REPORT OF THE

NCAA DIVISION III STUDENT-ATHLETE REINSTATEMENT COMMITTEE

 

 

1.                  ACTION ITEMS.

 

a.         Eligibility Ramifications — Complimentary Admissions (NCAA Bylaw 13.7.5.2).

 

(1)        Recommendation.  Amend Bylaw 13.7.5.2 (complimentary admissions) to indicate that all violations of this bylaw, where the amount is $100 or less are restitution and, thus, conditioned on repayment, do not affect the eligibility of the involved prospective student-athletes.

 

(2)        Rationale.  Currently, the bylaw is only restitution for violations where the prospect receives excessive tickets and not for situations when an individual sits in special seating or around the bench area, which is also prohibited.  Frequently, the value of this special seating is less than $100; however, these special-seating violations do impact eligibility.  This change will provide consistency to all Bylaw 13.7.5.2 violations and is also consistent with deregulation efforts.

 

(3)        Budget Impact.  None.

           

 

b.         Policies and Procedures. 

 

(1)               Recommendation.  Approve the proposed amendments to the committee’s policies and procedures (Attachment A).  Changes include:

 

(a)        The lead NCAA staff administrator, in consultation with the chair, can suspend a reinstatement condition in very limited circumstances if the next contest is an NCAA championship, a bowl game or another national championship.  The general practice is that student-athletes are withheld from the next contests even if the next contests are part of the championship and that policy remains in place.


(b)        In situations where the staff provides relief based on an institutional error or misinformation provided by an institution, a letter will be sent to the institution’s chief executive officer (CEO).

 

(c)        If a reinstatement or waiver request contains information or allegations against another NCAA institution or institutional employee, the institution or its employee must be provided a copy of relevant documentation and give the other institution/employee 10 days to respond in writing to the allegations.  The response will be included as part of the case record.

 

(d)        Reinstatement decisions rendered by the committee and the staff are made based on the record put forward by the institution.  If further information is later discovered and the facts of the original decision change (e.g., during an enforcement investigation), the reinstatement case will be reopened and a decision rendered on the new facts.  Further, in situations involving multiple student-athletes where the core violation is the same, the institution requesting reinstatement should attempt to process all student-athlete reinstatement cases as one request.

 

(2)        Rationale.  The committee felt changes were needed in order to implement new policies and reflect the current practices of the staff and committee.

 

                        (3)        Budget Impact.  None.

 

 

2.         INFORMATIONAL ITEMS.

 

a.         Summary of Reinstatement Cases Processed.  During the 2003-04 academic year, the staff processed approximately 1,900 cases in all three divisions.  Among all three divisions, only 2.5 percent of the cases were appealed and, of those, the committees' affirmed the staff’s decision in 83 percent of the cases.  Specific to Division III, there were 122 cases processed involving violations, as well as 32 cases involving waiver requests (e.g., extension requests). 

        

            Review of cases heard during the fall (August to October) of 2004-05 academic year, the staff processed approximately 622 cases in all three divisions.  Three percent of these cases were appealed and of those, the committees' affirmed the staff’s decision in 82 percent of the cases.  In Division III, 24 cases were processed involving violations, as well as 14 cases involving waiver requests. 


b.         Withholding Condition for a Season (Sit-A-Year, Charge-A-Year).  In situations involving academic fraud or amateurism violations, the committee reaffirmed that if the condition involves withholding a season it requires that the student-athlete “sit a year” and “be charged a year”.  Conversely, the committee discussed cases that involve transfers or nonqualifiers who compete during a period when they should be serving an academic year in residence.  Typically, the staff and committee had withheld the student-athlete from a season and charged a season of participation.  In such cases, where there is no student-athlete culpability, or it is minimal, the committee determined that the staff should attempt to return the student-athlete to the position he or she was prior to the violation occurring.  As a result, the minimum withholding condition for a season (sit-a-year, charge-a-year) may not be warranted and instead, a student-athlete may be withheld from the season but not charged.

 

c.         Considering Participation Opportunities and Denied Participation Opportunities Within 10-Semester/15-Quarter Extension Waiver Analysis.  The committee determined that it's current practice of denying extension waivers when a student-athlete has both been denied two participation opportunities, but still had four participation opportunities, (within a student-athlete’s 10-semester/15-quarter period of eligibility) should be maintained (absent extraordinary circumstances).  The committee recommends this information be highlighted on the NCAA Web site.

 

d.                  Contemporaneous Medical Documentation.  The committee reviewed the one- page document/guidelines outlining existing documentation standards used by the NCAA student-athlete reinstatement staff and committee for medical documentation associated with hardship and extension waiver requests (Attachment B).  These guidelines will be distributed to conference offices and may serve as a resource for conferences when processing hardship waivers.

 

e.         Letter to CEO Following Misinformation.  The committee reviewed and approved the specific language of a letter sent to CEO when relief is provided to a student-athlete based on misinformation provided by institutional personnel or institutional error.  Letters as appropriate will be sent for cases received after January 1.

 

f.                    Reinforce Campus Educational Efforts.  The committee supported continued outreach efforts directed at campus and conference office personnel regarding reinstatement issues and attendance at NCAA Regional Compliance Seminars.  The committee highlighted the need for institutions to reinforce to student-athletes its role in verification of eligibility for upcoming academic year during spring by working with appropriate academic personnel and not just relying on coaching or


athletics department personnel.  In addition, the committee will look at ways during its May meeting to support Division III rules compliance efforts in light of secondary violation reporting process.

 

g.                  Continuation of Extension of the 10-Semester/15-Quarter Period of Eligibility and Season-of-Competition Waiver Requests involving Military Service.  The committee endorsed continued application of the Management Council directive regarding extensions of the 10-semester/15-quarter period of eligibility and season-competition waivers for student-athletes called to active duty during enrollment in light of ongoing military action in Iraq.

 

h.                  Review of Cases Decided Under New Philosophy Resulted in a Different Outcome.  The committee reviewed all cases decided since its April 2004 teleconference, that as a result of the new philosophical approach, a different decision was rendered.  All cases but one (Eligibility Case No. 25478, which was archived) were approved by the committee.

 

i.                    Discussion Regarding Existing Impact of Foreign Tour Competition when Hardship Waiver is Granted.  The committee began review of Bylaw 14.2.5.2.6 (foreign tour competition) in relation to situations when a hardship waiver is granted during the previous academic year; however, a student-athlete’s participation in the following summer would result in use of a season of participation.  It was noted that Divisions I and II no longer consider such participation to trigger use of a season-of-competition.  The committee requested the staff provide additional research on the issue, which will be provided at the May meeting.

 

 

 

Committee Chair:  Kim Allen, Smith College

Staff Liaisons:  Kelly Groddy, Student-Athlete Reinstatement

                         Jennifer Strawley, Student-Athlete Reinstatement