The NCAA News - News and FeaturesMay 12, 1997
UTEP placed on probation for five years
The NCAA Committee on Infractions placed the University of Texas at El Paso on probation for five years for NCAA rules violations concerning academic eligibility, recruiting, extra benefits, financial aid and institutional control.
In addition, the committee reduced the number of initial and total financial aid grants in football and men's and women's basketball for two years, required the school to forfeit games for a two-year period in which ineligible players had participated, required additional compliance and education programs, and restricted institutional representatives from serving on NCAA committees or cabinets for three years.
The violations were characterized by the committee as systemic failures, involving several athletics department personnel and student-athletes in several different sports. Among the violations were improper recruiting, the participation of student-athletes who were enrolled in fewer than 12 credit hours, failure to correctly calculate grade-point averages that resulted in student-athletes being incorrectly certified as eligible, permitting student-athletes to compete who had not met satisfactory-progress requirements, providing financial aid to student-athletes who had been certified as nonqualifiers, and providing extra benefits to numerous student-athletes.
UTEP's violations were made more serious by the fact that the university was on probation when they occurred and the repeat-violator rule was in effect. The school had been placed on probation in 1991.
The committee noted that the university had taken a number of corrective steps to improve its compliance monitoring as a result of the 1991 decision. However, the committee concluded that the scope of the current case indicated that those measures were not effective, particularly regarding certification of student-athlete academic eligibility.
While still concerned about UTEP's continued lack of control over its athletics program, the committee noted that the violations found in the 1991 case were not found in the current case. The committee decided not to impose all of the penalties prescribed for repeat violators.
The NCAA Committee on Infractions heard this case February 2, 1997. Representatives of the university, the Western Athletic Conference and the NCAA enforcement staff appeared before the committee.
The violations found by the committee included:
Between June and August 1993, members of the women's basketball coaching staff and a student assistant in the athletics department provided improper recruiting inducements to a women's basketball prospective student-athlete and a men's basketball prospective student-athlete by assisting them with their enrollment in correspondence courses from Southeastern College and by arranging proctors and a tutor.
In November 1994 and during the fall of 1996, a total of 27 student-athletes in several sports traveled to, received expenses for and competed in contests away from the institution's campus, even though they were enrolled in fewer than 12 credit hours and were ineligible to participate in intercollegiate athletics competition.
From the 1992-93 through 1995-96 academic years, the institution certified the eligibility of numerous student-athletes using a method to calculate grade-point averages that was contrary to NCAA legislation and institutional policy. As a result, the institution incorrectly certified at least three student-athletes as eligible and allowed them to compete.
During the 1994-95 and 1995-96 academic years, at least 17 student-athletes in several sports who had not completed the required percentage of credit hours competed while ineligible. Even though it learned in December 1995 that the methods used to calculate grade-point averages were not permissible under NCAA legislation, and at least one men's basketball student-athlete was ineligible for competition, the university did not declare him ineligible for competition until March 1996.
In December 1995, two men's basketball student-athletes competed in one contest while ineligible.
During the 1996-97 academic year, three student-athletes received impermissible athletically related financial aid after the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse had certified them as
nonqualifiers.
The athletics department provided extra benefits to numerous student-athletes in all sports when it paid their drop/add fees and allowed them to use the photocopy machine.
From the 1992-93 through 1996-97 academic years, the institution exceeded the permissible number of initial financial aid awards in football by a total of seven.
There was a lack of institutional control.
In determining appropriate penalties, the committee considered UTEP's corrective actions, including:
Placed the athletics department on probation for the 1996-97 and 1997-98 academic years.
Specified that it would request the Western Athletic Conference to conduct annual audits of the athletics program.
Hired a compliance consultant to provide mandatory rules training to a variety of individuals in the athletics department and throughout the university.
Removed from the athletics department and assigned to other areas in the university all tutoring, study hall, registration and advising functions, and the administration of the student services department.
Stated that it would transfer eligibility certification from athletics to a newly created position reporting directly to the dean of enrollment services.
Required rules training for two women's basketball coaches, including attendance at an NCAA compliance seminar and at weekly meetings with the senior woman administrator.
Deferred salary increase opportunities for two coaches pending the outcome of the university's investigation.
Disassociated a former women's basketball student-athlete from the athletics department for five years, including contact with prospective or current student-athletes.
Required a variety of individuals to attend an NCAA compliance seminar.
Established mandatory monthly compliance meetings and a policy that, when possible, all rules interpretations would be put in writing.
The Committee on Infractions adopted as its own penalties self-imposed by the university, including:
Reduction by one in the number of permissible total financial aid awards in football during the 1996-97 academic year.
Reduction by two in the number of permissible initial financial aid awards in football during the 1999-2000 academic year.
Forfeiture of three men's basketball contests in which an ineligible student-athlete participated.
The Committee on Infractions imposed other penalties, including:
Public reprimand and censure.
Five years of probation from May 1, 1997.
Prohibition specifying that institutional representatives may not serve on NCAA committees or cabinets for three years.
Reduction by five in the number of permissible initial financial aid awards in football during each of the 1997-98 and 1998-99 academic years.
Reduction by seven in the number of permissible total financial aid awards in football during the 1997-98 academic year and by five during the 1998-99 academic year.
Limitation to a maximum of three initial financial aid awards in women's basketball during each of the 1997-98 and 1998-99 academic years.
Reduction by two in the number of permissible total financial aid awards in women's basketball during each of the 1997-98 and 1998-99 academic years.
Limitation to a maximum of three initial financial aid awards in men's basketball during each of the 1997-98 and 1998-99 academic years.
Reduction by two in the number of permissible total financial aid awards in men's basketball during each of the 1997-98 and 1998-99 academic years.
Requirement that the institution forfeit all contests in which ineligible football, men's basketball and women's basketball student-athletes participated during the 1994-95 and 1995-96 academic years.
Requirement that the institution continue to develop a comprehensive athletics compliance education program, with annual reports to the committee during the period of probation.
Requirement that the institution's head women's basketball coach, head men's basketball coach, head football coach and faculty athletics representative attend NCAA regional compliance seminars during each of the next two years.
Recertification of current athletics policies and practices.
As required by NCAA legislation for any institution involved in a major infractions case, UTEP is again subject to the NCAA's repeat-violator provisions for a five-year period beginning on the effective date of the penalties in this case, February 2, 1997.
Should the University of Texas at El Paso wish to appeal this decision, it must submit a written notice of appeal to the NCAA executive director no later than 15 days from the date of this release. The Infractions Appeals Committee, a separate group of people, hears such appeals.
The members of the Committee on Infractions who heard this case are Richard J. Dunn, divisional dean of humanities, University of Washington; Jack H. Friedenthal, dean of law school, George Washington University; Roy F. Kramer, commissioner, Southeastern Conference; Frederick B. Lacey, attorney, LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene and MacRae and a retired judge; James L. Richmond, retired judge and attorney, Rowe, New Mexico; and committee chair David Swank, professor of law, University of Oklahoma.
The full report of the Committee on Infractions will be published in the June 2 issue of The NCAA Register.
|
