Skip to Navigation
University of Pittsburgh
Print This Page Print this pages

March 20, 1997

Pitt begins self-study of athletics' compliance with NCAA rules

For the next year, about 50 members of the University community will evaluate the Pitt athletics department's compliance with National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) rules and principles of program governance, academic and fiscal integrity, and commitment to gender and racial equity.

The self-study is the first step in a new certification process for NCAA Division I institutions. The process — it's the athletic equivalent of accreditation for academic units — was a key part of a reform agenda that the NCAA approved at its 1993 convention.

Division I schools are supposed to undergo certification every five years. Pitt's first turn was scheduled for early 1997.

"One of the things that the NCAA requires is that this be a University-wide process, open to the entire University community and with the results announced to the public," said Internal Audit Director John Elliott, who is chairing a 28-member Pitt self-study steering committee.

Under NCAA certification guidelines, the steering committee also includes Chancellor Mark Nordenberg; Athletics Director Steve Pederson; education school Dean Kenneth Metz, who is Pitt's faculty athletics representative to the NCAA; and Senior Associate Director of Athletics Carol Sprague, who is Pitt's senior woman athletics administrator.

Other steering committee members include Donna Sanft, the Pitt athletics department's NCAA compliance officer; associate general counsel Rich Holmes; and faculty, staff, student and alumni representatives named by campus organizations such as the University Senate and the Chancellor's Diversity Working Group, Elliott said.

Four subcommittees will work with the steering committee. English department chairperson David Bartholomae will chair the academic integrity subcommittee, Interim Controller Douglas Wylie will chair the fiscal integrity subcommittee, nursing school assistant professor Susan Albrecht will chair the rules compliance subcommittee, and Residence Life director Jo Ann Woodson will chair the subcommittee on commitment to equity.

Tomorrow, March 21, an NCAA representative will visit Pitt to conduct an orientation session for the steering committee. The University will then have one year to complete its self-study report.

In May 1998, a three-to-five-member NCAA peer review team will visit Pitt and begin reviewing the University's self-study to verify its accuracy, whether it involved campus-wide participation, and how well Pitt's athletics department conforms to NCAA rules and principles. The review team for Pitt's certification has yet to be appointed by the NCAA's Committee on Athletics Certification. But the pool of reviewers includes chief executive officers and other administrators at fellow Division I institutions.

Peer review teams submit a report to the NCAA Committee on Athletics Certification. The latter committee then reviews the peer review report, the original self-study, and any additional written comments by both the institution under review and the peer review team.

Then the Committee on Athletics Certification renders a decision classifying the institution in one of three categories: * Certified, meaning the athletics program is "in substantial conformity" with NCAA operating principles and that any problems identified during the certification process were minor.

* Certified with conditions, which means the program likewise substantially conforms to NCAA principles but that the problems identified were serious enough to withhold full certification until they have been corrected.

* Not certified. According to NCAA guidelines, "This classification denotes that problems identified by the institution or the peer review team were considered by the [athletics certification] committee to be very serious or pervasive. In this instance, action must be taken by the institution before it can be conditionally certified." The guidelines add: "When problems are identified — regardless of the institution's eventual classification — the Committee on Athletics Certification will require the institution to correct them as a normal part of the certification process." Institutions classified as "certified with conditions" or "not certified" are expected to develop a self-correction plan in collaboration with the Committee on Athletics Certification. "Once the institution has shown that the corrective actions have been taken in the specified period of time, the [athletics certification] committee ordinarily will grant the institution full certification status," according to the guidelines.

"If an institution that has been classified as 'not certified' fails to make an effective effort to correct problems within the time specified by the Committee on Athletics Certification, the committee may place the institution's athletics program in a restricted membership category for up to one year. As a result, the institution would not be eligible for NCAA championship competition in all sports." If, at the end of this restricted membership period, the committee concludes that the institution has not addressed concerns properly, the institution would be barred from NCAA membership.

After notifying institutions of its decisions, the committee will announce them publicly. For institutions classified as "certified with conditions" or "not certified," the committee's public announcement will include any corrective actions, and the timetable for completing each action, specified by the committee.

Institutions may appeal decisions by the Committee on Athletics Certification and request hearings before the committee, under a process outlined by the NCAA.

— Bruce Steele


Leave a Reply