educational session: ncaa division i hot topics thursday, january 16, 2014 9:30 to 11:00 a.m

Educational Session:NCAA Division I Hot Topics

Thursday, January 16, 2014 9:30 to 11:00 A.M.

Educational Session - Part INCAA Division I Legislative Hot Topics


Overview• Legislative hot topics.

NCAA Division I Leadership Council Subcommittee updates.

Newly-adopted legislation related to meals. Division I interpretations philosophy. Division I temporary waiver review process.

• NCAA Division I Institutional Performance Program (IPP).

Progress. Timeline for implementation. What you need to know for 2014. Ongoing discussions.

• Questions and answers.

NCAA Division I Leadership Council Football Recruiting

Subcommittee

Football Recruiting Subcommittee

• Established October 2012 at the request of the American Football Coaches Association (AFCA) to review the football recruiting model.

• Members include:

Athletics directors; AFCA; Conference officials; Head and assistant coaches; and NCAA Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee.


2013

• Engaged Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS) and NCAA Football Championship Subdivision (FCS) membership.

Attended AFCA Convention and Board of Trustees meeting. Surveyed coaches and athletics directors. Solicited feedback from student-athletes.

• Five proposals adopted in October:

All-star contests; December dead period (FBS); June/July dead period (FBS); Official visits - meals for up to four family members; and Summer athletics activities.


2014

• Continuing engagement of FBS and FCS membership.

• Prioritizing areas of review, which may include:

Campus visits; Communication and contact with prospective student-

athletes; Employment of coaches at camps and clinics owned or

operated by other institutions; or 7-on-7 football.

NCAA Division I Leadership Council Transfer Issues

Subcommittee

Transfer Issues SubcommitteeEstablished October 2012 to evaluate transfer regulations.

• Three main issues to explore:

Permission to contact; One-time transfer exception; and Academic concerns.

• Members include:

Athletics directors; Coaches association representatives; Conference commissioners; Faculty athletics representatives; and NCAA Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee.

Transfer Issues SubcommitteePresenting two recommendations to the Leadership Council:

1.Undergraduate Transfer Waiver Requests.

• Amend NCAA Division I Legislative Council Subcommittee for Legislative Relief (SLR) policies.

Immediate eligibility not provided as relief for any reason for student-athletes not eligible to use the one-time transfer exception.

• NCAA Division I Committee on Student-athlete Reinstatement (SAR) grants SLR limited authority to provide a one-year extension of the five-year clock for mitigating circumstances.

• Mitigation would continue to be evaluated under SLR waiver policies and guidelines.

• No changes to the transfer legislation.

Transfer Issues Subcommittee2.Graduate Student Transfer Waiver Requests.

• Amend SLR policies.

Immediate eligibility not provided as relief for any reason for student-athletes not eligible to use the one-time transfer exception.

• SAR grants SLR limited authority to provide a one-year extension of the five-year clock for mitigating circumstances.

• Mitigation would continue to be evaluated under SLR waiver policies and guidelines.

• No changes to the one-time transfer exception for graduate students legislation.

Newly-Adopted LegislationRelated to Meals


Maximum Meal Plan (NCAA Division I Proposal No. 2013-28).

• Financial aid may include a board allowance that consists of three meals per day or the institution's maximum meal plan that is available to all students, whichever is greater.

14


Meals Incidental to Practice Activities and Noncompetitive Events and Snacks at Any Time (Proposal No. 2013-31-A).

• Institution may provide meals to student-athletes incidental to practice activities during the playing season and while representing the institution in noncompetitive events.

• Institution may provide snacks to student-athletes at any time.

15


Meals Incidental to Practice Activities and Noncompetitive Events and Snacks at Any Time (Proposal No. 2013-31-B).

• Institution may provide meals to student-athletes at any time as a benefit incidental to participation.

• Institution may provide snacks to student-athletes at any time.

16

NCAA Working Group on Collegiate Model - Rules

Philosophy

NCAA Division I Rules Interpretations

PhilosophyBackground:

• August 2011 Presidential Retreat.

• NCAA Working Group on Collegiate Model – Rules.

• Phase I Deregulation.

• Phase II Proposals.

Division I Interpretations Philosophy

Impact of reform on interpretive work:

• Review Legislative Services Database for the Internet (LSDBi) to ensure consistency with membership priorities.

• Apply Rules Working Group charge to interpretive work:

Focus on legislation that is meaningful, enforceable or that contributes to student's success.


Approach:

• Identify areas of legislation where increased local decision making is appropriate and where it is not;

• Increased emphasis on intent of legislation; and

• Special emphasis on student-athlete well-being and success.


Examples of questions to ask:

• Does the issue impact the immediate health & safety of a student-athlete?

• Was the legislation intended to address the circumstances at issue?

• Is the proposed action associated with a recruiting initiative?

• Do the circumstances require a consistent national standard?

Temporary Waiver Review Process

• Extension of Rules Working Group deregulation and interpretive reform.

• Designed to address specified waivers where limited or no flexibility exists in legislation, waiver guidelines or directives.

• Includes legislative relief waivers, initial-eligibility and amateurism certifications, student-athlete academic waivers and student-athlete reinstatement requests.

Temporary Waiver Review Process

Categories of cases impacted:

• Cases involving health and safety or well-being of student-athlete;

• Cases involving prospective student-athletes or student-athletes who served active duty in military or official religious missions;

• Cases involving significant withholding conditions but include compelling mitigation; and

• Cases involving nominal or inconsequential benefits to student-athletes.

Educational Session - Part IINCAA Division I Institutional Performance Program Update


NCAA Division I Institutional Performance Program

Overview

• Progress on the NCAA Division I Institutional Performance Program (IPP).

• Timeline for implementation of the Institutional Performance Program.

• What you need to know about the Institutional Performance Program for 2014.

• Ongoing discussions.

• Questions and answers.

What is IPP?

• Review of key components of the athletics programs and support structure

Package data, most of which we already receive from you, to:

• Identify trends.

• Address issues more proactively.

• Compare your institution against peer groups.

What is IPP?(Continued)

The NCAA Division I Board of Directors indicated the new program should:

• Focus on the student-athlete experience.

• Be a streamlined process.

• Assist institutions with an assessment of their intercollegiate athletics program against the institution’s mission, NCAA values and the principles of institutional integrity.

• Allow an institution to compare itself to other like institutions.

• Utilize technology to minimize institutional burden and maximize the program’s benefits.

• Focus on continuous improvement instead of certification.

IPP Timeline

Jan. 2014

Feb. 2014

Spring 2014

Summer 2014

Fall 2014

Pilot online management

tool

Committee on Institutional

Performance to finalize program

recommendations to Division I Board of

Directors

Board approval of

SAE and other elements of

the new program for

2015

Membership Feedback

IPP Begins

IPP Progress

• NCAA Division I Board of Directors approved the structure of IPP.

• Approval of IPP data elements.

• Development of a management tool.

• Identification of other data elements of the program.

How can IPP help our campus?

• Allow campus leaders to use existing data to make informed decisions regarding their intercollegiate athletics program.

• Provide data to institutions in a meaningful and useful manner to communicate to other constituents groups.

• Information will be available in Fall 2014 when NCAA provides each institution with consolidated data regarding its athletics department.

Membership Outreach

• 26 out of 31 multisport conferences.

• More than 40 chancellors and presidents and athletics directors.

• Governance committees and professional organizations.

• More than 50 campus visits.

• More than 1,000 total respondents including 700 student-athletes provided feedback.

Membership Interview Data

Interviewees

• 740 student-athletes.• 667 institutional personnel.• 1,407 total.

Information does not include conference meetings

Positional Breakout

• 40 presidents and chancellors.

• 336 senior administration. • 72 equipment staff.• 100 health and safety staff.• 62 life skills staff.• 57 facility staff.

Membership Feedback

• Majority believe the program will help institutions improve.

• Support for NCAA collecting and sharing best practices.

• Areas of focus for the new program are correct.

• Support for an inclusion review every four years.

• Conference involvement.

• Support for student-athlete, health and safety surveys.

IPP Student-Athlete Experience Outreach

• From 45 institutions, across 24 conferences. 19 FBS. 13 FCS. 13 Division I, no football.

• Areas discussed on campus: Health and safety. Equipment replacement. Program areas. Student-athlete survey. Facilities tour/evaluation .

Student-Athlete Experience - Student-Athlete Survey Pilot

Data SampleN = 740 student-athletes (mostly SAAC representatives)

Survey Content• Overall experience.• Academics.• Major.• Interaction with coaches.• Equity and inclusion.• Time demands.• Health and safety.• Facilities.• Travel accommodations

and transportation.

Preliminary Data from Student-Athlete Experience Outreach

Percentage of student-athletes who strongly agree or agree with the following statements:

Overall(N = 740)

FBS(N = 297)

FCS(N = 263)

DI, No FB

(N = 180)

I am satisfied with my athletics experience. 89.1 90.7 85.0 90.6

I am satisfied with my academic experience. 92.9 93.3 91.8 92.3

I am satisfied with my social experience. 84.1 87.0 82.2 81.3

I would recommend this school to a prospective student-athlete. 83.6 91.0 78.2 77.8

I am glad I made the decision to attend this school. 87.4 91.0 84.1 85.4

What We Are Still Working On

• Inclusion review.• Compliance review.• Educational plan for IPP.• Communication plan for IPP.• User guide for IPP system access.• Support structure for IPP.

Questions

educational session: ncaa division i hot topics thursday, january 16, 2014 9:30 to 11:00 a.m

Documents