateurism legislation.
(15) NCAA and Intercollegiate Tennis Association (ITA) Working Group. NCAA staff updated the cabinet of ongoing communications with the ITA and discussed recent issues and trends in the sport forwarded by the ITA. NCAA staff will keep the cabinet abreast of ongoing discussions with the group.
(16) Legislative Concepts from the I-A FAR Organization and Coalition for Intercollegiate Athletics (COIA). The cabinet established an ad hoc group of faculty athletics represenatives to review legislative concepts submitted by the COIA, two of which are supported by the I-A FAR organization.
(17) Committee/Subcommittee
Appointments. The cabinet appointed Lois Privslovsky,
Cabinet
Chair: Alan Hauser, Appalachian
Staff Liaison(s): Julie Cromer, Membership Services
Diane Dickman, Membership Services
Kevin Lennon, Membership Services