The NCAA Division III Committee on Infractions has placed Wesley College on two years of probation for financial aid violations in the school’s football program. Penalties also include required attendance at an NCAA Regional Rules Seminar.

This case was resolved through the summary-disposition process, a cooperative effort in which the involved parties submit the case to the Committee on Infractions in writing. When the NCAA enforcement staff, the university and involved individuals agree to the facts of the case and penalties proposed by the university, they may use this process instead of a formal hearing.

During the 2006-07 academic year, the college’s financial aid packaging for some freshman student-athletes was clearly distinguishable from the general pattern of financial aid packaging for all freshman aid recipients. At the time the violations occurred, the college had an unpublished financial aid appeals process. The policy provided that prospective students could appeal the institution’s initial financial aid offer. While unpublished, the policy was not secret; some prospective students became aware of it through “word of mouth” or personal experience, and it had existed for more than 20 years.

The institution’s football coaches were aware of the appeals policy and throughout the recruiting process made it a point to communicate the policy to prospects. The coaches also encouraged any prospect who seemed unhappy with his initial aid offer to take advantage of the appeal. As a result, compared to the general student population, a disproportionate number of freshman football prospects appealed their financial aid award packages for the 2006-07 academic year. No evidence suggested that the football coaches were deliberately attempting to circumvent NCAA rules.

Of 484 incoming freshmen in 2006-07, 208 (43 percent) appealed their initial financial aid offer and were awarded further aid. For incoming freshman football student-athletes that same year, 51 of 87 (59 percent) appealed and were awarded additional aid. The 16 percent differential between the two groups established a clearly distinguishable pattern of financial aid awards to incoming football student-athletes compared to the packages awarded to all incoming aid recipients at the institution.

The penalties in this case are as follows:

• Public reprimand and censure.
• Two years of probation from September 10, 2009, through September 9, 2011.
• During both years of probation, the director of athletics, compliance officer and financial aid personnel responsible for awarding aid to student-athletes shall attend an NCAA Regional Rules Seminar.

The members of the Committee on Infractions who reviewed this case are Mary Jo Gunning, the athletics director of Marywood University and chair of the committee; Keith Jacques, attorney at Smith Elliott Smith & Garmey; and Dea Shipps, associate commissioner at the Eastern College Athletic Conference.