The NCAA Executive Committee has appointed a working group to study division membership issues and their Association-wide ramifications.

The Exective Committee made the decision at its October 27 meeting in Indianapolis.

The group will consist of presidents and chancellors from all three divisions, due to the Association-wide nature of the review. Members are expected to forward recommendations to the Executive Committee by January 2007.

The need for such a review stems from a proposal submitted for the 2006 Convention by the North Coast Athletic Conference to cap Division III membership after institutions that currently are reclassifying or are in their provisional-membership progression complete those commitments. Division III membership is expected to be at 455 institutions by that time, about 100 more than just a decade ago.

Sponsors of the cap proposal say the implications of such growth are reduced championship access for student-athletes -- or, alternatively, lengthy championships that could increase missed class time. An enlarged division also affects the ability to provide adequate access to programming and grants, sponsors say.

Opponents believe that placing a cap on any one division's membership is not in the best interests of the greater Association, since it requires the other two divisions to be the only remaining outlets for new members. In the scenario presented by the Division III cap proposal, institutions that would have been inclined to join Division III likely would have Division II as their only logical alternative, even if those institutions did not appear to be a good "fit" for Division II. Many people believe it is not appropriate for Division II to be put in that position.

Both the Division III Management Council and Presidents Council reviewed the cap proposal during their fall meetings. The Management Council did not support the cap proposal, based on its recommendation that a membership moratorium (or other alternatives such as reducing the annual number of permissible provisional members) in conjunction with the establishment of the working group would be preferable.

The Presidents Council actually supported the measure, with conditions, one of which was the establishment of the working group. With the working group in place, Council Chair and Bridgewater College (Virginia) President Phillip Stone said the presidents have decided to halt applications from institutions seeking to initiate the exploratory membership process while the group completes its review. The interim moratorium in effect defers any action on the cap proposal to the 2007 Convention.

In its recent history, the Association has established two membership moratoriums. The first, from 1995 to 1998, coincided with the development and implementation of the Association's current governance structure. The second moratorium, from 2000 until 2001, led to the establishment of the provisional membership process and limits that currently apply in Divisions II and III.

The Division II Presidents Council actually was the first group to appeal to the Executive Committee on the Division III cap proposal, asking the Executive Committee in August to study the matter from an Association-wide perspective. Division II is facing membership issues of its own, having had a number of members recently reclassify to Division I.

Executive Committee Chair Walter Harrison, president at the University of Hartford, said he expects the working group recommendations "to focus primarily on ways through which Divisions II and III can exercise their divisional autonomy to reach their short-term and long-term membership goals." The Executive Committee in fact charged the working group with preserving the fundamental relationship that currently exists among the Association's three divisions, meaning that the working group shouldn't assume a blank slate in its deliberations.

"The proposed membership cap in Division III, if adopted, would affect the rest of the Association," Harrison said. "The Executive Committee recognizes that this issue must be addressed, consistent with its responsibility to take on Association-wide matters. The issue represents an important opportunity to address the future membership profiles of Divisions II and III, through the exercise of divisional autonomy, while maintaining the mutually beneficial governance structure established in 1997."

Other items

In other actions, the Executive Committee approved the following as members of a limited liability company that became necessary after the NCAA acquired the preseason and postseason National Invitational Tournaments: the NCAA president, senior vice-president for governance and membership, and the members of the Executive Committee administrative subcommittee.

Committee members also endorsed the following value statement from the NCAA/USOC Task Force that encourages institutions to maintain broad-based intercollegiate athletics programs:

"[Name of institution or organization] believes that participation in intercollegiate athletics represents a uniquely valuable educational experience for student-athletes and enriches the quality of campus life generally. As such, there is great benefit, consistent with the academic mission of American colleges and universities, in ensuring that diverse athletics opportunities are available to students, especially in those sports that connect to the Olympic ideals, inspire young people and attribute to a lifelong commitment to fitness. We are committed to doing all we reasonably can to help ensure that those diverse athletics opportunities continue to exist as part of intercollegiate athletics in America."