The 2003 Drug Education and Testing Survey of athletics departments throughout the membership showed that 74 percent of the institutions that responded prefer the NCAA conduct year-round drug testing in all sports.

The survey, which has been given on a biannual basis since 1987, realized a 49 percent return rate this year.

The number of participants in the survey -- and their answer to year-round testing --are significant to the NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports (CSMAS). .

"The single-most important thing that came out of this was the information about year-round testing,'' said Arnold Mazur, a staff physician at Boston College and a consultant to the CSMAS drug-education and drug-testing subcommittee. "That single fact is a quantum change in the NCAA program. We're going from a situation where only football and track were tested to a situation now where the results show all different sports be tested.''

When the NCAA began year-round drug testing in the 1990s, football and track and field were the only sports involved, primarily because of the high visibility of the two sports and the public perception that performance-enhancing drugs were starting to make their way into the playing fields.

While track isn't nearly as high-profile in this country as football, many NCAA student-athletes go on to compete at the top levels internationally.

The most surprising aspect of the desir for year-round testing in all sports was that 68 percent of the respondents in Division III favored this policy.

"Both Division I and Division II have already given the OK for this, but Division III hasn't,'' said Rochel Rittgers, director of sports medicine at Augustana College (Illinois) and chair of the subcommittee.

Since drug testing is expensive, finding the funds for year-round testing may be an obstacle. However, Rittgers said it's an issue that has been handled before on a trail basis.

"This came up when we first started testing for baseball,'' she said. "When we did that, we couldn't spend any more money. We did the same number of tests, but we did fewer of the football players. Now we have Division II involved in the year-round testing. We're juggling.

"It would be fabulous if we had an endless pot of money, and we just went at it, but we don't. The membership is indicating that they are interested, which is helpful for our cause. They are obviously seeing that this is a positive program for the athletes to create a more level playing field and increase the health and safety of the athletes.''

Institutions are not required to complete the survey, which made the number of responses an exciting part of the endeavor to CSMAS members. They believe receiving nearly half of the surveys is a sign that the membership is taking the issue seriously.

"Any time you have something that is not obligated you get much lower than 100 percent," Mazur said. "A 49 percent response is very good for that kind of situation.''

Under current NCAA rules, any student-athlete who tests positive for a performance-enhancing or illegal substance, such as marijuana, cocaine, heroine, amphetamines, etc., receives a one-year suspension without regaining any lost eligibility.

According to the survey results, 86 percent of the responding institutions believe this is a fair punishment.

There is an appeals process in effect in which a student-athlete is given the opportunity to say why a certain substance may have been found in a drug test. In addition, a legislative proposal that, if approved in this year's legislative cycle would become effective in 2005, will provide an option in which a student-athlete's penalty may be reduced by 50 percent if the appeals committee finds there are significant mitigating circumstances.

The CSMAS subcommittee also found that 47 percent of the responding institutions conduct their own drug testing, while another 47 percent have no in-house drug testing. The remaining six percent don't test, but are actively planning to have a drug testing program.

Of the institutions that conduct tests only 43 percent of those look for anabolic agents. This number is down from the 2001 survey, which showed that 52 percent of the institutions tested for anabolic agents.

However, the testing for recreational drugs has increased. Ninety-eight percent of the respondents test for marijuana and 64 percent test for ecstasy, which is an increase of 17 percent from the 2001 survey.

Survey results

A sample of membership responses to questions from the 2003 Drug-Education and Drug-Testing Survey:

Classification breakdown and response rates

*Seven surveys were returned with no division affiliation noted.

Does your athletics department currently use a drug-testing program for student-athletes?

For what drugs do you test?

Currently, a student-athlete suspended from competition by a national or international sports governing body for failing a drug test may still compete for a NCAA institution by passing a NCAA drug test. Do you favor changing the rule so that the student-athlete also would be ineligible for NCAA competition for the duration of his/her national/international drug-test suspension?

Currently, the NCAA testing program screens for marijuana only at NCAA championships. Do you believe marijuana testing should be added to the NCAA year-round program?

Should the NCAA apply the year-round drug-testing program to all sports?