NCAA Athletics Certification Orientation

Purpose and Benefits

DRAFT May 2010 Purpose Open up affairs of athletics to university community and public. Set standards -- operating principles -- for operation of NCAA Division I athletics programs. Establish tough sanctions for failure to conduct a comprehensive self-study or correct problems.

DRAFT May 2010 Benefits Self-awareness Affirmation Opportunities to improve

Athletics Certification Process

Step No. 1 Orientation videoconference and institution begins self-study process. Step No. 2 Institution develops self-study report. Report developed August 24, 2010 – April 2011 Step No. 3 Self-study report submitted via ACS by April 29, Step No. 4 NCAA staff liaison reviews report for preliminary issues. Step No. 5 Full committee reviews self-study report and approves issues. Step No. 6 Institution has option to respond to the committee's analysis. July 14, 2011 – August 15, 2011 April 29, 2011 – June 30, 2011 August 24, 2010 Until two weeks prior to the evaluation visit

DRAFT May 2010 Athletics Certification Process Step No. 7 Peer-review team conducts campus visit and writes report on Web-based system. September 15, 2011 – November 19, 2011 Step No. 8 PRT report sent to the chancellor or president for response on Web- based system. Step No. 10 Committee deliberates and issues a final decision for all institutions. Within two weeks of campus visit February 2012 Step No. 9 Institution's response due. December 16, 2011

Operating Principles

DRAFT May 2010 Governance and Commitment to Rules Compliance Operating Principle Institutional control, presidential authority and shared responsibilities.  The institution must be responsible for the conduct of its athletics program, including the actions of its staff members and representatives of its athletics interests. Operating Principle Rules compliance.  Staff, student-athletes, other individuals and groups representing the institution's athletics interests must comply with NCAA rules and regulations.

DRAFT May 2010 Academic Integrity Operating Principle 2.1 – Academic standards.  Athletics programs must be designed and maintained as a vital component of the institution's educational system and student-athletes are treated consistently with the student body. Operating Principle 2.2 – Academic support.  Athletics programs must be conducted in a manner designed to protect and enhance the educational experience of student-athletes and emphasize educational objectives.

DRAFT May 2010 Gender, Diversity and Student-Athlete Well-Being Operating Principle 3.1 – Gender issues.  Institutions must conduct and promote athletics programs that are free from gender bias. Operating Principle 3.2 – Diversity issues.  Institutions must promote respect for and sensitivity to the dignity of every person and to refrain from discrimination. Operating Principle 3.3 – Student-athlete well-being.  Athletics program must be designed to protect and enhance the physical and educational well-being of student-athletes.

Measurable Standards

DRAFT May 2010 Measurable Standards Clarify expectations for each operating principle. Bring more consistency to the process. Used by institutions, NCAA staff, peer- review teams and the NCAA Division I Committee on Athletics Certification.

Plans for Improvement

DRAFT May 2010 Plans for Improvement Institutional plans must include the following requirements: Issues/problems Measurable goals Steps to achieve the goals Individuals/offices responsible for carrying out the specific actions Specific timetable(s)

DRAFT May 2010 Plans for Improvement Further, institutional plans for improvement must meet the following requirements: Stand alone and in writing Broad-based campus participation Institutional approval

Participants in the Athletics Certification Process

DRAFT May 2010 Participants Committee on Athletics Certification Peer-Review Team Athletics Certification Liaison Steering Committee Self-Study Subcommittees Campus Contact Report Coordinator NCAA Staff Liaison

DRAFT May 2010 Committee on Athletics Certification 18 members:  College chancellors or presidents  Athletics administrators  Faculty athletics representatives  Conference administrators Philosophy: Assist institutions in identifying mechanisms which ensure intercollegiate athletics programs are operating in accordance with the high standards and core values of Division I.

DRAFT May 2010 Peer-Review Team Typical team:  Generally 3 to 5 members  Chaired by a chancellor or president whenever possible  Random selection approved by committee  Will not include peer reviewers with potential conflicts of interest

DRAFT May 2010 Peer-Review Team Responsible for:  Verifying accuracy of the self-study  Confirming broad-based participation  Evaluating conformity with the operating principles

DRAFT May 2010 Athletics Certification Liaison Previously designated by the chancellor or president Responsible for monitoring progress on plans for improvement developed during the second-cycle certification process May be inside or outside athletics

Certification Decisions

DRAFT May 2010 The Certification Decision Materials reviewed during deliberations:  Self-study report  Initial issues identified by the committee  Institution's response to Committee's analysis  Peer-review team's report  Institution's response to peer-review team's report  Other material and information deemed relevant by the committee

DRAFT May 2010 Certification Categories Certified Certified with conditions Not certified

Available Resources

DRAFT May 2010 Available Resources NCAA staff liaison – Kelly Brooks Handbook (PDF) Self-study instrument (PDF) Orientation materials Self-study checklist Measurable standards ACS training videos

NCAA Athletics Certification Orientation