Now that Division II’s game-environment initiative has been around for a couple of years, Division II is providing a way to acknowledge successes on campus.

Division II has established a Game-Environment Recognition Program that allows institutions – after completing a series of self-assessment exercises – to display a banner proclaiming “We Chose a Positive Game Environment.” Schools receive the banner only after the president or chancellor and the AD acknowledge that they have considered and discussed a checklist covering coach, spectator, student and support-group behavior.

Division II initiated the game-environment discussion two years ago, piggybacking off of its community-engagement philosophy – the thought being that if institutions want to attract community members to their athletics events, they should make sure they have a family friendly, lively and comfortable atmosphere that makes fans want to return. Since then, the initiative has been bolstered through national seminars and workshops teaching administrators how to implement best practices.

The Game-Environment Recognition Program keeps the discussion going on campus, with the self-assessment tool meant to identify areas for improvement. The program is self-administered, and there aren’t any check-ups from peer groups or NCAA staff members. Organizers hope it creates a natural incentive to attain the banner and then to ensure that the behavior matches the visual declaration.

“It’s also another way institutions can share in the branding of Division II as a collection of institutions interested in interacting with their community fan base and providing the right kind of game environment for those fans,” said Division II Vice President Mike Racy.

Getting the banner isn’t automatic. The questions in the self-assessment tool challenge institutional personnel to have address relevant areas, including areas that don’t relate directly to sportsmanship.

Here are some of the questions:

• Are your coaches instructed to interact appropriately with game officials when calls are disputed?

• Are your coaches instructed not to incite crowds through agitated behavior?  If so, how is that instruction accomplished (face-to-face talk, staff meeting, memo, contract)?

• Does your institution define what constitutes appropriate spectator behavior? If so, does it have in place a plan to confront bad behavior?

• What steps do you have in place to ensure that spectators are kept an appropriate distance from the competing student-athletes?

• Are concession staff members adequately trained?

• What steps has your institution taken to ensure the comfort of the fans (for example, surveying their needs, adequate and clean restrooms, nearby parking, chairback seats, pleasant entryways)?

• Do you permit students to sit behind the visiting team’s bench? If so, do you have in place a policy that ensures that the visiting student-athletes and coaches are not heckled?

• Is there a dedicated “family-friendly” seating area?

• Do you enlist student leadership on your campus to help create a better game environment at your athletics events?

• Do you believe the pep bands/marching bands and cheerleaders at your institution contribute to a positive environment?

• Do the band director and cheering advisors interact with athletics administration at your institution?

• Do you explicitly prohibit the band or cheer squads from leading or encouraging abusive cheers? If so, how is this policy enforced?

• Do you screen music before the game to ensure the absence of gang-related or profane language?

• Do you believe that the public address announcers at your institution contribute to a positive game environment?

• What steps do you take to remind spectators that the competition taking place is a part of the educational experience?

• Does your institution’s conference provide a way for visiting teams to cite poor treatment, with the expectation that the problem will be remedied?

• Download/view all the assessment questions.

“These review points are meant to engage the athletics department – and in some cases the campus – in the game-environment discussion,” Racy said. “Yes, you might be able to take a short cut or two to acquire the banner, but institutions risk embarrassment if that banner is hanging in the gym when there is an incident that could have been prevented by taking the self-assessment tool seriously.”

Racy said institutions should be encouraged to develop a plan for their campus and include all staff involved (athletics, bands, cheerleaders, security, concessions, parking and others) to ensure the desired outcome.

The recognition program also has a conference and national component. As with the annual community-engagement conference award, Division II will recognize a conference game-environment initiative award winner each year. Evaluation to determine the winner will be based on conference submissions to the “Ideas That Work” page of the Division II Game-Environment Web site. Click here for the award criteria.

Conference award winners will be eligible to receive the “National Game Environment Award of Excellence,” which will be presented annually at the NCAA Convention.