The Division III Presidents Council, facing a September 1 deadline for sponsoring legislation for consideration at the 2006 Convention, moved forward an assortment of proposals addressing Future of Division III--Phase II issues during its August 4 meeting in Indianapolis.

Those proposals touch in one way or another on a range of issues -- including membership growth and diversity -- raised two years ago by the resolution that created the Phase II initiative, 2004 Convention Proposal No. 66. The actions are the result of more than 18 months of research, membership discussion at last year's Convention and feedback through Virtual Focus Groups.

The discussions, much like those that occurred during the first phase of Future of Division III that ended with consideration of a reform package at the 2004 Convention, again have focused on comparing the division's legislative standards and administrative packages to its philosophy statement. In turn, that process has prompted recommendations from a variety of Division III committees.

Now, those recommendations have been endorsed by the Presidents Council, including 2006 Convention proposals to increase the number of sports that schools are required to sponsor and to ensure that a school plays a minimum number of contests in each sport it sponsors to meet membership requirements.

It also agreed to sponsor proposals to create a Conference Self-Study Guide (CSSG) to assist a formal process for evaluation of conference members' shared philosophy and practices, and to amend the Division III philosophy statement to explicitly support efforts to ensure that student-athletes are admitted to institutions under the same policies used for other students, that they perform at least as well academically as other students once enrolled, and that they are involved in athletics programs that are integrated into the campus culture and educational mission.

Altogether, the Council approved eight legislative recommendations stemming from the Future of Division III--Phase II initiative, including a proposal to allow two years for institutional realignment within conferences after completion of the initial CSSG without loss by affected conferences of championships automatic qualification.

However, not all of the proposals advanced unchallenged. Council members spent significant time debating the merits of the recommendation to increase minimum sport sponsorship from the current 10 sports (five for men, five for women) to 12 (six for men, six for women) for schools with undergraduate enrollment greater than 1,000.

Supporters of the recommendation said it would bring Division III's diverse membership -- in which schools sponsor an average of 16 sports but a significant percentage sponsor only the current minimum -- closer together in support of the division's philosophy of broad-based athletics opportunities. They also noted the proposals' delayed effective date (August 1, 2010), intended to give about 40 schools that currently do not meet the standard time to do so.

Some Council members expressed concern about imposing additional expense on institutions that would be required to add sports. Concerns also were expressed about the proposal's effect on smaller schools, though supporters noted the exemption for institutions with less than 1,000 enrollment and also pointed out the proposal would permit the Division III Membership Committee to recommend waivers for unique circumstances.

Ultimately, a majority of Council members supported sponsorship of the proposal.

Members also discussed the CSSG proposal at some length, sponsoring it only after satisfying themselves that the effort to encourage discussions among conference members on such issues as institutional mission, academic and athletics profile, geographic proximity, diversity, and the role of chief executive officers would not impose too heavy an administrative burden. The Council ultimately concluded there would be significant value in requiring each conference to discuss fundamental philosophical principles and administrative practices on a periodic basis.

The Council strongly supported the minimum-contests recommendation -- endorsing a proposal that would require teams to play the equivalent of at least 70 percent of the membership's average number of contests completed over a three-year period -- and also agreed to propose a cap of 64 teams (32 for football) on the bracket size of Division III team championships that exceed the 1:6.5 access ratio due to the future growth of sport sponsorship.

Council members also received a report on another important product of Future of Division III--Phase II initiative -- an assortment of "best practices" programs and policies that currently are being developed by members of the Future of Division III-Phase II Oversight Group, which met August 3.