The Gender-Equity Q&A is intended to help athletics administrators understand institutional gender-equity and Title IX-related issues. Answers for the Q&A are provided by Christine Grant, associate professor at the University of Iowa, and Janet Judge, attorney with Verrill & Dana LLP. This is the final column of the 2004-05 academic year. The Gender-Equity Q&A will resume publication in September.

Previous editions of this column discussed the overall treatment of issues that are covered by Title IX. The following factors, also collectively referred to as the "laundry list," are those identified by the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights as the areas to be evaluated for purposes of Title IX compliance:

• Equipment and supplies

• Scheduling of games and practice times

• Travel and per diem expenses

• Academic tutors

• Coaches

• Facilities

• Medical and training services

• Housing

• Publicity

• Support services

• Recruiting

Although complaints often are filed under only one area, both the men's and women's programs must be evaluated overall to determine whether a Title IX problem exists. Although sport-to-sport comparisons may indicate disparities, the differences become problematic only if they are not offset by differences occurring elsewhere.

For example, differences in equipment between the men's and women's basketball teams that benefit the women may be offset by the difference between the equipment provision for men's and women's ice hockey that benefit the men. In short, the test is whether the differences in benefits or services have a negative impact on athletes of one sex when compared with the benefits or services available to athletes of the other sex.

Keep in mind, however, that some differences are permissible. It would be reasonable, for example, for the men's basketball team to need additional recruiting funds in a year when all of the starting players are graduating as compared to the women's team composed that year of sophomore and junior standouts. To be actionable, the differences must be so substantial as to deny equal opportunity to members of one sex.

Both OCR guidance and case law have set forth those components to be evaluated under each factor. Of course, no one list can cover all of the unique circumstances that occur on campuses across the country.

In an effort to help institutions evaluate their current programs, however, the next few Gender-Equity Q&As (beginning in September) will discuss each of the areas in light of the guidance and existing case law. Schools should feel free to add additional pertinent factors or to tailor the existing factors to their particular programs.

For additional gender-equity resources, including newly created video segments featuring Christine Grant and Janet Judge, visit www.ncaa.org/gender_equity.