By almost every measure, the effort to bring ethnic and gender diversity to key positions in intercollegiate athletics has failed. Based on the latest data from the 2001-02 academic year, here are four data points that say volumes about the hiring practices at NCAA member institutions (see the accompanying listing of additional statistics).

Get the picture?

There are bright spots, certainly. There has been a steady increase among Division I men's basketball head coaches, where a total of 93 black males are in the top coaching spot. It also is tempting to look at the student-athlete population at NCAA member institutions and claim a victory for diversity. The number of Blacks participating in college sports in 2000-01 was better than 27 percent, nearly 2 percent more than the year before. And in terms of gender, the number of female student-athletes has been growing steadily, increasing by more than 10 percentage points in the last decade. But the number of female student-athletes (41 percent) is still not in proportion to the number of females in the student body at NCAA members schools -- one of the three options for complying with Title IX.

As impressive as the growth in diversity among student-athletes has been, the numbers tend to point out just how disproportionate the hiring of ethnic minority and female coaches and administrators has been. The truth is that NCAA colleges and universities are much more enthusiastic about diversity when they are recruiting student-athletes than when they are hiring athletics personnel. The result has caused some to criticize intercollegiate athletics for (at best) failing to provide minority and female role models for significant portions of their student-athlete population or (at worst) perpetuating a "plantation environment" in which female and black student-athletes -- who disproportionately participate in revenue-producing sports -- are under the eye of predominantly white male overseers.

Those are harsh accusations and, one hopes, unworthy of educated, sensitive campus leaders. Yet, the numbers tell a story from which few institutions can walk away blameless.

I believe that college and university presidents should use two tests in judging their personal commitment to hiring for diversity. Until each campus puts its hiring practices to these tests, we likely will not see much improvement in the level of diversity at the key athletics positions.

I made that personal commitment eight years ago when I came to the NCAA. In 1994, 21.7 percent of the national office staff in management positions were female and 8.7 percent were Black. Today, 36 percent are women and 20 percent are Black, and our commitment will continue. Are the circumstances for hiring at the campus level different than hiring for a national office staff? Perhaps. Are the standards and practices for success any different? Absolutely not. It is all about commitment and accountability.

In 2000-01 and 2001-02, the NCAA budgeted $4.5 million to support the development of ethnic minorities and women by funding 17 different programs that would increase the pool of qualified individuals, enhance professional development and career advancement, and assist the membership with the potential hiring of ethnic minorities and women. Another $4.2 million has been requested for fiscal years 2002-03 and 2003-04.

There is no national policy or program that will assure success, because hiring decisions can be made only at the campus level. To improve the diversity of those we hire to teach and coach so that we match the diversity of those we recruit to educate and play sports, we must find the will to act...campus by campus.