Division I student-athletes indisputably appreciate the Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund (SAOF) and the efforts by conference offices and athletics departments to administer it. In light of that growing appreciation, an increasing number of student-athletes want to be involved in how the fund is used. After all, if the name of the fund is going to be the Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund, it seems fitting that student-athletes should have the opportunity to discuss how it is allocated.

Based on annual figures reported to conference offices, administrators appear to be distributing the fund as it was intended. While anecdotal evidence suggests that student-athletes are aware of the fund and that it is being applied to meet their needs, the lack of student-athlete involvement in determining the fund’s use raises the question of whether the SAOF is meeting its goal — providing direct benefits to student-athletes — as well as it could.

That lack of student-athlete involvement has been raised at the NCAA Leadership Conference and the Division I Regional Leadership Conference in each of the last two years. The primary claim is that student-athletes would like to see the program become less exclusive, specifically with regard to whose input is sought for consideration. It appears that athletics administrators are the sole decision-makers for the distribution of the SAOF.

In general, student-athletes who have been involved in NCAA governance realize their place in the decision-making food chain. Most NCAA bylaws and policies are determined by administrators acting on behalf of student-athlete interests. Administrators in fact frequently legislate to protect their student-athletes, though they infrequently solicit direct input from the student-athletes they are trying to protect.

In the case of the SAOF, administrators say they are advocating for student-athlete well-being. However, a number of potential uses may not be readily apparent to administrators making the decisions. For example, with recent advances in technology, student-athletes might benefit academically from the purchase of a flash drive, a PDA or a wireless card. Additionally, from a health and safety standpoint, student-athletes could benefit from meetings with a nutritionist or a sports psychologist.

At the very least, student-athletes deserve the opportunity to express their opinions about the SAOF to administrators annually. Such communication would dispel the notion that the SAOF may not be meeting its potential. Those discussions also just make sense — if the SAOF is meant to address student-athlete well-being, student-athletes ought to have input.

So, how can an institutions accurately address the needs of their current student-athletes? Just ask!

Educating all student-athletes about the SAOF is the first step. Conference offices, especially liaisons to the conference SAACs, are ideal in such an educational effort. Conference administrators also should urge league SAAC members to talk with their institutional SAACs about potential uses of the fund. Additionally, conferences should recommend that administrators at each institution meet with their respective SAACs about the issue. Make the SAOF — and student-athlete input on how it should be used — an agenda item. Provide an avenue for involvement and urge student-athletes to own that opportunity.

Administrators should not be wary of inviting student-athletes to play a larger role in the decision-making process, either. We know the fund’s boundaries; we are not going to advocate for a stipend. Actually, it is ideal for athletics departments to collaborate with their student-athletes in this kind of decision-making. That experience is enlightening for both parties — student-athletes realize that their voice can be heard on real issues, and athletics departments better understand the needs of their student-athletes. I am positive that administrators will be impressed with the ability of student-athletes to make real-life decisions, decisions that not only will affect their peers, but also the prospective student-athletes ready to follow in their footsteps.

It is important to have these discussions about the SAOF on an annual basis, too. That way, decisions about the use of the fund are relevant to the challenges facing current student-athletes, not those from previous years. As I mentioned, advances in technology make the parameters of the fund dynamic. Administrators must acknowledge that we all live in a world that changes rapidly.

Education, communication and involvement are critical to the effectiveness of the SAOF. Again, student-athletes are extremely thankful for the fund; it is not a benefit we take lightly. On the contrary, we take it so seriously that we want to be more involved. It’s a request we’ve had with several issues over the years — to have the voice of student-athletes be heard in the proper forums, ultimately having the opportunity to effect positive change for our well-being.

Give us that chance. You won’t be disappointed.

Michael Piscetelli, a former track and field student-athlete at Wake Forest University, chairs the Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee.