Now that the first phase of financial aid deregulation has passed Division I muster, the Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet is building momentum for the sequel.

After more than a year of membership debate, the Division I Board of Directors in April adopted Proposal No. 02-83-A, landmark legislation that allows student-athletes to receive athletics aid up to the full grant level, plus non-athletics aid (for example, academic scholarships) up to the cost of attendance.

The AEC Cabinet had energetically supported Proposal No. 02-83-A as part of a financial aid deregulation package that included other measures. But because the Division I membership last year was preoccupied with academic reform, cabinet members believed that the membership did not have the opportunity to adequately review and fully understand the implications of the financial aid deregulation proposals. Thus, the cabinet recommended focusing only on Proposal No. 02-83-A during the 2003-04 legislative cycle. Now, though, the cabinet is asking the Management Council to consider the rest of the package.

Meeting in Indianapolis June 8-11, cabinet members urged the Council to support Proposal No. 03-23, which had been tabled by the Council in January. The proposal would permit student-athletes in equivalency sports to receive certain kinds of institutional academic scholarships and need-based aid under specified conditions without it being included in an institution's equivalency computation. Such aid, however, would continue to count toward the recipient's individual limit and toward Division I membership requirements. Cabinet members reason that because the aid is not related to athletics ability, it should not count in the team limits.

The AEC Cabinet did, though, recommend that Proposal No. 03-23 be revised so that the components essentially would be split into two proposals, one for exempting academic scholarships and one for exempting institutional need-based aid. Cabinet members believe this will allow Division I institutions to better determine the cost ramifications of the legislation, which continues to be the primary membership concern in deregulating financial aid.

The cabinet also recommended that the Council remove from the table and support Proposal No. 02-82 regarding counters, with a revision that limits the changes in the proposal to eliminating the varsity-competition standard in Bylaw 15. The measure would allow a recruited football or basketball student-athlete who receives institutional (non-athletics) financial aid to compete without triggering counter status.

Cabinet members believe that when institutional financial aid is based on athletics ability, it is not necessary for counter status to be contingent on the recruited status of a student-athlete, with the exception of outside aid of which athletics participation is a major criterion. Under the current regulations, a student-athlete may be forced to choose between participating in intercollegiate athletics and accepting aid from various non-athletics sources that may count against team limits simply because the recruited status caused the student-athlete to become a counter.

Proposal Nos. 03-23 and 02-82 as revised will enter the 2004-05 legislative cycle and, if adopted in April, would become effective August 1, 2005.

While those two proposals are moving ahead, the cabinet recommended that one other -- Proposal No. 03-24 -- remain tabled. Cabinet members believe Proposal No. 03-24, which would prohibit an institution from providing financial aid awards to student-athletes on a term-by-term basis, needs more review, particularly to figure out the various exceptions to the rule (for example, mid-year enrollment, student-athletes in their last term of eligibility). Cabinet members hope to complete that review by their September meeting.

Other legislative proposals

The cabinet also considered one other item with financial aid ramifications. Members agreed to sponsor legislation to become effective in the 2006-07 academic year that would increase the maximum grant-in-aid limits for the following women's head-count sports: gymnastics (from 12 to 14) and volleyball (from 12 to 13); and the following women's equivalency sports: cross country/track and field (from 18 to 20) and soccer (from 12 to 14).

The recommendation emanated from a Committee on Women's Athletics request for the Management Council to review scholarship data in women's sports. Research indicates that increases in scholarship limits in women's sports in 1996 triggered a rise in participation rates, particularly in the sports cited.

Though the proposal carries a budget impact, since increases in financial aid costs are commensurate with the number of grants-in-aid offered, cabinet members believe that the effective date of the proposal gives institutions adequate time to prepare for the revised maximums.

The cabinet also looked at legislation regarding printed recruiting materials. The issue came back to the cabinet after the Management Council wrestled with two proposals in April. One, Proposal No. 03-88, which would essentially have precluded institutions from producing printed media guides, was withdrawn by the sponsor but reintroduced by another conference. Another measure, proposal No. 03-32, which would allow institutions to produce the guides but not distribute them to recruits, was less restrictive than Proposal No. 03-88, but Council members decided they wanted more review before acting on either.

The AEC Cabinet provided that review and is recommending that the Council defeat Proposal No. 03-88 (and an amendment that allows media guides to be made available electronically). Rather, cabinet members agreed to support an amended version of Proposal 03-32 that allows recruiting or media guides to be printed and provided to prospects as long as they do not exceed 8 1/2 by 11 inches in size and 200 pages in length. The guides also must be printed in one color except for the cover.

Cabinet members believe the amendment is a viable compromise because it reduces costs (the primary concern of supporters of Proposal No. 03-88) and still provides information for program promotion and media use (the primary concern of Proposal No. 03-88 opponents).

In other legislative items, the cabinet asked the Management Council to sponsor legislation requiring institutions to certify that student-athletes in their final season of competition have satisfactorily completed six credit hours during the preceding term in order to be eligible for postseason play occurring between terms. While some conferences already have similar requirements, current NCAA legislation does not require certification of the six-hour rule before events such as bowl games and NCAA championships held during the winter break or after the spring term (for example, Men's College World Series).

Other highlights

Division I Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet
June 8-11/Indianapolis

Recommended eliminating the NCAA core-course review committee due to legislation in 1999 that vested the designation of core courses with individual high schools.

Recommended that the cabinet's legislation review/interpretations subcommittee become a standing committee composed of nine members, including at least two from each Division I subdivision and one athletics director or senior woman administrator, one faculty athletics representative, one campus compliance administrator and one conference administrator.

Reviewed legislative proposals regarding the definition of a recruited student-athlete and recommended that the Management Council approve Proposal No. 03-90-B, which expands current legislation by specifying that a prospect becomes recruited when he or she is officially offered athletically related financial aid. The cabinet urged the Council to defeat Proposal No. 03-90-A, which specifies that telephone contact with a prospect does not trigger the definition of recruited; rather, the definition is based on the institution issuing a National Letter of Intent or a written offer of athletically related aid.

Referred the determination of the inflationary adjustment of the minimum aggregate expenditure for grants-in-aid to the Management Council's membership subcommittee. Though the cabinet's financial aid subcommittee recommended a 10 percent increase after reviewing tuition data from the College Board, the full cabinet discussed whether a less-dramatic increase would be more equitable to both public and private institutions.

Reviewed reaction from the recruiting subcommittee to preliminary recommendations from the Recruiting Task Force. The subcommittee urged further discussion regarding the expansion of the scope of current unethical conduct regulations to include underage drinking and drug use, and requiring prospects and student hosts to sign a form indicating they will not engage in inappropriate conduct during the official visit. The recruiting subcommittee also did not support eliminating student host money provided during the official visit. However, the subcommittee urged the task force to reconsider its stance on providing expenses to parents of prospective student-athletes to attend official visits. Though members noted the economic impact on recruiting budgets, the group does support allowing institutions to pay airline transportation expenses for a parent or legal guardian to accompany a recruit on an official visit.