The Division II conference grant program was not broken, but the division fixed it anyway.

While conventional wisdom may be that it's bad to mess with success, Division II hopes that it has made a good program better by adding flexibility that will enable conferences to meet local needs.

The grant program was piloted in 2001-02 as an annual initiative that provided $13,000 in grants to each conference to enhance the roles of faculty athletics representatives, senior woman administrators and student-athlete advisory committees. A technology category was included for 2002-03, and academic enhancement and health and safety (along with another $1 million in funding) were added for 2003-04. So, what started only three years ago as a three-category, $13,000 program is now a six-category, $74,000 program.

As progress goes, that's not bad.

The problem has been that conferences have had little choice but to apply for all grant categories since there is no incentive for them to be selective. Thus, the funding in each area is divided 23 ways with no regard for whether the local need in that category is great or small.

That will change for the 2004-05 academic year. The Division II Presidents Council in October approved a change that will introduce substantial flexibility to the program. At the same time, the grant program's principal objective -- strengthening Division II conference operations -- will be enhanced.

Here is how the new approach will work:

Each conference will be eligible to receive $71,000 in grant money that must be applied in three areas (a minimum of $15,000 in each area):

Conference diversity and governance-structure enhancements.

Student-athlete enhancements.

Academic-support enhancements.

In addition, conferences are eligible for another $24,000 that can be spent on any of the three "required" categories or any of eight "permissive" grant programs. They are:

Compliance and rules education.

Officiating.

Promotions/identity.

Technology.

Professional development.

Sportsmanship.

Consortiums with other conferences (for example, technology workshops).

Consulting fees for work relating to any priority identified in the strategic plan.

Although conference commissioners generally have not made final decisions about how they might want to apply the funding, they are excited at the prospect of using the money in a way that matches their needs.

For example, California Collegiate Athletic Association Commissioner Bob Hiegert, based on preliminary discussions with CCAA members, is targeting technology. "We're trying to move forward with a technology improvement for all 12 schools with Apple computers, getting them the same equipment -- camcorders, the ability to burn DVDs -- and then have the same computers available so that we can improve officiating," Hiegert said.

So, the CCAA likely will devote most of the $24,000 available for "permissive" purposes to technology, about 2.5 times more than would have been available in the previous structure.

"That's the wonderful part about this flexibility within the grant program," he said. "One of the things the Conference Commissioners Association has been concerned about since the outset of the conference grant program is that larger conferences can certainly use the money, but the ability to really get after one program and get it jump-started has had to be split over almost a two-year period. This will give conferences a chance to get it done in one year."

Don Landry, commissioner of the Sunshine State Conference, also endorses the new approach.

"We realize how different we are," he said. "It would be nice if all of us had the exact same problem in the various areas, but we don't. We vary a good bit. This lets us meet all the strategic-planning criteria, but gives us some freedom."

Indeed, "planning" is the operative word behind this initiative. The ultimate plan is to move toward model Division II conferences that increasingly resemble one another in structure and general purpose. In fact, Division II works from a model-conference document that describes desired staffing, use of technology, office location, and salaries and benefits.

The application form is laden with questions about those categories, along with inquiries about the conferences' commitment to planning per se. In fact, the grant process may help frame conference planning with a carrot-and-stick approach: The carrot is that conferences are provided with a clear road map for progress; the stick is that they have to follow the map if they want the funds.

The good news is that the map guides the conferences toward generally agreed-upon destinations. When asked if the CCAA's use of funds for technological purposes fits within the conference's strategic plan, Hiegert said, "Yes, it fits in about four different components of our strategic plan. The main part of it was just trying to get everyone -- the 12 members -- to have the ability to do something at the same time and have the same quality."

The applications are not due until February 16, so most conferences are still forming their proposals. Landry emphasized that the Sunshine State Conference is still in a preliminary stage. However, he said one use under consideration would be to create a series of mini grants for each conference member.

"We realize that even every school varies a good bit," Landry said, "so we may use a lot of mini grants within the categories. As long as they collect things from the approved menu, they would get their mini grant."

The new format permits such an approach, although with extra requirements. Subgrants are permitted, but the request must include a summary from member schools about how subgrant money will be spent. The conference also must include supporting documentation about how the conference will measure the success of the subgrant programs. The Division II Budget and Finance Committee reserves the right to audit subgrant programs as part of the annual reporting process.

At other conferences, the emphasis may be on promotion. The CCAA's Hiegert said that the technology upgrade would benefit the ability of member schools to tout their individual programs in a way that boosts the conference. "Maybe it's information regarding press-conference results, maybe it's a preseason coaches poll, maybe it's a highlight of a basketball game or volleyball game, but we'll have the ability to say to a campus now, 'Get this to so-and-so at this point' and we'll be assured that it will be of very high quality. So, it's exciting."

Bill Lide, commissioner of the Southern Intercollegiate Athletic Conference, sees a future in which promotion and academics are blended.

"We must do a better job of not only marketing Division II but marketing Division II athletes," he said. "We don't do a very good job of that in my view."

To deal with that issue, Lide hopes to attack an acknowledged problem with the SIAC: graduation rates.

"Our graduation rate is too low in comparison to the general graduation rate," he said. "What we have to do is clear additional academic support programs to help our youngsters. We have to create conference-based programs that will be revenue-sharing. We'll give incentive to our schools to have high graduation rates. The only way to do that is that you include it as part of our revenue-sharing package."

If that is the approach that the SIAC eventually chooses, it will benefit greatly from the flexibility the new approach provides. The conference could direct well over half of the $94,000 in available funding to such a use if it chose to do so.

This may not mark the end of the grant program's evolution. As the overall Division II budget grows along with the overall NCAA budget, more funding will become available. For 2005-06, each conference will be eligible for $105,000; that will increase to $115,000 for 2006-07.

As those figures grow, there may be a growing discussion about how the money is allocated. At the moment, each conference gets the same amount, regardless of whether it has six members or 17. Conferences with larger memberships are concerned that their institutions receive less per capita benefit than those with only a few members.

But for the moment, the focus is on the benefits that come with the conference grant program and the new flexibility that it provides.

"People are just so thrilled to get anything to help them," Lide said. "Right now, when I got my $74,000 this past year, I had already spent $30,000 to $40,000 on programming knowing I was going to eventually get the money."