You are here

Emmert provides details on enforcement

NCAA President Mark Emmert on Monday provided campus and conference leaders within the Association with information on the number and type of enforcement cases under review, in light of recent public comments and media reports regarding NCAA enforcement activity. The full memo can be found below.

TO:            NCAA Division I Board of Directors
                  Collegiate Commissioners Association (CCA)
                  Mike Alden, University of Missouri at Columbia
                  Morgan Burke, Purdue University

FROM:       Mark Emmert,
                  NCAA President.

SUBJECT:  NCAA Enforcement.

Recent comments and stories in the press have suggested that activity in the NCAA's enforcement department has slowed and that there have been no cases handled by the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions. Such observations are common and understandable, especially in light of strict confidentiality rules precluding the enforcement staff and committee members from commenting publicly about pending matters. However, the observations are inaccurate. While I cannot provide specific details about pending cases, the following information illustrates some of enforcement's case-related activities for calendar year 2014:

  1.  Enforcement is presently conducting approximately 100 investigations.
  2. Enforcement has provided notice of 64 Level I, Level II or major allegations across 14 cases. Before the end of 2014, enforcement anticipates providing notice of no less than 50 additional Level I or Level II allegations across seven cases. Most of these involve Division I schools, including schools in the five largest conferences.
  3. The enforcement staff projects that the Division I Committee on Infractions could have at least one hearing each month for most of the 2014-15 academic year, in addition to summary disposition cases.
  4. Cases currently being processed represent a higher-than-average year in enforcement activity, which is significant after the staff dedicated considerable time to working group and other regulatory reforms.
  5. Furthermore, the nature of these cases is significant because the enforcement department, consistent with direction from the membership, is focused on those violations that most seriously compromise the collegiate model. They are working on the right kinds of cases and with the right philosophy.
  6. In response to the desires of the NCAA Division I Board of Directors and NCAA Executive Committee, some of these cases will be resolved through in-person hearings, but most will be resolved through a written process (summary disposition) designed to preserve resources of all parties.
  7. This year, enforcement has received as much incoming information as ever. The quality of incoming information is increasing, as evidenced by the fact that more than 60 percent of incoming information warrants further investigation.
  8. Enforcement has conducted over 250 interviews year to date.
  9. Enforcement has processed over 3,000 Level III/secondary cases year to date.

Likewise, the Committees on Infractions, as the membership bodies responsible for deciding cases, have decided and are currently reviewing cases presented by the enforcement staff through the infractions process. I expect that the docket of cases under the new infractions model for Division I is beginning to take shape, recognizing that there is a transition period as the new penalty structure becomes applicable to cases. 

In addition to these case-related numbers, it is important to note that much of the enforcement department's work occurs outside of committee hearings. Counting allegations and cases is instructive, but it measures only one facet of the department's much broader work.