You are here

High Point did not notify student-athletes in writing of changes to scholarships

University and NCAA utilized negotiated resolution to process violations

Download the Apr. 2019 High Point University Negotiated Resolution

High Point and the NCAA enforcement staff agreed that the university did not notify 134 student-athletes in writing that their scholarships were reduced or canceled, according to a negotiated resolution agreement approved by a Division I Committee on Infractions panel. High Point also did not notify the student-athletes in writing about their opportunity for a hearing regarding the changes to their scholarship.

According to the agreement, High Point did not monitor its obligation to provide student-athletes with written notifications about changes to their scholarships and the opportunity for a hearing.

This case was processed through the new negotiated resolution process. Since High Point and the enforcement staff agreed to the violations, the level of those violations, the classification and penalties, the process was able to be used instead of a formal hearing or summary disposition. The Division I Committee on Infractions reviews the case to determine whether the resolution is in the best interest of the NCAA and whether the agreed-upon penalties are appropriate. Negotiated resolutions may not be appealed and do not set case precedent for other infractions cases.

High Point and the enforcement staff agreed the university did not educate staff members responsible for the administration of scholarships and did not adhere to its own policies and procedures for the reduction and nonrenewal of athletics scholarships. The agreement noted that the violations occurred because the financial aid office was unaware that NCAA rules required written notification. Because of changes in compliance staff, the financial aid office was not directly instructed to send letters to student-athletes whose scholarships were reduced, canceled or not renewed.

According to the agreement, the university self-detected and self-reported the violations, then worked quickly and collaboratively with the enforcement staff to agree upon the facts of the case.

High Point and the enforcement staff used ranges identified by the Division I membership-approved infractions penalty guidelines to agree upon Level II-Standard penalties in this case. Those penalties, approved by Committee on Infractions, are detailed below:

  • Two years of probation.
  • A $15,000 fine.

Members of the Committee on Infractions are drawn from NCAA membership and members of the public. The members of the panel who reviewed this case are Carol Cartwright, president emerita at Kent State and Bowling Green; Joel Maturi, former Minnesota athletics director; and Dave Roberts, chief hearing officer for the panel, administrator at Southern California and vice chair of the Committee on Infractions.