Home

Steering Committee

Schedule

Subcommittees


Certification Handbook
1996 Certification Report

Self-Study Instrument

Athletics Organization Charts (MS Excel Files)

 



Working Group for Compliance Issues

NCAA Governance and Compliance Sub-Committee

April 24, 2002

Attending: Paul Beck, Carla Curtis, Jeff Daniels, Leslie Fine, Heather Lyke, Jack Rall, Kris Richardson, Linda Schoen, Katie Virtue

Heather Lyke and Kris Richardson prepared and handed out folders containing:

1. Pamphlet: "A quick reference guide to NCAA rules and regulations"

2. List of compliance staff, mission statement and compliance office goals

3. List of assigned responsibilities for each compliance office employee

4. Document: "Athletic compliance office staff, summary of responsibility for coaches 2001-02"

5. List of compliance committees and meeting frequencies

6. List of organizations and people who received "A Quick Reference Guide" beginning Spring 2000

7. A copy of a form used to evaluate coaches with regard to Compliance

8. 2001-01 Calendar of compliance education events conducted by Compliance office

9. Summary of sports and coaches' attendance at compliance meetings

Using these documents and review of the 1996 NCAA self-study report, Heather Lyke guided the group through a discussion of compliance activities since 1996, focusing on activities that took place after she arrived at OSU in 1998. The intent on the Compliance office is to create a "Compliance Conscience" among anyone associated with athletics.

Compliance Staff work with all teams. It is more important to develop an expertise in compliance issues, than an expertise in specific team issues. The compliance office at OSU has a staff size that is comparable with other Big 10 institutions, but is probably smaller than would be optimal for a program as large as ours.

One important issue that was raised and discussed is the responsibility for compliance among Booster organizations. The Compliance office supports the creation of a booster education plan. It is unclear at this point who bears responsibility for booster groups.

The nature and tasks of each compliance committee were discussed in detail.

We discussed the regular, formal audits conducted by the Big 10 and by OSU's Internal Auditing group of the Compliance office. These audits were begun at the request of Athletic Director Andy Geiger, and have proven helpful in identifying areas of strengths and weaknesses.

The group asked about the nature of compliance offices in other schools. Lyke and Richardson explained that nationally, compliance programs are evolving as Athletic Directors begin to view compliance as insurance against inappropriate activities. It was agreed that OSU's compliance office is very technologically sophisticated with excellent database management capabilities.

Lyke and Richardson informed the group that a compliance manual was nearly completed, and would be provided to the group in a timely fashion for the completion of the self-study process.

The group was informed of the nature and consequences of secondary and primary violations. OSU reports approximately 40-50 secondary violations per year, which is strong evidence of a "compliance conscience."

The group was also informed about the many ways that the compliance office makes compliance information available, and about how the compliance office documents requests.

The group agreed that the following additional information would be helpful:

1. A summary of comparable staff sizes for compliance offices in the Big 10

2. A copy of the "Coaches' Guide to Compliance"

3. More information on booster activities, and on who interacts with boosters

4. The chart which shows how OSU compares to other institutions in reporting of violations

At the conclusion of the meeting, the group suggested that the self-study should include:

1. A description of the database system, including how it works and how it was implemented.

2. A discussion of "what do we need to do differently?"

3. Information on changes in the NCAA and Big 10 Compliance rules since 1996

4. Interviews with various constituencies, including student-athletes, SASSO counselors, the marketing office, ticket office, etc.

Leslie Fine will propose a list of constituencies for interviews, and will ask each member of the working group to be responsible for one or more groups. These interviews will assure that data gathering is as comprehensive as possible.

back to top


- The Ohio State University
line
The Ohio State University
-