REPORT OF THE
NCAA DIVISION III MANAGEMENT COUNCIL
MEETING
NCAA DIVISION III PRESIDENTS COUNCIL
MEETING
October 26, 2006
|
MC
SUPPLEMENT NO. 1 AW
– COMMITTEE ON COMPETITITVE SAFEGUARDS AND MEDICAL ASPECTS OF SPORTS Staff
Liaisons: Klossner, Wilfert Council
Rep: |
|
||
|
ISSUE: Noncontroversial Legislation –
NCAA Bylaw 31.2.3.4 (banned drugs). |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Adopted
noncontroversial legislation to amend Bylaw 31.2.3.4 (banned drugs) to add a class
of drugs – anti-estrogens, effective August 1, 2007. This class of drugs includes
substances, such as tamoxifen and clomiphene that may be used to manipulate a
sample by masking anabolic steroid use.
Anabolic steroid users use anti-estrogens to minimize side effects of
steroids use (the body naturally converts anabolic steroids into estrogens)
and to stimulate testosterone production. The NCAA considers these products
banned under Bylaw 31.2.3.4.1 (manipulation of urine samples). Identifying the class of
anti-estrogens under Bylaw 31.2.3.4 clarifies their status as banned. In addition, with the inclusion of
this class of substances under Bylaw 31.2.3.4, this class also should be
identified under Bylaw 31.2.3.5 and eligible for a medical exception review. In advance of the effective date and
the posting of the new list, staff will send out information to educate the
membership. There shall be no
additional burden on time commitment of student-athletes and they will have a
clearer sense of these banned substances. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE:
2008 NCAA Convention Legislation – Extension of Committee
Service. |
|
||
|
Management Council Recommendation: To sponsor
legislation for the 2008 Convention that would allow for an exception to extend
by one year the service of the chair of the NCAA Committee on Competitive
Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports (CSMAS), if the chair becomes chair
with only one year left of the four years of committee service, effective
August 1, 2008. Service on CSMAS
is a true learning experience.
Though there is a mechanism for a rising chair, that person generally
is not identified until the completion of two years of service. After the rising year (third year of
service), the new chair then has only one year of the four years of committee
service to act as chair. The
complexities and impact of the issues before this committee, and the need for
consistent, learned leadership, require a chair that has had the opportunity
to “learn” the position and to provide continuity of
service. This option would be
enacted only when circumstances warrant the extension, i.e., the chair enters
in the fourth year of committee service. |
|
||
|
Presidents Council Action: Approved the
recommendation. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE: Division III Academic Year Round Drug Education and
Testing Pilot. |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: The Council
reviewed the information presented regarding the drug pilot, noting that 140
institutions have responded to date.
Those 140 institutions include 138 active members, one reclassifying
member and one provisional member, representing 40 conferences and five
independents. The Council
discussed the following details regarding the pilot: ·
All sports will be included in some way, but
sports with higher incidence of drug use will be targeted for greater
participation (e.g., football, basketball and track and field). ·
To measure effectiveness of the pilot, the
NCAA will administer an assessment tool prior to education and testing and
after those efforts. ·
Student-athlete selection: The National Center for Drug Free
Sport will request a roster for those sports chosen to be tested. A selection will be made from that
roster to produce a representative sample. ·
The final summary will reveal only the
institution’s number of positive results. All other information will be
confidential. ·
Results data will be given to participating
institutions on an aggregate level for all teams at the institution. National results will report usage by
sport, as well as demographic breakdowns such as public or private
affiliation, enrollment and geographic region. ·
January 2007 Convention discussion session
will update membership on program details, including information regarding
pool of participating schools. ·
Institutions should be reminded to discuss
pilot participation with institutional legal counsel. ·
Recommended that the final list of pilot
participants not be released to the membership. The Council also
discussed whether to allow institutions that already have a program in
existence to participate by using their information for a separate
analysis. The sense of the
meeting was this would be permissible. |
|
||
|
Presidents Council Action: Council reviewed
Management Council action and suggested that the following details regarding
the 1.
Allocate $325,000 for 2006-07 for enhanced
alcohol, tobacco and other drug education programming for Division III
institutions through the promotion of an annual “Model Alcohol and Drug
Education Program” and two existing NCAA grant programs (CHOICES Grants
and Health and Safety Speakers Grants). ·
Provide five additional institutions (total
of eight for 06-07) a CHOICES Grant ($150,000). ·
Provide $1,000 grants to 100 additional
institutions ($100,000) per NCAA Health and Safety Speakers Grant. ·
Provide $500 matching speaker’s grants
to 150 institutions with approved Association-wide funding ($75,000). 2.
Implement for 2007-09 a voluntary two-year
(academic year September-May) comprehensive drug education and testing pilot
program without penalties for approximately 100 Division III
institutions. Annual overall cost
= $600,000 with up to $250,000 of testing costs through matching Association
funds committed by President Brand. ·
Education: $1,000 x 100 schools = $100,000 ·
Testing: $250/test x 16 student-athletes =
$400,000 (20 student-athletes = $500,000) ·
Total cost: $600,000 with up to $250,000 through Association
matching funds. It was also
noted that more information will be shared during the Council’s
pre-Convention meeting ·
Quality of institutional drug education process. ·
Collaboration between institutional
stakeholders and student-athletes regarding substance use. ·
Institutional drug test results. ·
Institutional stakeholder perceptions about
the drug education program. ·
Student-athlete perceptions about the drug
education program. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE:
Testing and Sanctions for Street Drugs. |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Accepted the
information that the committee is exploring a recommendation to test for
street drugs in the Division I and II year-round testing program and to apply
a distinct sanctioning tract for the use of street drugs that is
appropriately responsive to the health issues presented when street-drug use
is identified – as opposed to the response to cheating through the use
of performance-enhancing drugs – and to test for all banned substances
in the year-round program, including street drugs. Under this recommendation, the
sanctions for a positive test for a street drug would involve a withholding
from 50 percent of competition in all sports for a first positive,
withholding for a year for a second positive and permanent loss of
eligibility for a third positive.
In addition, reinstatement would require a negative NCAA exit test,
documentation provided by the institution identifying the results of
scheduled institutional drug tests during the withholding period and
documentation of an assessment and education or treatment plan conducted with
the student-athlete.
Student-athletes will have the right to appeal a positive drug test
for a street drug but the option to reduce the penalty will not be available
within this new tract. |
|
||
|
MC
SUPPLEMENT NO. 2 AW –
NCAA OLYMPIC SPORTS LIAISON COMMITTEE Staff
Liaisons: Strawley and Walters. Council
Rep: McHugh |
|
||
|
ISSUE: Updates from the Fall NCAA Olympic
Sports Liaison Committee Meeting. |
|
||
|
Management
Council Action: Accepted the information that the Olympic Sports Liaison Committee
was informed that the November 2006 meeting will occur in |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE: Discussion Regarding the
Recommendation of the NCAA/USOC Task Force. |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Accepted the
information that the NCAA/USOC Task Force created several recommendations
designed to help institutions maintain Olympic sports. The task force recommendations called
for the committee to develop a package of legislative recommendations
designed to protect and expand endangered and at-risk sports. The committee reviewed and discussed
various recommendations in the areas of amateurism, expenses, playing and
practice seasons, as well as financial aid. In addition, it discussed that some
sports are, in fact, endangered while others are at risk of being
endangered. As the committees
understanding of the issue evolved, so did its appreciation for the magnitude
and complexity of the issues.
Based on extensive discussion at the committee level, it is
considering a package of recommendations designed to decrease the expenses
associated with endangered and at-risk sports, and it is creating a summary
document of possible legislative changes in order to solicit feedback and
input. This summary document will
be forwarded for comment to the NGBs, the USOC and other entities within the
NCAA governance structure. This
feedback will be reviewed by the committee at its November meeting, with the
goal of creating a legislative proposal by the 2008 Convention proposal
submission deadline. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE:
Update from the USOC. |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Accepted the
information that the USOC was represented by Jeff Howard. Mr. Howard provided the committee with
an update from the second annual USOC assembly meeting and indicated that the
U.S. Olympic Committee has increased its focus on issues related to the
Olympic ideal which espouses blending sport with culture and education, and
creating a way of life based on the joy found in effort, the educational
value of good example and respect for universal fundamental ethical
principles. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE:
Strategic Plan. |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Accepted the information
that the committee reviewed its strategic plan and provided updates regarding
the status of many items. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE: Meeting with NGBs. |
|
||
|
Management
Council Action: Accepted the information that the committee met with representatives
from USA Track and Field, US Soccer Federation, USA Table Tennis Association,
USA Triathlon, US Curling Association, United States Diving and USA
Gymnastics. a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
United States Diving.
The committee met with Todd Smith. He discussed two issues: (1) Mr. Smith
reviewed the two-step selection process for the national team. At the first selection camp, divers
complete a list of specific dives and the top 20 participants move on to a
second selection camp. The
national team is selected from the participants in the second selection
camp. United States Diving would
like for collegiate coaches to be able to coach their athletes during the
selection camps. It is unclear
whether these camps take place in or out of the collegiate-playing
season. The liaisons to the
committee will work with Mr. Smith to further review this issue and acquire
more details. (2) NCAA
Division I Bylaw 30.11.9.1.1 provides that when the dead period for
recruiting occurs during the U.S. Diving National Championships, it shall be
permissible to observe prospective student-athletes participating in that
event. United States Diving
indicated that they have changed the name of the event to the US Open and
would like to have the legislation changed to reflect the name change;
however, the US Open is not a national championship. Per United States Diving regulations,
the US Open may not be considered a national championship in that international
athletes are allowed to participate in the event. The liaisons to the committee will
research the history of Bylaw 30.11.9.1.1 and continue discussions with Mr.
Smith. g. (1) The
organization would like to use collegiate coaches as volunteers at various
events in which prospective student-athletes may be participating. The coaches would not participate in
coaching duties, but would serve as floor managers and other similar
activities. Currently, Bylaw
13.11.3.4 precludes collegiate coaches from participating in this manner at
such events. The committee will
refer this issue to the gymnastics committee and the committees which focus
on recruiting for each division. (2) Mr.
Galimore also discussed the ability for an institution to provide expenses
for a former (3) The
USA Gymnastic Collegiate Event for women has been changed in that it occurs
after the end of the playing season, as defined in Division III. The liaisons of the committee will
work with Mr. Galimore to gather more information on this issue. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
MC SUPPLEMENT NO. 3 AW – NCAA PLAYING RULES
OVERSIGHT PANEL Staff Liaisons: Halpin and Perry |
|
||
|
ISSUE:
2007 NCAA Convention Legislation
– Secretary-Rules Editor Nomination Approval. |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Adopted noncontroversial legislation that will
allow the NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel (PROP) to oversee the selection process,
approve the nominations for secretary-rules editor candidates and review
waiver requests for secretary-rules editor term limits, as specified in NCAA
Bylaws 21.3.1.1.1 and 21.4.1.1.1.
PROP was created to streamline the oversight of playing rules issues,
which are Association-wide. The
current bylaw language does not include the appointment of the
secretary-rules editors within the oversight parameters, and there is no
established process for selection of these positions. The |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
MC SUPPLEMENT NO. 4 AW – NCAA RESEARCH COMMITTEE Staff Liaisons: Hartung Council Reps:
Miranda |
|
||
|
ISSUE: Update on the
Study of College Outcomes & Recent Experiences (SCORE). |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Accepted
the information on update of SCORE, focusing on the sampling plan and
preliminary findings. It was
noted that a series of research reports will be released throughout this
calendar year as analyses are conducted in specific topic areas. A large-scale presentation of findings
is being planned for the 2007 NCAA Convention. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE:
Update on Growth, Opportunities, Aspirations and Learning of Students
in College (GOALS) Study. |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Accepted
the information that the sampling procedures, test administration,
Institutional Review Board issues and response rate pertaining to the GOALS
study were discussed. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE: Discussion
of the NCAA Committee Mandate and its Effects on the Future of the Research
Committee. |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Accepted
the information that the committee members understood the mandate and focused
on exploring ways in which the Research Committee may restructure itself to
better serve the NCAA research staff, other NCAA staff members and the
membership. It became clear
through the discussion that there are two primary purposes of the
committee: (1) providing feedback
on new and ongoing research conducted by the NCAA research staff; and (2)
administering the grant program for research proposed by outside
investigators. On the first
point, the committee instructed NCAA staff to explore means of electronically
distributing research presentations and reports to the committee members,
enabling them to provide comment in a timely manner. Recognizing that the current grant
program was inadequate due to a mismatch between available funding and the
written commitment to studies that are relatively large in scope and
generalizable to the wider membership, the committee instructed NCAA staff to
explore a grant program structure where a “call for proposals”
was employed to ensure the proposed research would be focused in a topic area
timely and relevant. Further, the
committee proposed a program model where a number of smaller amount grants
(e.g., $5,000) were offered in the hopes of attracting doctoral dissertations
and master’s theses. This
could potentially increase the number of proposals received and provide the
committee the ability to fund student-level research. In addition, the committee instructed
NCAA staff to explore ways in which the grant winners could be publicly
recognized and given the opportunity to present their findings to a group of
peers. The Faculty Athletics
Representatives Association (FARA) Fall Forum was suggested. With the possible link between the
proposed grant program and the FARA Fall Forum, the committee discussed the
option of holding their annual meeting in conjunction with that event. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE:
Research Proposals. |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Accepted
the information that the committee reviewed three research proposals from external
researchers and chose not to fund them. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE:
Division III Financial Aid Reporting Program – Year 1 Findings. |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Accepted
the information that findings were presented from the first year of the
Division III Financial Aid Reporting Program, including outcomes from the
program’s Level I Review Process and aggregate information pertaining
to the variance estimate and other indicators. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
MC
SUPPLEMENT NO. 5 AW – NCAA COMMITTEE ON SPORTSMANSHIP
AND ETHICAL CONDUCT Staff
Liaisons: Newman, Roe and
Stratten
Council Reps: Slabik |
|
||
|
ISSUE: |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Accepted the information
that the committee reviewed and reaffirmed the mission statement. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE: Review of Report
of November Meeting. |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Accepted the
information that the committee’s divisional Management Council representatives
reported each division’s reaction to the committee’s report from
the November meeting. The
Division II Management Council endorsed the direction of the committee and
the recent actions of the committee contacting conferences when unsportsmanlike
conduct occurs. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE: Sports Wagering
Update. |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Accepted the
information that the committee discussed multiple initiatives being
implemented by the NCAA agents, gambling and amateurism staff. The issues included the following: a.
Facebook.com. The
committee discussed the growth of this Web site and the impact that negative
images/pictures on a student-athlete’s page could have on sportsmanship
issues. The staff also noted that
inclusion of details related to student-athlete participation could be
information sought out by gamblers and bookmakers, undermining the
Association’s efforts against sports wagering. b. Sports wagering
task force initiatives.
Background checks for football officials will be implemented for the
2006-07 postseason football games. c. The
sports-wagering staff met with the equipment managers association. Focused on Divisions II and III, the
sports wagering staff had more of a presence at the Division II and III leadership
conferences. d. Another
Association-wide initiative on which the staff is working during the 2006-07
academic year is a “Don’t Bet On It” campaign, in which
head coaches will be provided lapel pins to be worn during a designed
“Sports Wagering Awareness Day.” The committee previewed the newly
developed “Don’t Bet On It” educational DVD. The committee noted that this DVD
should be widely distributed and also discussed the value of having public
service announcements (PSAs) at championship events. With the increase in Web casting
championship competition, the committee noted this avenue would be a good
opportunity for PSAs in the future. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE: Playing Rules
Oversight Panel (PROP) Update. |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Accepted the
information that Ty Halpin and Heather Perry, staff liaisons for PROP,
discussed issues of interest to both committees. The liaisons noted that supporting
officials was critical to enforcing the playing rules, especially in the area
of technical fouls. The liaisons
also noted that the issue of sportsmanship is discussed at every playing
rules committee meeting and the groups welcomed and supported any action of
the committee in its efforts to instill accountability on behalf of the
Association in addressing unsportsmanlike conduct. The committee suggested that the
playing rules committee annually review, (and revise where appropriate),
sportsmanship statements included in each sports rules book. |
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
ISSUE: Subcommittee
Breakouts. |
|
||
|
Management Council Action: Accepted the
information that prior to the strategic planning subcommittee and the
accountability subcommittee breakout sessions, the full committee discussed
its NCAA Bylaw 10.01.1 policy (July 2005 report). The committee agreed to increase
educational efforts and ensure that all commissioner groups understand the
process for communicating with a conference office regarding an
incident. The charge of the
accountability subcommittee includes establishing a protocol for addressing
such incidents. a. Accountability
Subcommittee. The
subcommittee noted that when the committee or NCAA staff contacts a
conference or institution regarding a negative incident, the purpose of the
communication is to determine how the issue was handled. The NCAA is
frequently asked to comment on these issues and additional background
information is helpful. The
subcommittee noted that examples of positive sportsmanship are not always
forthcoming as individuals are not as conditioned to share those instances as
they are to share examples of unsportsmanlike conduct. The
subcommittee agreed to the following methods for collecting information
related to positive instances of sportsmanship. (1) Ask officials to share observations of
exemplary behavior. (2) PROP will encourage
reporting of positive actions, with those individuals it contacts. (3) Have the regional
site representative for a championship relay instances of positive behavior
to the national office. (4) If a host
institution/conference conducts a championship or a regular-season event in
an outstanding way that promotes sportsmanship, this needs to be highlighted
to the committee. When
positive behavior is reported to the national office or a subcommittee
member, a letter acknowledging the positive actions will be sent to the
involved individual, institution, etc. The
second issue the subcommittee addressed relates to unsportsmanlike conduct
that meets one of the following three factors that were adopted at the
committee’s July 2005 meeting: ·
Issue of national significance. ·
National exposure/extensive regional press. ·
Actions did not uphold sportsmanship. In
terms of a specific protocol to address situations meeting one of the three
criteria, the subcommittee will allow a reasonable amount of time for the
school and conference to respond and adjudicate the issue. In the interim, the issue will be
circulated to the subcommittee members for private reaction. If the institution and/or conference
have met its responsibility under Bylaw 10.01.1, the issue is considered
resolved. | |||