NCAA Division I Student-Athlete Reinstatement Dialogue

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Division III Student-Athlete Reinstatement and Hardship Waivers Kelly Groddy Brandy Hataway.
Advertisements

Division III Student-Athlete Reinstatement and Hardship Waivers
Division III Student-Athlete Reinstatement Fundamental Introduction
DIVISION I STUDENT-ATHLETE REINSTATEMENT AND LEGISLATIVE RELIEF Matt Maher and Ryan Allen Hall.
LSDBi/RSRO NCAA Division III
A. Faith English and Kelly Groddy. RSRO REPORTING TRENDS.
1. NCAA Division III Financial Aid Reporting Program and Self-Assessment 2012.
Introduction to the NCAA Amateurism Clearinghouse.
Overview of NAU Compliance IAC April 10, 2009 Jared Bruggeman, Associate Athletic Director Lynn Newson, Compliance Assistant.
HEAD COACH CONTROL AND PROVIDING GUIDANCE TO ALL COACHES October 2013 Compliance Meeting.
University of Kentucky Compliance Office
December  Bylaw now states that a head coach is presumed to be responsible for the actions of all assistant coaches and administrations.
 Overview and Virginia Tech Procedures for Reporting October 19, 2010 Virginia Tech Athletics Compliance ***** RULES-EDUCATION *****
2015 Regional Rules Seminar.  To understand four-year college transfer legislation.  To be able to accurately apply legislation to use best practices.
 Bylaws subject to reinstatement.  Philosophy.  Factors considered for reinstatement.  Points of contact.  De minimis violations.  Restitution violations.
Natasha Oakes and Leslie Schuemann. 1. Session Outcomes. 2. Learning Objectives. 3. Compliance Concepts. 4. Resources.
NCAA Division I Interpretations Philosophy
Division I Student-Athlete Reinstatement – PART II.
NCAA Division I Interpretations Philosophy Brandy Hataway & Charnele Kemper.
Agenda NCAA Bylaw 14. Eligibility between terms. Exchange programs and study abroad. Transfers. NCAA Division III Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement.
Conference USA Head Coaches Responsibility. What’s On Our Agenda Today? Rationale for rule change NCAA Bylaw Triggers of the Rule Promoting an.
2012 NCAA Regional Rules Seminar Orientation Session for Advanced Compliance Administrators.
Secondary/Level III Violations and Online Self-Reporting Process Renee Gomila Kelly Groddy 2014 Regional Rules Seminar.
NCAA Division I Student- Athlete Reinstatement (Part I) Kelly Groddy Jennifer Henderson.
Division I Advanced Student-Athlete Reinstatement NCAA Academic and Membership Affairs.
Division I Student-Athlete Reinstatement: Institutional, NCAA and Media Navigation Advanced Application.
2011 Regional Rules Seminars NCAA Division II Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement and Secondary Infractions.
Lynn Holzman Director of Academic and Membership Affairs, NCAA.
Division I Enforcement Level III/Secondary Violations and Level IV Incidental Infractions Renee Gomila Kelly Groddy.
Self-Reporting Secondary Violations. This session will review: 1. The definition of a secondary violation; 2. Level I and Level II secondary violations.
Division I Awards and Benefits Question and Answer Jobrina Marques Steve Clar.
Requests/Self-Reports Online Reporting Process Advanced Session A. Faith English Kelly Groddy.
Processing Level I and II Violations 2013 Regional Rules Seminars Laura McNab and Mike Zonder NCAA Enforcement Staff.
Division III Eligibility – Advanced Anne Rohlman.
Division I Student-Athlete Reinstatement Stephanie Grace | Matt Maher | Brad Rochman.
NCAA Division III Bylaws 12/16 – Fundraising Advanced Team Presenter Jean Orr.
Division I Academic Misconduct Emily Capehart Andy Cardamone Azure Davey.
NCAA DIVISION III INTRODUCTION TO COMPLIANCE CONCEPTS (PART 3) Kristin DiBiase Joni Williamson.
DIVISION III REQUESTS/SELF-REPORTS ONLINE: INTERPRETATIONS, WAIVERS AND VIOLATIONS Kristin DiBiase Faith English Kelly Groddy.
Student-Athlete Reinstatement and Enforcement A. Faith English | Stephanie Grace | Brad Rochman.
Secondary/Level III Violations and Online Self-Reporting Process Janet Calandro A. Faith English Kelly Groddy 2016 NCAA Regional Rules Seminar.
Kelly Brummett Steve Clar
Duquesne University Monthly Compliance Meeting
Requests/Self-Reports Online Reporting Process
Division I Recruiting Hot Topics
Kristen Matha Anne Rohlman Jenn Samble Academic & Membership Affairs Bylaw 11, 13, 17 Team
Elite Student-Athlete Education
Division III Transfers
Division I Student-Athlete Reinstatement Stephanie Grace | Matt Maher | Brad Rochman
Eric Brey Kelly Brummett Katy Yurk
Janet Calandro A. Faith English Kelly Groddy
Division I Waivers Processed by Student-Athlete Reinstatement
Bylaw 16: Awards and Benefits Hot Topics
2010 Regional Rules Seminar
Scott Connors Eric Mayes
Division I Legislative Relief Waivers Brandy Hataway abbie markey
Panel Part 1 Ethics in Compliance Chris Brown Louise McCleary
Main NCAA Title.
Interpretations process Kelly Brummett Kris richardson
Academic integrity Forum: Current Landscape
UAlbany Compliance Corner
Department of Athletics
UAlbany Compliance Corner
Janet Calandro Kelly Groddy Cindi Merrill
NATIONAL LETTER OF INTENT
Legislative Relief Waivers
Division I Bylaws 11/13/17 Modernization
Division I Football Hot Topics
Division III Student-Athlete Reinstatement
College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin Compliance Conference
Presentation transcript:

NCAA Division I Student-Athlete Reinstatement Dialogue 2017

Session Overview Student-Athlete Reinstatement (SAR). Level III/Secondary Enforcement. Public and Media Relations (PMR). Case Study and Discussion. Key Takeaways.

Cases Processed by SAR SA involved in a violation that affects eligibility and requires reinstatement. Student-athlete reinstatement request. SA unable to compete in four seasons in a five-year period. Extension of eligibility waiver. Athletics activity waiver.

Cases Processed by SAR SA unable to complete a season due to extenuating circumstances or medical hardship. Hardship waiver (independent institutions). Hardship waiver appeal. Season-of-competition waiver.

SAR Analysis Facts. Committee guidelines. Mitigation. Case precedent. SA culpability. Institutional involvement. Committee guidelines. Case precedent. Totality of circumstances.

Intersection of Level III/Secondary Enforcement and SAR Nearly all situations requiring reinstatement also are institutional violations. Most are Level III/Secondary Not every violation requires reinstatement. Create a related case in RSRO.

Intersection of Level III/Secondary Enforcement and SAR Prioritize submissions. Don’t wait on Level III/Secondary decision to address eligibility issues. Address In-Season sports. Circumstances and information reported should be consistent.

Cases Processed by Level III/Secondary Enforcement Level III – Breach of Conduct. Isolated or limited in nature; Provide no more than a minimal recruiting, competitive or other advantage; and Provide no more than a minimal impermissible benefit.

Level III/Secondary Enforcement Process Assess circumstances to determine processing. Consider facts and any mitigation in each case. Review institution and conference responses. Determine if additional corrective/punitive actions are necessary.

Level III/Secondary Enforcement Process Standard Penalties Document. Head Coach Responsibilities – Level III Violations Coaching Suspensions Document. Case Precedent. Level III/Secondary Enforcement Staff. RESOURCES

What does NCAA Public and Media Relations (PMR) do? Educate and inform about college sports issues. Tell the benefits of athletics in higher education. Collaborate with national office staff, the membership and others. Use clear and concise language in all communications.

How does PMR collaborate? Work with SAR and member schools before issues break, during the review and through the decision. Monitor media stories and social media. Correct inaccurate information. Assist in the development of communication strategy surrounding decision. SAR/ENF PMR INST

PMR Best Practices Consult with university relations, athletics communications and NCAA public and media relations. Have a clear media strategy, communication plan. Monitor issues via social media sites, local and national outlets, etc. Beware of information leaks. Include all relevant facts of the case (excluding confidential information).

PMR Communications Clarify NCAA process and rules. Correct inaccuracies in media reports. Proactive vs. reactive statements. Joint statement vs. individual statements. PMR slide

Case Study - Facts Morning of Selection Monday for the 2017 Division I Women’s Basketball Championship. Institution is projected number two seed. Director of compliance saw following Twitter post by women’s basketball student-athlete:

Enforcement – Conducting an Investigation Member Resource Guide (found on www.ncaa.org/enforcement). Information on conducting a campus investigation and preparing a report to the enforcement staff for possible Level I/II violations. Develop institutional investigative policy. Contact the enforcement staff. Develop a case strategy. Analyze the information. Report the violations.

Case Study - Facts SA is in her first year at the institution. SA is originally from Canada and previously spent two seasons at a two-year institution. After further investigation, institution determines: Individual who responded to SA’s tweet is a booster of institution. SA stayed at home of booster family on several occasions. Boosters paid for SA’s meals.

Communications Plan After seeing the tweet, local media calls to question the eligibility of SA Becky Wolf - What do you do?

Communications Plan Proactive vs. reactive (facts are still being developed). Is she a high-profile SA? Will this be resolved prior to selection show? Will this require reinstatement? Is this going to be a major investigation? What is the best course of action at this point? Who else on campus needs to know (communications)?

Case Study – Additional Information How did SA meet booster? SA was introduced to booster family fall 2016 when she first arrived at institution. Director of basketball operations arranged for SA to meet booster when booster was in athletics department office picking up season tickets. Head coach requested booster family serve as surrogate family to SA.

Case Study – Additional Information How many times did SA stay with booster family? Four days over winter break. Four additional days during 2017 spring semester. How many meals did SA receive from booster family? Seven meals during winter break. Two meals associated with the other times SA stayed with booster family. Three additional meals during course of 2016-17 academic year.

Case Study – Additional Information Did SA receive any additional benefit from booster family (e.g., gifts, use of family car, or other items)? No. Any other questions?

Case Study – Lodging Value Based on the Division I Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement guidelines. Rental value of the property is the basis for the valuation. May divide rental value by the number of people staying in the household on a per-night basis. If no actual value of the property is available, must explain why.

Case Study – Lodging Value Calculation. Rental value of booster’s home = $6,500 per month. $6,500 per month divided by 30 days = $216.67 per day. $216.67 per day divided by the number of people in the home at the time SA stayed (3) = $72.22. SA stayed with the booster family for eight days (8 x $72.22). Total value = $577.76.

Case Study – Meals Value Seven meals were at the booster’s home and five meals were at a restaurant. Institution’s policy permits SAs to participate in one occasional meal per month. Occasional meals must occur at home of booster. Can subtract four meals from the seven meals at booster’s home.

Case Study – Meals Value Value of meals at a restaurant. Based on actual value (credit card statement) or cost of menu item + tip. Total = $84.62. Value of meals at booster’s home. Based on cost of similar meals at local restaurants. Total = $33.50. Total meal value = $118.12.

Case Study – Valuation Total value of impermissible benefits received by SA: Lodging = $577.76. Meals = $118.12. Total value = $695.88.

SAR Mitigation Discussion Mitigation Education Institutional Involvement Relationship with booster SA well-being SA culpability SAR Mitigation Discussion

SAR Guidelines and Case Precedent Bylaw 16 guideline. Value of benefit ranging from $400-$700 = withholding of 20 percent and repayment. Community service guideline. Permits SAs, in some circumstances, to perform community service in lieu of a portion of repayment. Case precedent. Mitigation discussion. Decision Mitigation Case Precedent Guidelines

SAR Decision and Rationale Reinstated. Withholding? Repayment and/or community service? Rationale?

Communicating the Decision Work with individuals on your campus, including communications, to develop a plan to notify involved individuals about the decision. Once decision is communicated on campus, the likelihood that it will become public increases. Contact NCAA PMR staff to discuss media strategy. Monitor social media and other statements made by involved individuals, including student-athletes, coaches, third parties, etc.

Key Takeaways Communicate with NCAA from onset of process, especially if URGENT matter and competition is pending. Determine relevant facts and mitigation; don’t rely on unreliable sources. Report violations in a timely manner.

Key Takeaways Use available resources. Division I Committee on Student-Athlete Reinstatement guidelines. www.ncaa.org/enforcement. Include appropriate institutional staff members in process, including media relations staff where appropriate. Have a media strategy, communication plan.

We Want Your Feedback Your input is important. Rate this session using the survey on the Regional Rules Seminar app.