The Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse Committee continued its ongoing quest toward a paperless initial-eligibility process during its July 31-August 1 meeting in Indianapolis, studying possibilities for the next phase of Web-based initiatives to be implemented to make the process easier, more efficient and less costly.

The group received a presentation from the NCAA Initial-Eligibility Clearinghouse staff about new technological initiatives that could be added to the Web-based improvements that already have been introduced over the past year.

The Clearinghouse staff asked the committee to consider additional initiatives that would expedite the initial-eligibility process by:

Allowing student registration forms to be submitted via the Internet;

Providing registrants with Internet access to the 48-C form (preliminary status);

Communicating with institutions, secondary schools and registrants via the Internet; and

Allowing schools to post and update Institution Request Lists online.

Though a time line for implementation of the enhancements has not been determined, the committee supported the initiatives and asked the Clearinghouse staff to continue to develop the ideas. The committee also emphasized that the implementation of electronic operations be spread out over time to accommodate high schools and students without Internet access (though the committee has been advised that roughly 98 percent of high schools currently have such access). The group noted that traditional methods for submitting registration forms would continue to be available.

The new initiatives follow already implemented Web-based enhancements such as allowing schools to access student reports on the Web (as opposed to having those reports mailed or sent via facsimile) and access to lists of high-school core courses on the Web. Those initiatives already have resulted in a substantial cost savings and increased accessibility. The committee also believes the new initiatives will have a long-term effect on cost reduction by providing more efficient service.

"The cost-savings piece of this is significant," said Robert A. Oliver, NCAA director of membership services. "But it's not the driving force behind the changes. The committee is more interested in a more efficient process and easier access to information that will benefit student-athletes."

In addition to its review of technological enhancements, the committee also revisited the issue of encouraging schools to submit students on an IRL in a more timely manner. The group cited research that indicated about 40 percent of prospects who had signed a National Letter of Intent in November 1999 still hadn't been placed on an IRL as of February 2000. That concerns the committee, which noted that the earlier a student is submitted on an IRL, the earlier institutions are able to access the prospects' academic record and provide advice to the prospect about initial-eligibility requirements.

Conversely, the later a student is placed on an IRL, the less likely it is for the institution to accurately evaluate the prospect's progress toward meeting initial-eligibility requirements and to properly advise the prospect of methods to remedy any deficiencies.

The group agreed to solicit feedback from the Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee and various coaches associations to find ways to encourage schools to submit recruited athletes on an IRL earlier. The committee emphasized that in addition to institutional access to a student's academic files, priority for processing occurs when students are placed on an IRL. As a result, when a student appears on an IRL, the Clearinghouse performs a preliminary evaluation, which prompts a preliminary status report to be sent to the prospect's home. Thus, the preliminary evaluation enables both the parents and institution to review the current status and determine if the student is on target to meet the initial-eligibility requirements.

"The committee sees this as a student-athlete welfare issue," Oliver said. "It's not a burden for schools to place these prospects on the IRL, and the subsequent benefit to the student-athlete is immense."

The committee even discussed possible requirements for IRL submissions, such as requiring a student to be on an IRL before signing a National Letter of Intent or requiring a student to be on an IRL before making an official visit, but deferred the matter to a future meeting.

In other action, the committee:

Received positive feedback from the American Association of College Registrars and Admissions Officers about recent technological enhancements to Clearinghouse operations.

Discussed various states administering "state" ACT tests that are not conducted on national testing dates under national testing conditions, as required by NCAA legislation. The committee noted that such test scores shall not be used to meet NCAA initial-eligibility requirements. The group also requested that ACT include in the written testing information and verbal testing instructions associated with those tests a notice advising students that the test scores will not be used by the Clearinghouse.