What’s new in Compliance

Education for coaches, SA, PSA’s, Boosters, faculty/staff◦Website improvements◦Forms online and accessible◦Research information◦Educational documents and How to’s◦Links to resources◦Facebook & Twitter◦Lesson from Hesson◦Compliance in the news◦This week in compliance◦Hatter News (Monthly Newsletter)

New Enforcement Program Gets Tougher/More

Efficient

Department Meeting, August 2013

New Enforcement Program Effective as of Aug. 1,

2013

• Includes 4 tier violation structure

• Enhances head coach accountability

• Increases the DI Committee on Infractions from 10-24 voting members

• Continues to offer meaningful consequences

Why the Structure Change?

• Re-establishing a sense of shared responsibility for NCAA rules compliance & enforcement

• Oct. 2012, DI Board of Directors adopted an overhauled structure that created additional levels of infractions, increased the hearing options in some cases

• Membership wanted to have stiffer and more predictable penalties

• Members asked for a more expedited process.

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS/ANSWERS

1. Does the new enforcement structure apply only to DI schools? YES

2. How long is a head coach suspended for a Level I/II violation? Depending upon the nature of the violation, including aggravating and/or mitigating circumstances, a head coach could receive a show cause order and could be suspended from 50 percent to an entire coaching season.

3. What are some of the Level III violations that could result in a head coach suspension? • In-person, off-campus contacts during a dead period (particularly

during the National Letter of Intent signing dead period);• Intentional or significant game-day simulations and/or impermissible

recruiting aids;• Exceeding the permissible number of contacts with a prospective

student-athlete;• Providing team gear or other inducements to prospective student-

athletes;• Providing a written offer of athletically related financial aid to a

prospective student-athlete prior to August 1 of the prospect's senior year in high school.

4. How does the new penalty structure provide greater predictability and consistency? The new penalty structure clearly outlines the range of penalties available to the Committee on Infractions for each level of violation, including the factors relied upon for the penalties imposed.

5. What are some examples of aggravating factors the committee will rely upon to impose penalties?

• Multiple Level I violations by the institution or involved individual;• A history of Level I, Level II or major violations by the institution, sport

program(s) or involved individual. Additional considerations include: o Lack of institutional control;o Obstructing an investigation or attempting to conceal the

violation;o Unethical conduct, compromising the integrity of an investigation,

failing to cooperate during an investigation or refusing to provide all relevant or requested information;

o Violations were deliberate, premeditated or committed after substantial planning.

6. What are some examples of mitigating factors the committee will rely upon to impose penalties?

• Prompt self-detection and self-disclosure of the bylaw violation(s);• Prompt acknowledgement of the violation, acceptance of

responsibility and (for an institution) imposition of meaningful corrective measures and/or penalties;

• Affirmative steps to expedite final resolution of the matter;• An established history of self-reporting Level III or secondary

violations;• Implementation of a system of compliance methods designed to

ensure rules compliance and satisfaction of institutional/coaches control standards;

• Exemplary cooperation

7. What are some examples of Level I & Level II violations?

Level I Violations Level II Violations

Lack of institutional control

Violations that do not rise to the level of Level I violations and are more serious than Level III violations

Academic fraud Failure to monitor

Failure to cooperate in an NCAA enforcement investigation

Systemic violations that do not amount to a lack of institutional control;

Individual unethical or dishonest conduct

Multiple recruiting, financial aid, or eligibility violations that do not amount to a lack of institutional control;

Head coach responsibility violation by a head coach resulting from an underlying Level I violation by an individual within the sport program

 Collective Level III violations

Misc. New Information• PSAs who receive an NLI will now have 7 days instead of 14 to

sign their NLI.

• Ticketing Information/Forms/How-To can be found on the GoHatters website• Tickets are only given to those with IDs. • If an ID is not available, there is a form which will need to be

filled out.

• Student-athletes need to request their comp tickets in a two-tiered system. • Student-athletes ARE allowed to share comp tickets.

Don’t forget to…

ACS◦ Log All recruiting activities

and sign off on the Affirmation of Recruiting Statement at the first of every month

◦ Make sure new recruits are put into the recruiting coordinator – no duplicate entries

◦ Start filling out CARA Logs, ASAP for fall sports

◦ PSA’s ticket request as made through ACS – working document is on website

EC◦ IRL updates - Amateurism◦ PSA’s check to see list of

approved courses are on HS approved core course list

◦ Get with PSA’s early about sending in HST and TS

Like us on FB and Twitter for all the hot news in compliance campus-wide and nation-wide

SAAC Reps◦ 2 from every team

◦ Need team reps by 8/26 morning◦ Meeting 8/27, 9 p.m. Hall of Fame room

◦ All SAAC reps/interested parties should attend Coach participation encouraged

◦ Corn Hole tournament—need coaches to participate◦ Attendance helps; ideas help!

◦ Chet Hesson is new SAAC Advisor!◦ Katie DiGirolamo, WSV, SAAC Rep