Historical-Penalty Structure

REPORT OF THE

NCAA DIVISION I COMMITTEE ON ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE

JANUARY 4-5, 2007, MEETING

1. ACTION ITEMS.

a. Occasion-Two Historical-Penalty Structure.

(1) Recommendation. The NCAA Division I Committee on Academic Performance recommends the NCAA Division I Board of Directors approve the attached penalty structure for Occasion-Two Historical Penalties.

[Note: The Board of Directors approved the recommendation at its January 8, 2007, meeting.]

(2) Rationale. The recommended Occasion-Two Historical-Penalty structure will encourage continued behavioral change for teams subject to the historical-penalty structure. Specifically, the committee supported a two-tiered penalty structure that emphasizes improvement and uses meaningful penalties in the areas of financial aid and playing and practice seasons. The first tier of penalties will apply to teams that demonstrate significant improvement, as evidenced by a favorable review of the “improvement” factor previously approved by the committee. The second tier of penalties will apply to teams that do not meet the “improvement” review. Occasion-Two Financial Aid Penalties will be either a standard reduction applied to the amount of aid awarded by the team, or the total (uncapped) number of contemporaneous penalties, whichever is higher. Total aid awarded shall be determined using a four-year average of total countable aid awarded during the same four years recorded in multi-year APR. The standard five or ten percent financial aid reductions, noted in the attachment, will be rounded up to the next whole number for head count sports as is done in determining contemporaneous penalties. Additionally, playing and practice seasons penalties will reduce the number of hours and/or days per week a team will be allowed to participate in countable athletically related activity during the playing season. The playing and practice season penalties will not impact activity outside the playing season. The committee recommends recruiting penalties not be included at this time to continue to encourage institutions to utilize the available recruiting opportunities to make informed decisions throughout the recruiting process. Lastly, the committee noted the historical-penalty structure will have a cumulative effect that continues to apply each year as a team advances through the historical-penalty structure. [Attachment A] Each year a team fails the historical-penalty review, another layer of penalties will be added. For example:

(a) Spring 2007 - public announcement.

(b) Spring 2008 - public announcement, PLUS scholarship reductions and practice restrictions.

(c) Spring 2009 - public announcement, scholarship reductions, practice restrictions, PLUS post-season competition restrictions.

(3) Budget Impact. None.

b. NCAA Division I Academic Performance Program (APP) Supplemental Support Fund.

(1) Recommendation. The committee recommends the Board approve the attached APP Supplemental Support Fund.

[Note: The Board of Directors approved a motion to table consideration of the establishment of this program until the April 2007, Board of Directors meeting.]

(2) Rationale. The APP Supplemental Support Fund is recommended to support campus-based initiatives designed to foster student-athlete academic success at limited-resource institutions. Grants will be awarded for innovative solutions to barriers preventing student-athlete retention and progress-toward-degree completion and success will be measured by team NCAA Division I Academic Progress Rate (APR) and Graduation Success Rate (GSR) improvement. In addition, the program encourages sharing and adaptation of successful programs on all Division I campuses, including institutions that do not receive supplemental support. Further, establishing this fund will demonstrate the Association’s commitment to a meaningful program that encourages academic achievement and facilitates academic improvement. [Attachment B]

(3) Budget Impact. The program will be funded through reallocation of a portion of the NCAA Division I Academic Enhancement Fund. Specifically, the 4.25 percent annual incremental increase to the fund will be set aside for grant recipients in the initial year. If taken in the current fiscal year, this reallocation will total approximately $800,000 in available supplemental support. In fiscal year 2008, approximately $1.6 million dollars will be available through the APP Supplemental Support Program. Any monies allocated to this fund but not awarded will be returned to the Academic Enhancement Fund for general distribution.

2. INFORMATIONAL ITEMS.

a. Public and Media Relations Issues Associated with the APP Rates and Penalties. The committee discussed key themes related to academic reform that will be emphasized by the NCAA branding and communications group in all public communications. The committee also received a staff update regarding the development of academic messaging to take place during NCAA championship events, which will be designed to change perceptions regarding student-athlete academic performance and to celebrate student-athlete academic achievement. The committee also expressed interest in considering a change in the terminology used to describe penalties (e.g., contemporaneous and historical) to facilitate easier communication and greater understanding among the membership and the general public.

b. Annual GSR and Federal Graduation Rate Announcement. The committee reviewed a summary of the most recent GSR and Federal Graduation Rate data and noted the increase in the overall Division I student-athlete GSR from 76 percent in 2005 to 77 percent this year. The first of two GSR data releases was announced September 27, 2006, and focused on team GSR and Federal Graduation Rates using a four-class aggregate of entering classes from 1996 to 1999. The second release, which occurred November 9, 2006, included additional GSR and federal graduation data, including specifics related to gender and ethnicity. The committee noted that according to the federal graduation rate 63 percent of Division I student-athletes who started college in 1999 graduated within six years, while college students nationally graduated at a 61-percent rate in the same period. Both rates increased one-percentage point from last year.

c. APP Penalties Following Coaches and/or Coaches Rate. The committee reviewed a comprehensive document regarding APP penalties following coaches and development of an academic coaches rate. The document provided a history of discussions that have occurred on these topics, legal considerations and a number of issues that need to be resolved before these two concepts could be implemented. The committee does not support penalties that would follow coaches to their next institutions. This concept is complicated by legal and administrative complexities such that the committee does not intend to pursue this idea. However, the committee noted interest in considering a coaches rate and directed the staff to examine this concept in greater detail and to provide sample models to be considered in the future.

d. Input from Various Organizations. The committee reviewed written correspondence from the National Association of Basketball Coaches (NABC), and supports establishment of a group charged with developing possible initiatives that would help to improve the academic performance of men’s basketball student-athletes. This group would be similar to the task force established for baseball and will provide regular updates on its work to the committee. Work is underway to identify individuals to serve on this group, which will include committee members, and it is anticipated this group will meet semi-annually over a two-year period.

e. Historical-Penalty Waiver Directive. The committee amended its historical-penalty waiver directive regarding the review of waivers for teams to accommodate the two-tiered penalty model for Occasion-Two Penalties. The committee amended the directive to fairly evaluate a waiver request for a team(s) that has satisfied one or more of the following historical-penalty determination factors: by sport, institutional characteristics and/or institutional resources. Additionally, the amended directive provides the staff and the NCAA Division I Committee on Academic Performance Subcommittee on Appeals with the ability to render a decision warranted by the circumstances for that particular team(s). [Attachment C]

f. Establishing and Reviewing Conditions for Conditionally Approved Contemporaneous-Penalty Waivers. The Subcommittee on Appeals discussed whether delayed-graduation points earned by a team in a given academic year should be considered by the staff and the Subcommittee on Appeals when establishing and reviewing an APR goal as part of a conditionally approved waiver. Previously, the Subcommittee on Appeals agreed that a primary, but not exclusive, condition for a conditional approval is the achievement of a single year APR by the team(s). During its review of conditionally approved waivers, the staff recognized the significant impact the delayed-graduation point could have on a team’s APR. The Subcommittee on Appeals agreed that any APR goal established as part of a conditional approval should be based on an APR that does not include any delayed-graduation points. Additionally, the Subcommittee on Appeals acknowledged that delayed-graduation points should not be considered when determining whether a team has satisfied the APR goal as part of a conditional approval. The Subcommittee on Appeals noted a true picture of the team’s academic performance can be affected by including delayed-graduation points. As such, conditional approvals should be based on the academic behavior of the current team.

g. APP Data Reviews. The committee received a status report on the data review process for the 15 institutions selected for this year. The data review includes an audit of institutionally submitted APP data from the 2003-04 and 2004-05 academic years. It is anticipated that the NCAA Division I Committee on Academic Performance Subcommittee on Data Collection and Reporting will complete all reviews and will provide final reports to institutions in March 2007.

h. Requests for Retroactive Relief of Penalties Based on Amendments, Adjustments, and Delayed-Graduation Points to APP Data from Prior Academic Years. The committee amended its policies and procedures to permit institutions that discover amendments, adjustments and delayed-graduation points from prior academic years that would have resulted in the team not being subject to penalties to request relief of the previously earned penalties that have not been taken. An institution must submit a formal request to the Subcommittee on Data Collection and Reporting and provide any necessary supporting documentation. The current policy allows institutions to request amendments, adjustments and delayed-graduation points to any academic year that makes up its multiyear APR. However, the policy does not permit changes to prior years’ data to change the status of any previously earned penalties or incentives. The Subcommittee on Data Collection and Reporting recognized there are instances when an institution subject to a penalty may discover that the penalty was based on inaccurate or incomplete data. Permitting an institution to request a waiver of the penalty based on a correction to the data will ensure that penalties are accurately incurred by institutions. By allowing an appeal process in which an institution must present its fact scenario for relief of contemporaneous and/or historical penalties, institutions will be offered flexibility while providing an external review that an automatic waiver of the penalties does not provide. The policy applies in situations only where the penalty was not taken. If the penalties were taken, there is no recourse (e.g., no “banking” of penalties).

i. Definition of the APR Cohort. The committee approved an amendment to the definition of the APR cohort to exclude from the APR cohort any scholarship student-athletes enrolled beyond the fifth year (i.e., 10th semester/15th quarter), with no athletics eligibility remaining. Amending the definition of the APR cohort will allow institutions to continue to provide athletics aid beyond the fifth year of enrollment, when permissible under NCAA financial aid legislation, without negatively affecting a team’s APR. In such instances, institutions have indicated they are truly providing incentives for a student-athlete who has exhausted his or her athletics eligibility to return or to continue at the institution to graduate. Under the current cohort definition, a sixth-year student-athlete receiving athletics aid is included in the cohort. By changing the definition of the cohort, a sixth-year student-athlete on athletics aid would be eligible for the delayed-graduation point. Further, data provided by the NCAA research staff indicated that the population of student-athletes who are provided athletics aid beyond their fifth year of enrollment is very small and affects relatively few sports. The committee determined it was appropriate to exclude this population from the cohort once five years (i.e., 10 semesters/15 quarters) of enrollment have passed. Finally, the amended definition of the APR cohort will not apply retroactively. The new definition of the APR cohort will be effective with the 2006-07 APR cohort data, to be collected fall 2007.

j. Request from Member Institution Related to APP Data Collection and Graduation Issues. The Subcommittee on Data Collection and Reporting reviewed a request from a member institution to allow an institution, through graduation, to recover a point lost at any time during a student-athlete’s enrollment at the institution when he or she is a part of the APR cohort. For example, if a student-athlete lost a retention point in the first year of enrollment, subsequently returned to the institution, was included in the APR cohort, and graduated, the team would be credited with an additional point to make up for the retention point lost in the first year of enrollment. This point would be in addition to the two points credited in the term of graduation. The Subcommittee on Data Collection and Reporting did not support this change.

k. APR Improvement Plan Requirements for Teams Subject to Historical Penalties. The NCAA Division I Committee on Academic Performance Subcommittee on Penalties and Rewards received an update regarding the continued development of the APR Improvement Plan requirements for institutions subject to historical penalties. The APR Improvement Plan materials will address the areas of: admissions, retention, academic support and graduation. The ad hoc group will finalize their work over the next several months and submit a final draft document for the Subcommittee on Penalties and Rewards’ review late spring 2007.

l. Academic Incentive Concept. The Subcommittee on Penalties and Rewards received a presentation by members of the Atlantic Coast Conference regarding an academic incentive concept that would provide institutions flexibility in application of select progress-toward-degree requirements if they graduate their student-athletes at a rate significantly higher than the national average for student-athlete graduation and can show that the attainment of the higher graduation rate is commonplace, continuing and inherent in the culture of the institution. The Subcommittee on Penalties and Rewards agreed to continue discussions on this concept as a possible incentive, and also noted this issue may be more appropriately addressed via progress-toward-degree waivers.

m. APP Educational Initiatives. The committee received a report regarding various educational initiatives to assist institutions in understanding academic reform and the APP. The NCAA staff has established partnerships with the National Academic Advising Association (NACADA) and the National Association of Athletic Academic Advisors (N4A) to develop additional initiatives to be launched later this year. The NACADA partnership will focus on delivery of an online course and a summer institute covering academic reform and principles of student-athlete academic success. The online course will be made available to the membership by late February 2007 and the institute will take place this summer. In addition, the staff and N4A leadership are exploring similar concepts.

n. Summary of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) Ad Hoc Advisory Group. The committee received an update regarding the work of the

NCAA DIVISION I ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE PROGRAM

STRUCTURE FOR OCCASION-TWO HISTORICAL PENALTIES

LESS THAN 900 AND MEETS “IMPROVEMENT PLUS” REVIEW = NO HISTORICAL PENALTY

	Less than 900 and does not meet IMPROVEMENT review¹	Less than 900 and meets only IMPROVEMENT review¹	900------------------------------	925-------------------1000
Financial Aid Penalties	Greater of the following two one-year penalties: Reduction of scholarships by 10% (deducted from total aid awarded)²; OR Reduction of scholarships by total uncapped contemporaneous penalties³ (deducted from NCAA maximums).	Greater of the following two penalties: Reduction of scholarships by 5% (deducted from total aid awarded)²; OR Reduction of scholarships by total uncapped contemporaneous penalties³ (deducted from NCAA maximums).	NO HISTORICAL PENALTIES APPLY. CONTEMPORANEOUS PENALTIES MAY APPLY, DEPENDING ON “0/2” DEPARTURES.	NO PENALTIES APPLY.
Playing/Practice Season Penalties	Reduction of practice time by one full day throughout the playing season⁴. Team is limited to five days of countable activity, and 16 hours.	Reduction of practice time by four hours per week throughout the playing season.⁴		NO PENALTIES APPLY.
Occasion-One Penalty	Public announcement

¹This improvement review uses the same standard being applied to determine all historical penalties.

²Total aid awarded shall be determined using a four-year average of total countable aid awarded during the same four years recorded in multi-year APR.

³Contemporaneous penalties are “capped” at approximately 10 percent of the team scholarship maximum. This penalty results in a team applying scholarship penalties for all “0/2” student-athletes.

⁴Penalized practice time shall be replaced with academic support activities. For teams who meet only the improvement review, institutions have the discretion to apply the penalized hours throughout the week (i.e., maximum of 16 hours spread over six days per week). Teams who do not meet the improvement review have a maximum of 16 countable hours to be spread over five days per week.

EXAMPLE IMPACT OF OCCASION-TWO HISTORICAL PENALTIES

ON SAMPLE MEN’S BASKETBALL TEAM

Men’s Basketball NCAA Maximum Limit = 13 scholarships

Percent Reductions Determined by NCAA Maximum Limit:

5% Reduction = 1 scholarship

10% Reduction = 2 scholarships

Sample Men’s Basketball Team

Aid Awarded = 13 scholarships (fully funded)

Total Contemporaneous Penalties = No “0/2” student-athletes

LESS THAN 900 AND MEETS “IMPROVEMENT PLUS” REVIEW = NO HISTORICAL PENALTY

	Less than 900 and does not meet IMPROVEMENT review	Less than 900 and meets only IMPROVEMENT review	900------------------------------	925-------------------1000
Financial Aid Penalties	Greater of the following two one-year penalties: Reduction of scholarships by 10% (deducted from total aid awarded) = 2 scholarships (13 – 2 = 11) OR Reduction of scholarships by total uncapped contemporaneous penalties (deducted from NCAA maximums). = No “0/2” (13 – 0 = 13) Penalty = 2 scholarships (reduced from 13) Limit = 11 scholarships	Greater of the following two penalties: Reduction of scholarships by 5% (deducted from total aid awarded); = 1 scholarship (13 – 1 = 12) OR Reduction of scholarships by total uncapped contemporaneous penalties (deducted from NCAA maximums). = No “0/2” (13 – 0 = 13) Penalty = 1 scholarship (reduced from 13) Limit = 12 scholarships	NO HISTORICAL PENALTIES APPLY. CONTEMPORANEOUS PENALTIES MAY APPLY, DEPENDING ON “0/2” DEPARTURES.	NO PENALTIES APPLY.
Playing/Practice Season Penalties	Reduction of practice time by one full day throughout the playing season. Team is limited to five days of countable activity, and 16 hours.	Reduction of practice time by four hours per week throughout the playing season.		NO PENALTIES APPLY.
Occasion-One Penalty	Public announcement

EXAMPLE IMPACT OF OCCASION-TWO HISTORICAL PENALTIES

ON SAMPLE FOOTBALL TEAM

Football Bowl Subdivision NCAA Maximum Limit = 85 scholarships

Percent Reductions Determined by NCAA Maximum Limit:

5% Reduction = 5 scholarships

10% Reduction = 9 scholarships

Sample Football Bowl Subdivision Team

Aid Awarded = 78 scholarships (not fully funded)

Total Contemporaneous Penalties = 10 “0/2” student-athletes

LESS THAN 900 AND MEETS “IMPROVEMENT PLUS” REVIEW = NO HISTORICAL PENALTY

	Less than 900 and does not meet IMPROVEMENT review	Less than 900 and meets only IMPROVEMENT review	900------------------------------	925-------------------1000
Financial Aid Penalties	Greater of the following two one-year penalties: Reduction of scholarships by 10% (deducted from total aid awarded); = 9 scholarships (78 – 9 = 67) OR Reduction of scholarships by total uncapped contemporaneous penalties (deducted from NCAA maximums). = 10 “0/2” (85 – 10 = 75) Penalty = 9 scholarships (reduced from 78) Limit = 67 scholarships	Greater of the following two penalties: Reduction of scholarships by 5% (deducted from total aid awarded); = 5 scholarships (78 – 5 = 73) OR Reduction of scholarships by total uncapped contemporaneous penalties (deducted from NCAA maximums). = 10 “0/2” (85 – 10 = 75) Penalty = 5 scholarships (reduced from 78) Limit = 73 scholarships	NO HISTORICAL PENALTIES APPLY. CONTEMPORANEOUS PENALTIES MAY APPLY, DEPENDING ON “0/2” DEPARTURES.	NO PENALTIES APPLY.
Playing/Practice Season Penalties	Reduction of practice time by one full day throughout the playing season. Team is limited to five days of countable activity, and 16 hours.	Reduction of practice time by four hours per week throughout the playing season.		NO PENALTIES APPLY.
Occasion-One Penalty	Public announcement

Committee Liaisons: Julie Cromer, Membership Services