SAN DIEGO -- In his opening remarks at the Division II Presidents and Chancellors Summit June 23, NCAA President Myles Brand referred to a track coach who compelled his runners to start the race as fast as they could … and then gradually increase their speed.

That theme carried throughout Division II's second presidential summit, which celebrated a quick start on an aggressive and ambitious identity campaign and also acknowledged the need to pick up the pace.

The acceleration is the "what's next" for a division that since the first summit in Orlando two years ago  developed a comprehensive strategic-positioning platform that defined Division II for what it is rather than what it is not. The good news from the San Diego session is that those next steps are essentially tactical now that the strategic heavy lifting has been completed.

"The strategic platform gives us a benchmark upon which to base all our future decisions," said Pfeiffer University President Charles Ambrose, who as chair of the Division II Presidents Council moderated the summit. "Now it’s all about giving each campus the tools to implement and activate that strategic direction."

About 130 presidents and chancellors participated in the summit, roughly the same number as in Orlando, and most agreed the "next steps" would build on the good work already done.

They liked the notion, for example, of expanding Division II's unique National Championships Festival to an annual event. The first festival was in spring 2004, followed by a fall-sports version last November in Pensacola, Florida, which city officials report had a $3.6 million economic impact on the community. The next is slated for May 2008 in Houston. NCAA President Brand encouraged Division II to make the experience more accessible to student-athletes by increasing the frequency.

The presidents and chancellors also appreciate Division II's television exposure on CBS, ESPN and CSTV, which provided live or tape-delayed broadcasts of 17 championship events this year. The CSTV agreement also provided coverage of nine regular-season games in football and basketball and more than 125 additional webcasts of other games and events. Plans are underway to provide even more opportunities.

And they seem especially pleased with Division II's visual identity campaign that ties hexagon imagery to the six key Division II attributes of learning, balance, passion, sportsmanship, resourcefulness and service; and a slogan ("I Chose Division II') that identifies Division II as a thoughtful destination. Now, presidents and chancellors can activate the campaign locally with the help of a toolkit and "online store" that allow schools to co-brand the creative application of Division II's strategic position through signage, posters, field stencils, videos, print ads and more.

Future challenges

While those next steps seem easy enough to accomplish, some of the others discussed at the summit may be harder to solve. Membership issues in particular loom as the Association works through matters that affect each division. Rapid growth in Division III, continued migration of Division II members to Division I, conference realignment and increasing interest from NAIA schools in joining the NCAA all will affect Division II in the coming years.

The most immediate concern perhaps lies in the Western half of the Division II nation where just 66 of the division’s 281 active members reside. A panel at the summit discussed the ramifications of the sparse population on travel and conference affiliation.

The University of Nebraska at Kearney's Doug Kristensen in fact called it the No. 1 challenge facing Division II. "Our Rocky Mountain Athletic Conference opponents are an average of 600 miles away," he said. "That's like sending Gannon to play a conference game in Orlando or Pfeiffer to play one in Des Moines."

The Great Northwest Conference is similarly challenged, with two schools in Alaska. Karen Morse of Western Washington University said travel there from her campus compares to a coast-to-coast journey in the continental states.

Relief may be on the way, though, either in the form of increased membership in the region or in distribution policies that help mitigate travel concerns. Division II is the only division so far with legislation on the table to facilitate an influx of Canadian schools. If approved at the 2008 NCAA Convention, a handful of institutions north of the border that have expressed interest in joining Division II may become active members as soon as 2011.

In addition, the Division II Presidents Council at its meeting the previous day agreed to explore mitigating travel expenses for some Division II schools by adding a component to the division’s distribution formula that accounts for mileage incurred for in-region regular-season travel. The Council also reaffirmed a previous decision to waive the waiting period for former Division II members that wish to return from Division I.

"We understand the pressures some of our Western region members face and are looking for ways to reduce those concerns," Ambrose said. "In fact, as Nebraska-Kearney President Kristensen indicated, membership issues overall are our No. 1 priority as we move forward."

Scholarship study

The second summit featured a second financial study as well. In Orlando, the focus was on the costs of schools reclassifying from Division II to Division I, but the presentation in San Diego highlighted the value of the partial-scholarship model in Division II.

The study conducted by the firm Hardwick-Day is designed to determine the financial value of the Division II model of partial athletics scholarships and identify the non-financial implications of Division II athletics in areas such as cultural diversity, gender balance, campus culture and student life.

"In effect," Ambrose said, "we want to know the following: If I offer person X an athletics scholarship, what is the value of that scholarship against an offer from another institution that does not include athletics aid and what is the impact of the athletics aid on that person’s decision?"

So far (data have been collected from 15 of the 20 desired schools), the study shows the primary benefit of athletics aid is in the effect on enrollment. For example, the study indicates that athletics scholarship recipients contribute positively to the institution’s academic profile. They are more likely to be near the center of the academic profile than non-recipients.

Athletics scholarship recipients also contribute positively to gender balance and ethnic diversity. They add geographic diversity, too, since they are much more likely than non-recipients to come from distances greater than 300 miles away and much less likely to be local students.

They also are significantly more likely to have participated in community-service projects or to indicate that they plan to do community service than students not on athletics aid, a finding that aligns with Division II’s community-based identity.

Officials hoped the study would reveal the Division II partial-scholarship model as more cost-efficient than non-athletics scholarship models, but the data are not clear at this point.

"The value of the study will be at the campus level more than in aggregate," Ambrose said. "In effect, Division II is creating a tool that currently does not exist that benefits current and prospective members. For current members, it helps validate that they are in the right place. But it also allows potential members to take their existing revenue and expense projections and test what life might be like in Division II."

University of Indianapolis President Beverley Pitts said those are advantages she can take to her board. "These data will help me help my board members understand the value of athletics," she said.

Charles Dunn at Henderson State University said his faculty would be impressed with the diversity element alone. "At Henderson, we would drop from 17 percent to 13 percent in racial diversity without athletics," he said.

Ambrose said the "ah ha" moment may be farther down the road with this particular study, as more campuses are included and the financial simulation model and customized reports are developed.

"We wouldn't have athletics at all if it wasn't consistent with our mission as institutions of higher education," he said. "This study, once it is complete, will allow institutions a research-based assessment of their investment in athletics and their return on that investment."

'Leverage the victory'

In all, the business session included eight panels and forums and almost two dozen speakers. Many more presidents spoke from the floor, several of whom praised Division II for the progress made since 2005. And the proceedings were in an environment that reflected Division II's identity, surrounded by banners and signage that are part of the division’s branding campaign.

That energy did not go unnoticed.

"Judging from your interactions," NCAA President Brand told the presidents, "you're a different group than you were two years ago. Even though you have directed outward in terms of engagement, internally the cohesion is remarkable and noticeable. Presidential leadership has brought together diverse thoughts and built them into a unified whole."

Brand added that while Division II -- and the NCAA in general -- is not without challenges, "it's my strong belief that those challenges pale in comparison to the ones you've just solved. Let's not lose sight of the fact that in the last two years there's been a dramatic change in attitude and substance. Take pride and build on that momentum. You've come a very long way in a short time. Savor the victory and leverage it for the future."