Template APA v3.0 (beta): Created by J. Nail 06/2015

A descriptive study of intercollegiate athletics in North Carolina’s public community and

technical colleges

By TITLE PAGE Marcus Timothy Mounce

A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Mississippi State University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Community College Leadership in the Department of Leadership and Foundations

Mississippi State, Mississippi

August 2015

Copyright by COPYRIGHT PAGE Marcus Timothy Mounce

2015

A descriptive study of intercollegiate athletics in North Carolina’s public community and

technical colleges

By APPROVAL PAGE Marcus Timothy Mounce

Approved:

______James E. Davis (Director of Dissertation/Graduate Coordinator)

______Arthur D. Stumpf (Committee Member)

______William M. Wiseman (Committee Member)

______Stephanie B. King (Committee Member)

______Richard L. Blackbourn Dean College of Education

Name: Marcus Timothy Mounce ABSTRACT Date of Degree: August 14, 2015

Institution: Mississippi State University

Major Field: Community College Leadership

Director of Dissertation: James E. Davis

Title of Study: A descriptive study of intercollegiate athletics in North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges

Pages in Study: 110

Candidate for Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

The purpose of this study was to provide an assessment of the involvement of

North Carolina’s 58 community and technical colleges in intercollegiate athletics during the academic year 2013 – 2014. This study was similar to Alexander’s 2009 study A

Descriptive Study of Intercollegiate Athletics in Mississippi’s Public Community and

Junior Colleges and Castaneda’s study (2004) at the University of North Texas The

importance of intercollegiate athletics at rural-serving community colleges. These data

could assist North Carolina community and technical college presidents, vice presidents

residing over athletics, athletic directors, and other policy makers in their decision-

making processes concerning intercollegiate athletics. These leaders can now readily

compare their institution data from other colleges statewide.

This study included the entire population of North Carolina’s 58 public

community and technical colleges. Frequencies and percentages were utilized by the

researcher to report the information. Data were collected to provide an overview of

intercollegiate athletics at North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges.

Information included location, student participation, amount of athletically related

student aid, teams sponsored, athletic revenues and expenses, and staffing requirements, including salaries.

Key words: community college, athletics, intercollegiate, technical college

DEDICATION

I dedicate this dissertation to my wife, Katie, for her unwavering support, and my son, Charles (Charlie) Timothy.

ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to acknowledge my friends and family for all their support.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DEDICATION ...... ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...... iii

LIST OF TABLES ...... vi

CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Statement of the Problem ...... 2 Purpose of the Study ...... 3 Significance of the Study ...... 3 Limitations and Delimitations ...... 4 Definition of Terms ...... 5

II. REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE ...... 7

Introduction ...... 7 The North Carolina Community and Technical College Mission ...... 8 History ...... 9 Economic Impact ...... 9 Role of Athletics ...... 10

III. METHODOLOGY ...... 13

Introduction ...... 13 Data Sources ...... 13 Description of Instrument ...... 13 Data Collection ...... 14 Data Analysis ...... 15 This Study and the IRB ...... 15

IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA...... 16

Introduction ...... 16 Population ...... 16 Method Reviewed ...... 17 Answering the Research Questions ...... 18 iv

Research Question One ...... 18 Research Question Two ...... 21 Research Question Three ...... 42

V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS...... 52

Summary ...... 52 Conclusions ...... 54 Research Question One ...... 54 Research Question Two ...... 55 Research Question Three ...... 56 Recommendations ...... 58

REFERENCES ...... 62

APPENDIX

A. INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL LETTER ...... 68

B. EQUITY IN ATHLETICS DISCLOSURE ACT SURVEYWOMEN’S, MEN’S, AND COED TEAMS ...... 70

C. NORTH CAROLINA PUBLIC COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGE WEB SITES (* DENOTES ATHLETIC PARTICIPANT DURING 2013 – 2014 SCHOOL YEAR) ...... 107

v

LIST OF TABLES

1 Athletic Sports Offerings at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 20

2 Female Athletic Participation (Total – Not Unduplicated) at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 23

3 Male Athletic Participation (Total – Not Unduplicated) at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 24

4 Total Athletic Participation (Total – Not Unduplicated) at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 25

5 Total Head Coaches Assigned to Women’s Sports by Gender and Employment Status at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 31

6 Total Head Coaches Assigned to Men’s Sports by Gender and Employment Status at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 32

7 Total Assistant Coaches Assigned to Women’s Sports by Gender and Employment Status at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 34

8 Total Assistant Coaches Assigned to Men’s Sports by Gender and Employment Status at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 35

9 Female Coaches at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 37

10 Male Coaches at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 38

vi

11 Employment Type of Head Women’s Sports Coaches at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 39

12 Employment Type of Head Men’s Sports Coaches at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 40

13 Employment Type of Assistant Women’s Sports Coaches at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 41

14 Employment Type of Assistant Men’s Sports Coaches at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 42

15 Average Annual Salary Comparison for Coaches at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 44

16 Average Annual Institutional Salary per Head Coach at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 45

17 Average Annual Institutional Salary per Assistant Coach at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 46

18 Athletically Related Student Aid at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014) ...... 48

19 North Carolina Public Community and Technical College Athletic Expenditures vs. Revenues (2013 – 2014) ...... 49

20 North Carolina Public Community College Athletic Expenditures vs. Revenues for Men’s and Women’s Sports (2013 – 2014) ...... 50

21 North Carolina Public Community College Athletic Expenditures vs. Revenues From Other Sources (2013 – 2014) ...... 51

vii

INTRODUCTION

“Community colleges are key to the state’s economic recovery,” said North

Carolina Governor Pat McCrory (Stancill, 2013).

The Governor made this comment to the North Carolina Community College

System board, where he detailed how North Carolina’s 58 community colleges are vital to the state’s economic recovery efforts and its ability to attract high-paying jobs. While this may be true, North Carolina’s community and technical college system, the third largest in the nation (behind California and Texas), has still taken an overall $16 million cut in the most recent budget. One of the main reasons for this cut, according to

McCrory, is the funding formula used by the legislature. This formula bases funding for

North Carolina’s community and technical colleges on enrollment. Despite an enrollment surge in 2010 – 2011 of 12.6% at North Carolina’s community and technical colleges, there has been a declining pattern since then. Whether fair or not, as enrollment at North

Carolina’s 58 community and technical colleges goes down, so does their funding.

The problem is that the number one player in the state’s economic recovery cannot be properly funded by the legislature because enrollment is on a downward trend.

Despite declining overall enrollment and funding, the higher cost technical and health programs offered by North Carolina’s community and technical colleges are leading to a more robust local economy, which results in more jobs, increased business revenues,

1

greater availability of public investment funds, and eased tax burdens (Camden County

College, 2002).

One solution to this problem is to increase enrollment, which would in turn increase funding. One proven way to increase community college enrollment is to add more sports. There is a surging number of 18- to 24-year-olds who are demanding a traditional college experience, including athletics. Prospective students, potential athletes or otherwise, often choose a community college with athletics over one without. Ashburn also cites officials at Iowa Central Community College, who are just one of many community colleges that are using sports to attract local students and students from out of state. The inclusion of sports at the community college level is about enrollment

(Ashburn, 2007).

Statement of the Problem

The problem addressed in this study was to describe the scope of intercollegiate athletics at North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges. Without a thorough assessment of intercollegiate athletics in North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges, presidents and athletic directors do not have a source of comparative information within their own state, and for the first time, similar studies in other states such as Mississippi will allow for readily comparative information between two states. The results from this study provide a comprehensive assessment that may be useful to community, junior, and technical college presidents, athletic directors, coaches, policy makers, and others (Byrd & Williams, 2007). This study provides information about all 58 community colleges in North Carolina, including location, student

2

participation, amount of athletically related student aid, teams sponsored, athletic revenues and expenses, and coaching staff (including salaries).

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to describe the involvement of North Carolina’s community and technical colleges in intercollegiate athletics during the 2013 – 2014 academic year. The following research questions were answered in order to meet the purpose of the study:

1. To what extent are North Carolina’s public technical and community colleges involved in intercollegiate athletics?

2. How do intercollegiate athletics vary amongst public technical and community college in the state of North Carolina?

3. What are the revenues and expenses at North Carolina’s public technical and community colleges?

These questions were addressed by reporting on students’ participation levels; athletically related student aid; sponsorship of intercollegiate athletics at each institution; financial investment; and coaching staff information, including salaries.

Significance of the Study

Community colleges are vital to the state, and athletics are vital to the community college (Bush, 2009). Since a statewide study does not exist that describes the extent that

North Carolina’s community and technical colleges are involved in intercollegiate athletics, this study provided the first statewide assessment of intercollegiate athletics in

North Carolina’s community and technical colleges and also yielded a foundation for further research. Because athletics can be a hot-button topic, administrators should place importance on looking into every aspect of community, technical, and junior colleges,

3

and they should revisit each aspect occasionally to see if there can or should be

improvements made. This study can be used as a guide for community and junior college policy makers and boards of trustees of the 58 community and technical colleges in the state of North Carolina. The study included comparisons on location, student participation, amount of athletically related student aid, teams sponsored, athletic revenues and expenses, and coaching staff. Such data can be of assistance to the community college president, vice president over athletics, athletic directors and others as they make meaningful decisions and determinations on the future direction of their individual community colleges’ intercollegiate athletic programs. As a result of this study, examinations can be made from one institution to the next within the state of North

Carolina. The North Carolina Community College System (NCCCS) is comprised of 58 community and technical colleges that service all 100 counties in the state. This study described the level of financing, intercollegiate sports offered, level of scholarship funding, and other athletic funding details at North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges that will be valuable from a community, technical, or junior college administrator’s point of view. Given that a lack of research may have contributed to the haphazard development of community college athletics in North Carolina, this study may be of critical importance to future community, technical, and junior college athletic development (Byrd & Williams, 2007).

Limitations and Delimitations

It is common for Ph.D. students to try to do too much (Cassuto, 2013). Therefore, this section is useful in defining how much the researcher undertook and descriptions of

4

the key assumptions that governed this research. The researcher acknowledges the following limitations and delimitations of this study:

1. This study was limited to the 58 public 2-year technical and community colleges in the state of North Carolina.

2. This study concentrated on data obtained concerning the 2013 − 2014 academic year.

3. This study depended on data obtained from the United States (U.S.) Department of Education, the Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act, the North Carolina Community College System.

4. A limitation area that could contain errors is within the entry of data into the system from the North Carolina institution to the U.S. Department of Education.

5. A limitation area that could contain errors is any errors from similar cited studies.

The community colleges involved in this study from which the data were gathered were all within the state of North Carolina and may not be generalizable for community colleges in other regions of the country. Further conclusions that come from this study on intercollegiate athletics in North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges address items and issues in this state and region and should not be generalized to other community colleges in different regions of the United States of America.

Definition of Terms

The following terms are defined for the purpose of this study:

1. Public technical, junior, or community college refers to a public, 2-year college as identified by the Department of Education (Department of Homeland Security, 2012).

2. National Junior College Athletic Association (NJCAA) is a voluntary organization by which member community colleges are governed and regulated. The association was charted in 1938 and currently has over 517 members located across 43 stated. The teams are assigned to one of three divisions (NJCAA, 2014). 5

3. North Carolina Community College System (NCCCS) has as its mission to open the door to high-quality, accessible educational opportunities that minimize barriers to post-secondary education, maximize student success, develop a globally and multi-culturally competent workforce, and improve the lives and well-being of individuals by providing 1) Education, training and retraining for the workforce including basic skills and literacy education, occupational and pre-baccalaureate programs, 2) Support for economic development through services to and in partnership with business and industry and in collaboration with the University of North Carolina System and private colleges and universities, and 3) Services to communities and individuals which improve the quality of life. (NCCCS, 2011).

4. A community college with intercollegiate athletics is a community college that operates under an athletic sanctioning body. This sanctioning body is a national organization that governs intercollegiate sports (U.S. Department of Education, 2014b).

5. NJCAA Division I includes student athletes that receive full athletic scholarships. Full scholarships might include tuition, fees, room, travel to and from home, and supplies (NJCAA, 2014).

6. NJCAA Division II includes student athletes that receive partial athletic scholarships limited to room and board (NJCAA, 2014).

7. Athletically related student aid refers to any scholarship, grant, or other form of financial assistance, offered by an institution, the terms of which require the recipient to participate in a program of intercollegiate athletics at the institution (U.S. Department of Education, 2015).

8. Full-time equivalent (FTE) is configured by adding the amount of full- time students to the amount of part-time students and then multiplied by a specific factor (North Carolina Community College System, 2014).

9. Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) is a database of surveys that are given by the U.S. Department of Education (National Center For Education Statistics, 2015).

10. The Equity in Athletic Disclosure Act (EADA) is a survey that provides data available on the U.S. Department of Education web site. It contains intercollegiate sport information (EADA, 1995).

11. Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 is a ban on institutions that get federal funding that keeps the institutions from discriminating based on gender in activities or educational programs. Since almost all 2-year colleges receive federal funding, Title IX applies to them as well (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014) 6

REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE

Introduction

This study is similar to one conducted in 2009 by Alexander. His study was also a dissertation for Mississippi State University entitled A descriptive study of intercollegiate athletics in Mississippi’s public community and junior colleges. Alexander analyzed data that pertained to Mississippi's public community and junior college athletic programs.

The history of Mississippi's public community and junior colleges was discussed along with summaries of related studies. Alexander found that intercollegiate athletics play a major role in Mississippi's community and junior colleges because 1) their college values can be reinforced through athletics, 2) athletics can become an avenue of opportunity for future generations, and 3) community college athletics can be used to connect with the local communities in many different ways, including socially and economically.

Alexander (2009) surmised that people should attempt to understand the structure of the athletic programs at their state's community and junior colleges. He recommended that the study should be replicated in other Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) states, such as North Carolina. He also recommended further studies be conducted that include the race/ethnicity of people involved from the student athletes to the coaches and administrators. Alexander concluded that further research would provide insight about

7

community college athletics — an area in which much money is invested and little research has been conducted (Alexander, 2009).

This study on North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges is also similar to one conducted in 2004 by Castaneda and Hardy. That study was a dissertation for the University of North Texas entitled The importance of intercollegiate athletics at rural-serving community colleges. Castaneda examined the proper place of athletics at community colleges and determined that athletics play an integral role at rural-serving community colleges. The study concluded that intercollegiate athletics are indeed a very important student activity for public community colleges, especially for rural-serving community colleges, such as the majority of those in North Carolina and Mississippi. The study indicated an increase in the population of 17 – 24-year-olds, and said that community colleges must be responsive to this demographic with expanded intercollegiate athletics (Castaneda & Hardy, 2004).

The North Carolina Community and Technical College Mission

NCCCS has as its mission to open the door to high-quality, accessible educational opportunities that minimize barriers to post-secondary education, maximize student success, develop a globally and multi-culturally competent workforce, and improve the lives and well-being of individuals by providing 1) education, training and retraining for the workforce including basic skills and literacy education, occupational and pre- baccalaureate programs, 2) support for economic development through services to and in partnership with business and industry and in collaboration with the University of North

Carolina System and private colleges and universities, and 3) services to communities and individuals which improve the quality of life. (NCCCS, 2011). 8

History

Like many states after World War II, North Carolina began to transition from an agricultural economic base to an industrial economic base. With this industrial boom came the need for citizens to have access to something more than a high school education but less than a four-year degree. Thus, North Carolina’s General Assembly adopted the first Community College Act in 1957 to fund community colleges. Funding was also provided for institutions to train adults and high school students in industrial skills. By

1961, North Carolina had five public junior colleges and seven industrial education centers. In 1963 a more unified body was created when the General Assembly established the Department of Community Colleges under the State Board of Education for the purpose of administrating the 20 industrial education centers, 6 community colleges, and

5 extension units as members of the Community College System. In just three years there were 43 institutions with 28,250 FTE enrollments. By 1969, there were 54 institutions with 59,329 FTE. In 1978, the 58th college was added, and then number remains the same today. These 58 community colleges service all 100 counties of North Carolina, and are under the authority of the State Board of Community Colleges. For the 2013 – 2014 academic year, the total curriculum and continuing education student enrollment for

North Carolina’s public community colleges was 780,146 (NCCCS, 2011).

Economic Impact

North Carolina continues to experience a sluggish economic recovery (Sirota,

2015). The Governor of North Carolina, Pat McCrory, hailed community colleges as nothing less than they key to the state’s economic recovery. In a 2013 article for the News

& Observer, based in Raleigh, North Carolina, Stancill detailed the Governor’s speech to 9

the NCCCS board. The Governor lamented over the decreased funding to community colleges because of lower enrollment numbers, but cited two examples of new business being brought to the state by community colleges. McCrory added that officials from

North Carolina’s community colleges must be at the ‘leadership table’ (Stancill, 2013).

However, with enrollment trends that are counter-cyclical to the economy, North

Carolina community college enrollment has declined, and along with declining enrollment are budget cuts and job elimination (Ball, 2015).

The following information is from Camden County College’s (2002) Economic

impact study. Community college programs lead to a more robust local economy, which

results in more jobs, increased business revenues, greater availability of public

investment funds, and eased tax burdens. In Camden County, New Jersey, every $1.00

state and local government invested in Camden County College produced a stream of

future benefits worth a value of $5.17, giving government a 27.5% rate of return on its

investment. This investment was recovered in 5.2 years in the form of higher tax receipts

from increased student wages and less public assistance. Persons there with community

college educations were less likely to smoke or drink, draw welfare or unemployment

benefits, or commit crimes. The added skills of these persons translated into higher

earnings, increased tax receipts, less social services, and a more robust local economy.

Role of Athletics

Given the overwhelming evidence for the critical role of the community college in

North Carolina’s economic recovery and the incredible return for the state on funding

investment in the community college, one can find themselves befuddled by the

legislature’s funding constraints that are based on enrollment. With the goal of an 10

improved economy and better quality of life for more citizens, given the reality of the

funding formula for North Carolina’s community colleges, one must determine that the

clearest path to increase funding is to increase enrollment. That is exactly what is

discussed in Ashburn’s 2007 article for Education Digest. There is a trend toward

expanding athletics at community colleges, as indicated by increased membership in the

NJCAA. Factors influencing this trend include the effort to enroll more students as well

as to offer a traditional college experience to enrolled students. In North Carolina, the push to increase the number of athletics programs is so strong that the state’s community college system formed a task force to examine the issue and develop guidelines for sports teams. At Guilford Technical Community College in Jamestown, NC, establishing athletics was a way to expand student activities, which their President says has improved student morale. He also points out that the bookstore cannot keep sports paraphernalia in stock. Recent NCAA Division I rule changes concerning academics could drive an even greater number of high school athletes to attend two-year colleges, thus facilitating the need for further research on this topic in order to meet the growing demands of new community college students (Ashburn, 2007).

Barreno and Traut’s (2012) Student decisions to attend public two-year community colleges examined reasons for student choice of a specific community college. Reasons students chose a specific community college were 1) campus activities and recreational facilities, and 2) athletic teams and sports. The pair concluded that it is of utmost importance for community colleges to improve the college product and address the needs of students regionally, nationally, and internationally, and, therefore, further

11

research on maximizing student enrollment via athletics is needed (Barreno & Traut,

2012).

Athletics at North Carolina community and technical colleges is a fledgling entity, but these programs have been expanding. Expansion is good because intercollegiate athletics can make a significant contribution to the community college experience and can contribute to the community college mission. Presidents, boards, decision-makers, and other practitioners involved in community college athletics can benefit from further research on the topic, and that intercollegiate athletics will require self-study, innovation, and leadership to succeed (Byrd & Williams, 2007).

12

METHODOLOGY

Introduction

This study included the entire population of North Carolina’s 58 public community and technical colleges. This study did not require complex statistical procedures; therefore, this study reported frequencies and percentages. Data were collected to provide an assessment of intercollegiate athletics at North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges. The study used a non-experimental research design.

The non-experimental research design did not impose any kind of treatment or effect on any group. This study looked at the status of intercollegiate athletes during the 2013 –

2014 academic year.

Data Sources

The population observed in this study was North Carolina’s 58 public community

and technical colleges. The researcher investigated each intercollegiate athletic

department that received public appropriations. Detailed information that may be useful

to community and junior college administrators is provided from this study.

Description of Instrument

Data mining of existing data utilized the following instruments:

1. Sources such as required U.S. Department of Education surveys, institutional data, the NCCCS data, and the EADA. 13

2. A cost benefit analysis was done to investigate the revenue and expenses at each North Carolina public technical and community college, utilizing data from the U.S. Department of Education.

Data Collection

The researcher used data sets that are a combination of data files from the U.S.

Department of Education surveys, the EADA Survey, data expenditures from the North

Carolina State Board of Community Colleges, and North Carolina’s public technical and community college web sites. The sample for this research was the entire population of

North Carolina’s public technical and community colleges.

The research was guided by three research questions:

1. To what extent are North Carolina’s public technical and community colleges involved in intercollegiate athletics?

2. How do intercollegiate athletics vary amongst public technical and community college in the state of North Carolina?

3. What are the revenues and expenses at North Carolina’s public technical and community colleges?

The following are specific variables included in the study:

1. Level of college participation.

2. The number of men and women participating in individual sports.

3. Coaching staff.

4. Coaching salaries.

5. Amount of athletically related student aid.

6. Financial investment amount for intercollegiate athletics.

14

Data Analysis

The data were reported and analyzed utilizing various descriptive statistics, including frequencies, percentages, means, medians, modes, variances, standard deviations, ranges, and displaying charts and tables containing the descriptive statistics.

These data were used to assess the involvement and expenses of North Carolina’s public technical and community colleges concerning their intercollegiate athletic programs.

This Study and the IRB

Although this study does fit the definition of research, the following factors indicated that this study did not fit the criteria requiring Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2009):

1. It did not fit the definition of human subjects as defined in 45 CFR 46.

2. The researcher did not conduct any interaction or intervention with subjects.

3. The publicly available data sets the researcher analyzed did not contain any identifiable private information.

The researcher obtained verification from the Mississippi State University IRB

Administrator that approval was not needed (see Appendix A).

15

ANALYSIS OF DATA

Introduction

During this study of North Carolina’s community college’s intercollegiate athletic programs, three basic research questions were used. The first question was “To what extent are North Carolina’s community colleges involved in intercollegiate athletics?”

The second question was “How do intercollegiate athletics vary at each community college in the state of North Carolina?” The third question was “What are the revenues and expenses at North Carolina’s community colleges?” Specific variables addressed included student participation levels, availability of athletic scholarships, sponsorship of intercollegiate athletics at each institution, financial investment, and the required staffing including salaries.

Population

The population used for this study was the entire state of North Carolina’s public community college athletic programs that reported Equity in Athletics data for the 2013 –

2014 academic year to the U.S. Department of Education. North Carolina has 58 public community colleges that serve all 100 counties of the state and belong to the North

Carolina Community College System. Of these 58 public community colleges, 25 participated in athletics as members of NJCAA Region 10 (also known as Region X).

Region X consists of 2-year institutions, both public and private, from North Carolina, 16

South Carolina, and Virginia. There is also one private 2-year college in North Carolina

with athletics that is not a part of this study.

Out of North Carolina’s 25 public community colleges that reported Equity in

Athletics data for the 2013 – 2014 academic year to the U.S. Department of Education,

19 are classified as rural small, rural medium, or rural large because none has a

population center of 500,000 or more (Hardy, 2005). North Carolina has six public 2-

year colleges with athletics that are considered rural small, thirteen considered rural

medium, and one considered rural large. Out of North Carolina’s 25 public community

colleges that reported Equity in Athletics data for the 2013 – 2014 academic year to the

U.S. Department of Education, 3 are classified as suburban single campus or suburban

multi-campus because they all have a population center of 500,000 or more but without a

campus within a central city. North Carolina has two public 2-year colleges with athletics

that are considered suburban single campus and one considered suburban multi-campus.

Out of North Carolina’s 25 public community colleges that reported Equity in Athletics

data for the 2013 – 2014 academic year to the U.S. Department of Education, 1 is

classified as urban single campus because it has a population center of 500,000 or more

and a campus located within a central city (U.S. Department of Education, 2014a).

Method Reviewed

The researcher utilized a dataset that was a combination of data files from the

EADA survey. Data expenditures were also utilized from the North Carolina Community

College System. North Carolina’s community college web sites were also a usable source of information for the researcher. The researcher looked at the entire population of North

Carolina’s public community colleges that offered intercollegiate athletics. The purpose 17

of the study was to provide an assessment of intercollegiate athletics at North Carolina’s public community colleges. Descriptive statistics such as percentages and frequencies were used to accomplish this goal.

The researcher located the results of the EADA Survey and reported the findings from the 2013 – 2014 academic school year. The public North Carolina community colleges listed in all tables in this chapter have been assigned a letter to preserve anonymity. Each community college was assigned a letter by the researcher. The researcher wrote alphabet letters onto a separate sheet of paper and placed them in a hat.

The researcher pulled the letters out of the hat and assigned the letters to the colleges.

The letters representing the 25 community colleges range from A to Y.

Answering the Research Questions

Research Question One

Research question one: To what extent are North Carolina’s community colleges involved in intercollegiate athletics?

The researcher found that out of 58 community colleges in North Carolina, 25 offered intercollegiate athletics (Colleges A through Y). There are several interesting findings here. First, the most predominant sport offered was women’s volleyball, which was offered at 17 out of the 25 colleges. The next most prevalent sport was basketball, offered at 16 out of the 25 colleges, but it is noteworthy that only 6 of those colleges offered women’s basketball. Therefore, 10 out of the 16 public community colleges in

North Carolina that had basketball only offered men’s basketball [Table 1].

Also of interest, College K is the only community college to offer cross- country/track and field, fielding women’s and men’s teams. Only three colleges offered 18

soccer, and Colleges K, Q, and V fielded women’s and men’s teams. There were 12 men’s baseball teams fielded, but only 5 women’s softball teams. Golf was available for men at nine different colleges, but available for women at just six, including College B’s offering of a ‘coed’ team.

Perhaps the most interesting findings were that 6 out of the 25 colleges (24%) offered more men’s sports than women’s sports on their respective campuses, including

College B, which only had a coed golf team to offer women, and there were 2 out of the

25 colleges (8%) that offered more women’s sports than men’s sports on their respective campuses. There were 16 out of the 25 colleges (64%) that offered an equal number of women’s and men’s sports. Football, cheerleading, and tennis were not offered at any of the 25 colleges (Table 1). One of the researcher’s fondest memories of attending a community college was playing for the college tennis team, so the absence of tennis was duly noted. It should be noted that the only 2-year colleges in the state of North Carolina to offer football, cheerleading, as well as residential access are private, and their data are not a part of this study.

19

Table 1 provides a display of athletic sports offerings:

Table 1

Athletic Sports Offerings at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges

(2013 – 2014)

Com. Base- Basket- Soft- Track & Golf Soccer Volley. Total Col. ball ball ball C.C. A M No No No W No No 1W/1M B No M Coed No No No No 0W/1M/1Co C No No M No No No No 0W/1M D M M No No W No W 2W/2M E M No No No No No W 1W/1M F No M No No No No W 1W/1M G No M No No No No No 0W/1M H M No W&M No W No W 3W/2M I No M M No No No W 1W/2M J No No No No No No W 1W/0M K M W&M W&M W&M W W&M W 6W/5M L M W&M No No No No W 2W/2M M No M W&M No No No W 2W/2M N No M No No No No W 1W/1M O M W&M No No No No W 2W/2M P M No No No No No No 0W/1M Q No W&M M W&M No No W 3W/3M R M W&M No No No No W 2W/2M S M W&M No No No No W 2W/2M T M No No No No No W 1W/1M U No M W&M No No No W 2W/2M V M No No W&M W No No 2W/2M W No M No No No No W 1W/1M X No M No No No No No 0W/1M Y No No W&M No No No No 1W/1M 5W/8M/ 37W/40M/ Total 12M 6W/16M 3W/3M 5W 1W/1M 17W 1Co 1Co Note. Com. Col. = Community College; C.C. = Cross Country; Volley. = Volleyball; W = Women’s; M = Men’s; Co = Coed.

20

Research Question Two

How do intercollegiate athletics vary at each community college in the state of

North Carolina?

Data for question two were obtained from the EADA survey from the 2013 –

2014 academic year. Once the data were obtained, they were placed in Tables 2 – 14. The researcher found that the sports offered for women in North Carolina’s public community colleges were basketball, golf, soccer, softball, track and field/cross-country (one coed team), and volleyball (table 2). Findings showed that 382 female athletes participated in college-sponsored sports during the 2013 – 2014 school year. The predominant sport for female athletes was volleyball, which had 168 total participants, making up 44% of the total females that participated. The next two highest sports in terms of participation were basketball, with 78 female athletes (20.4% of the total), and softball, with 71 female athletes (18.5%). Soccer had 49 participants (12.8%), golf had 12 participants (3%), and track and field/cross-country had 4 female athletes (1%). It is noteworthy that cheerleading was not offered at any North Carolina public community college that participated in intercollegiate athletics during the 2013 – 2014 academic year.

Table 3 shows that the sports offered for men included baseball, basketball, golf, soccer, and track and field/cross-country. It also shows the total number of male athletes that participated in college sponsored sports during the 2013 – 2014 academic year was

705. Thus, when compared with Table 2, there were approximately 1.85 times more male participants in intercollegiate athletics at North Carolina public community colleges during the 2013 – 2014 academic year. The predominant sport for male athletes was baseball, which had 350 total participants, making up approximately 50% of the total

21

males that participated. The next two highest sports in terms of participation were basketball, with 224 male athletes (31.7% of the total), and soccer, with 76 male athletes

(11%). Golf had 49 participants (7%), and track and field/cross-country had 6 male athletes (less than 1%). It is noteworthy that football was not offered at any North

Carolina public community college that participated in intercollegiate athletics during the

2013 – 2014 academic year.

Table 4 shows the total number of participants for males and females by college.

The researcher found that the North Carolina community college system provides 1,087 opportunities for its citizens to be student athletes. The researcher found from this question that there were 323 more opportunities for males than females to play college sponsored sports in North Carolina’s public community colleges. This is also a noteworthy discrepancy given that football is not offered at any public community college in the state of North Carolina.

22

Table 2

Female Athletic Participation (Total – Not Unduplicated) at North Carolina Public

Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Track & Community Base- Basket- Soft- Golf Soccer Cross- Volleyball Total College ball ball ball Country A 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 13 B 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 0 0 15 0 12 27 E 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 11 F 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 H 0 0 3 0 13 0 10 26 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 J 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 K 0 13 1 11 13 4 14 56 L 0 13 0 0 0 0 9 22 M 0 0 5 0 0 0 10 15 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 O 0 14 0 0 0 0 9 23 P 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q 0 13 0 22 0 0 12 47 R 0 13 0 0 0 0 8 21 S 0 12 0 0 0 0 11 23 T 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 14 U 0 0 1 0 0 0 6 7 V 0 0 0 16 17 0 0 33 W 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 8 X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Y 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Total 0 78 12 49 71 4 168 382 Note. Not Unduplicated denotes individual participants could be counted more than once if they participated in multiple sports.

23

Table 3

Male Athletic Participation (Total – Not Unduplicated) at North Carolina Public

Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Track Community Base- Basket- Soft- & Field, Volley- Golf Soccer Total College ball ball ball Cross- ball Country A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 12 3 0 0 0 0 15 C 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 6 D 30 16 0 0 0 0 0 46 E 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 F 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 12 G 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 22 H 27 0 6 0 0 0 0 33 I 0 15 4 0 0 0 0 19 J 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K 23 11 4 24 0 6 0 68 L 29 12 0 0 0 0 0 41 M 0 15 8 0 0 0 0 23 N 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 15 O 50 14 0 0 0 0 0 64 P 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 Q 0 15 9 28 0 0 0 52 R 30 15 0 0 0 0 0 45 S 36 17 0 0 0 0 0 53 T 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 U 0 6 3 0 0 0 0 9 V 48 0 0 24 0 0 0 72 W 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 12 X 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 15 Y 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 6 Total 350 224 49 76 0 6 0 705 Note. Not Unduplicated denotes individual participants could be counted more than once if they participated in multiple sports.

24

Table 4

Total Athletic Participation (Total – Not Unduplicated) at North Carolina Public

Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Community Women's Total Men's Total Total Participants College Participants Participants A 13 0 13 B 1 15 16 C 0 6 6 D 27 46 73 E 11 21 32 F 8 12 20 G 0 22 22 H 26 33 59 I 10 19 29 J 6 0 6 K 56 68 124 L 22 41 63 M 15 23 38 N 10 15 25 O 23 64 87 P 0 31 31 Q 47 52 99 R 21 45 66 S 23 53 76 T 14 25 39 U 7 9 16 V 33 72 105 W 8 12 20 X 0 15 15 Y 1 6 7 Total 382 705 1087 Note. Not Unduplicated denotes individual participants could be counted more than once if they participated in multiple sports.

Table 5 shows that there were 18 female head coaches in women’s sports. Of these, none had full-time duties with their teams, but 6 were full-time employees of the college, while 12 were part-time employees of the college (or volunteers). Of the 6 full- time female employees, one coached basketball, one golf, one softball, and three coached 25

volleyball. Of the women’s sports, the one with the most female head coaches was

volleyball, with 12. After that, basketball had three female head coaches, and golf,

soccer, and softball had one each. There were 20 male head coaches of women’s sports.

Of these, none had full-time duties with their teams, but 6 were full-time employees of

the college, while 14 were part-time employees of the college (or volunteers). Of the

women’s sports, the ones with the most male head coaches were golf and volleyball,

which had five each. After that, softball had four male head coaches, basketball had three,

soccer had two, and track and field/cross-country had one. On the employment type side,

women’s sports had 26 head coaches that were assigned to their teams on a part-time

basis and were part-time institution employees/volunteers. There were 12 head coaches of

women’s sports who were assigned to their teams on a part-time basis but were full-time

employees of the college, meaning they performed other duties for the college besides

coaching. There were no head coaches of women’s sports who were assigned to their

teams on a full-time basis. The most numerous women’s sport to be offered at North

Carolina’s public community college was volleyball, with 21 out of 25 colleges offering

it. This was following by basketball and golf, which had six different offerings, softball,

which was offered at five different colleges, soccer at three, and track and field/cross-

country at one. Across the colleges, College K offered the most women’s sports with six

offerings. They also had four part-time coaches with full-time duties with the college and

two part-time coaches with part-time/volunteer duties with the college. After that,

College H and Q had three offerings each, eight different colleges had two offerings, 10

different colleges had only one women’s sport, and four different colleges offered no

women’s sports.

26

Table 6 shows there were no female head coaches in men’s sports. There were, however, 41 male head coaches in men’s sports. Of these, only one had full-time duties with their teams, which also made them a full-time employee of the college. This lone coach with full-time duties to their time was a men’s basketball coach at College G.

Interestingly, this is the only men’s sport offered at College G, and they do not offer any women’s sports. Out of the 41 male coaches in men’s sports at North Carolina’s public community colleges, 16 had part-time duties with their teams and were full-time employees of the college/institution (PT/FI). Of these part-time coaches with full-time college status, nine coached baseball, four coached basketball, one coached golf, one coached soccer, and one coached track and field/cross-country. Out of the 41 male coaches in men’s sports at North Carolina’s public community colleges, 24 had part-time duties with their teams and were part-time institution employees/volunteers. Of these part-time coaches with part-time college status, 3 coached baseball, 11 coached basketball, 8 coached golf, and 2 coached soccer. This made basketball the most prevalent men’s sport, with 16 teams, followed by baseball with 12, golf with 9, soccer with 1, and track and field/cross-country with 1. Across the colleges, College K offered the most men’s sports with five, which had one part-time coach with full-time college duties, and four part-time coaches with part-time college/volunteer duties. After that,

College Q offered three men’s sports, then 11 different colleges offered two sports, 11 offered only one sport, and College J offered no men’s sports.

Table 7 shows that there were 38 assistant coaches assigned to women’s sports at

North Carolina’s public community colleges during the 2013 – 2014 academic year. Of these 38 total assistant coaches, 20 were female and 18 were male. One female assistant

27

coach had part-time coaching duties as well as full-time employment status with the college. Thus, 19 out of the 20 female assistant coaches of women’s sports had part-time duties with their teams and part-time/volunteer status with their college. Of the 18 male assistant coaches, none had full-time employment status with their college. Thus, all had part-time duties with their teams and part-time/volunteer status with their colleges. The women’s sport with the most assistant coaches was volleyball, which had a total of 16 assistant coaches. Nine females and seven males were assistant volleyball coaches.

Basketball had five female and five male assistants, softball had five female and three male assistants, soccer had one female and two male assistants, golf had one male assistant, and track and field/soccer had no assistant coaches.

Table 8 shows that there were 44 assistant coaches assigned to men’s sports at

North Carolina’s public community colleges during the 2013 – 2014 academic year. All of these assistant coaches were male. Four assistant coaches had part-time duties with their teams and full-time employment with their colleges. Two of these assistants coached baseball and two coached basketball. The community colleges had 40 assistant men’s coaches with part-time duties with their teams and part-time/volunteer status with their colleges. The men’s sport with the most assistant coaches was baseball with 22.

Men’s basketball had 18 assistant coaches. Three assistant coaches were assigned to men’s soccer. One assistant coach was assigned. There were no assistant coaches assigned to track and field/cross-country. The researcher found there were six more assistant coaching positions for men’s sports than there were for women’s sports, despite the fact that community colleges in North Carolina offered more women’s sports than men’s sports. There were also 62 total male assistant coaches in North Carolina’s public

28

community college athletic programs compared to just 20 total female assistant coaches –

3.1 times more male assistants than female assistants.

Table 9 and 10 display an organized view of coaches at each college. The

researcher found that there were more male coaching positions at 24 out of the 25 North

Carolina public community colleges that offered intercollegiate athletics during the 2013

-2014 academic year. None of the colleges had more female coaching positions. College

J had an equal number of female and male coaching positions, with one female and one

male. Females only accounted for approximately 23.6% of the total coaching positions.

Out of 161 coaching positions, there were 38 female coaches, and 123 male coaches.

There were no female coaches, head or assistant, of any men’s sports. North Carolina’s public community colleges that offered athletics did not have female coaches at 40% of colleges. There were no female coaches at 10 out of 25 colleges.

The researcher found in Table 11 that out of the 38 women’s athletic programs in

North Carolina’s public community colleges, there were only 18 female head coaches. Of these, none had full-time duties with their teams. Six female coaches had part-time duties with their teams and full-time duties with their college, and the remaining 12 were part- time with their teams and had part-time/volunteer status with their colleges. There were

20 male head coaches of women’s athletics. Of these, none had full-time duties with their teams. Six male coaches of women’s athletics had part-time duties with their teams and full-time duties with their college, and the remaining 14 were part-time with their teams and had part-time/volunteer status with their colleges.

The researcher found in Table 12 that out of the 41 men’s athletic programs in

North Carolina’s public community colleges, there were no female head coaches. One

29

male head coach was assigned to their team on a full-time basis, and was likewise a full- time employee of the college. Sixteen male head coaches of men’s athletic programs had part-time duties with their teams and full-time duties with their college, and the remaining 24 were part-time with their teams and had part-time/volunteer status with their colleges. It is interesting to note that when comparing Table 11 to Table 12, women, despite having more sports offerings than men, had only 38 athletic programs compared to 41 for men.

The researcher found in Table 13 that women’s athletics had 20 female assistant coaches. One female assistant for women’s athletics was assigned to their team on a part- time basis and a full-time employee of the college. The rest were assigned to their team on a part-time basis and had part-time/volunteer status with their colleges. There were 18 male assistant coaches for women’s athletics, and all of them were part-time with their teams and had part-time/volunteer status with their colleges.

The researcher found in Table 14 that there were no female assistant coaches of men’s athletics at North Carolina’s public community colleges. There were 44 male assistant coaches. Four male assistant coaches had part-time duties with their teams and full-time duties with their college, and the remaining 40 were part-time with their teams and had part-time/volunteer status with their colleges. When comparing Table 13 to

Table 14, the researcher found that there were six more of these positions for male sports than female sports, despite there being more female sports offered than male. Again, the researcher noted that there were 42 more male assistant coaches than female assistant coaches.

30

Table 5

Total Head Coaches Assigned to Women’s Sports by Gender and Employment Status at

North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Comm. Track, Total Total Basket. Golf Soccer Softball Volley. Coll. C.C. (Gender) (Status) 1M: A None None None None None 1M 1PT/FI PT/FI (Coed) B None 1M: None None None None 1M 1PT/PI PT/PI C None None None None None None None None 1M: 1M: 1PT/FI D None None None None 2M PT/FI PT/PI 1PT/PI 1F: E None None None None None 1F 1PT/PI PT/PI 1M: F None None None None None 1M 1PT/PI PT/PI G None None None None None None None None 1M: 1M: 1F: H None None None 1F/2M 3PT/PI PT/PI PT/PI PT/PI 1M: I None None None None None 1M 1PT/PI PT/PI 1F: J None None None None None 1F 1PT/PI PT/PI 1M: 1M: 1M: 1F: 1M: 1F: 4PT/FI K 2F/4M PT/FI PT/PI PT/PI PT/FI PT/FI PT/FI 2PT/PI 1M: 1F: L None None None None 1F/1M 2PT/FI PT/FI PT/FI 1F: 1M: 1PT/FI M None None None None 1F/1M PT/FI PT/PI 1PT/PI 1F: N None None None None None 1F 1PT/PI PT/PI 1F: 1F: 1PT/FI O None None None None 2F PT/FI PT/PI 1PT/PI P None None None None None None None None 1F: 1F: 1F: Q None None None 3F 3PT/PI PT/PI PT/PI PT/PI 1F: 1F: R None None None None 2F 2PT/PI PT/PI PT/PI 1M: 1F: S None None None None 1F/1M 2PT/FI PT/FI PT/FI 1F: T None None None None None 1F 1PT/PI PT/PI 1M: 1F: U None None None None 1F/1M 2PT/PI PT/PI PT/PI 31

Table 5 (continued)

Comm. Track, Total Total Basket. Golf Soccer Softball Volley. Coll. C.C. (Gender) (Status) 1M: 1M: V None None None None 2M 2PT/PI PT/PI PT/PI 1M: W None None None None None 1M 1PT/PI PT/PI X None None None None None None None None 1M: Y None None None None None 1M 1PT/PI PT/PI 3F: 1F: 12F: 1F: 1F: 1PT/FI PT/FI 3PT/FI PT/FI PT/PI 1M: 12PT/FI Total 2PT/PI 4M: 9PT/PI 18F/20M 5M: 2M: PT/FI 26PT/PI 3M: 2PT/FI 5M: 5PT/PI 2PT/PI 3PT/FI 2PT/PI 5PT/PI Note. Comm. Coll. = Community College; Basket. = Basketball; C.C. = Cross-Country; Volley. = Volleyball; F = Female; M = Male; PT = part-time with team; FI = full-time with institution; PI = part-time with institution or volunteer.

Table 6

Total Head Coaches Assigned to Men’s Sports by Gender and Employment Status at

North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Comm. Track, Total Total Baseball Basketball Golf Soccer Coll. C.C. (Gender) (Status) 1M: A None None None None 1M 1PT/FI PT/FI (Coed) B None 1M: PT/PI 1M: None None 2M 2PT/PI PT/PI 1M: C None None None None 1M 1PT/FI PT/FI 1M: 1PT/FI D 1M: PT/PI None None None 2M PT/FI 1PT/PI 1M: E None None None None 1M 1PT/PI PT/PI F None 1M: PT/PI None None None 1M 1PT/PI G None 1M: FT/FI None None None 1M 1FT/FI 1M: 1M: 1PT/FI H None None None 2M PT/FI PT/PI 1PT/PI 1M: I None 1M: PT/PI None None 2M 2PT/PI PT/PI J None None None None None None None

32

Table 6 (continued)

Comm. Basket- Track, Total Total Baseball Golf Soccer Coll. ball C.C. (Gender) (Status) 1M: 1M: 1M: 1M: 1PT/FI K 1M: PT/PI 5M PT/PI PT/PI PT/PI PT/FI 4PT/PI 1M: L 1M: PT/FI None None None 2M 2PT/FI PT/FI 1M: M None 1M: PT/PI None None 2M 2PT/PI PT/PI N None 1M: PT/PI None None None 1M 1PT/PI 1M: O 1M: PT/FI None None None 2M 2PT/FI PT/FI 1M: P None None None None 1M 1PT/FI PT/FI 1M: 1M: 2PT/FI Q None 1M: PT/FI None 3M PT/PI PT/FI 1PT/PI 1M: R 1M: PT/FI None None None 2M 2PT/FI PT/FI 1M: 1PT/FI S 1M: PT/PI None None None 2M PT/FI 1PT/PI 1M: T None None None None 1M 1PT/PI PT/PI 1M: U None 1M: PT/PI None None 2M 2PT/PI PT/PI 1M: 1M: 1PT/FI V None None None 2M PT/FI PT/PI 1PT/PI W None 1M: PT/PI None None None 1M 1PT/PI X None 1M: PT/PI None None None 1M 1PT/PI 1M: Y None None None None 1M 1PT/PI PT/PI 9M: 16M: 12M: 1PT/ 3M: 1 FT/FI 1FT/FI 1M: Total 9PT/FI FI 1PT/FI 41M 16PT/FI 4PT/FI PT/FI 3PT/PI 8PT/ 2PT/PI 24PT/PI 11PT/PI PI Note. Comm. Coll. = Community College; C.C. = Cross-Country; F = Female; M = Male; FT = full-time with team; PT = part-time with team; FI = full-time with institution; PI = part-time with institution or volunteer.

33

Table 7

Total Assistant Coaches Assigned to Women’s Sports by Gender and Employment Status at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Track Comm. Soft- & Field, Volley- Total Total Basketball Golf Soccer Coll. ball Cross- ball (Gender) (Status) Country 1F: A None None None None None 1F 1PT/PI PT/PI B None None None None None None None None C None None None None None None None None 3F: 2F: D None None None None 5F 5PT/PI 3PT/PI 2PT/PI E None None None None None None None None 1M: F None None None None None 1M 1PT/PI PT/PI G None None None None None None None 1M: 1F: H None None None None 1F/1M 2PT/PI PT/PI PT/PI 1M: I None None None None None 1M 1PT/PI PT/PI 1M: J None None None None None 1M 1PT/PI PT/PI 1F: 1F: 1F: K 1F:PT/PI None None 4F 4PT/PI PT/PI PT/PI PT/PI 2F: 2PT/PI 1F: L 2M: None None None None 3F/2M 5PT/PI PT/PI 2PT/PI 1M: 1M: M None None None None 2M 2PT/PI PT/PI PT/PI 1F: N None None None None None 1F 1PT/PI PT/PI 1M: O 1M: PT/PI None None None None 2M 2PT/PI PT/PI P None None None None None None None None 1M: 1M: Q 1F: PT/PI None None None 1F/2M 3PT/PI PT/PI PT/PI 1M: R 1M: PT/PI None None None None 2M 2PT/PI PT/PI 1F: S 1F: PT/PI None None None None 2F 2PT/PI PT/PI 1F: T None None None None None 1F 1PT/PI PT/PI 1F: U None None None None None 1F 1PT/FI PT/FI 34

Table 7 (continued)

Track & Comm. Field, Volley- Total Total BasketballGolf Soccer Soft-ball Coll. Cross- ball (Gender) (Status) Country 1M: 2M: V None None None None 3M 3PT/PI PT/PI 2PT/PI W 1M: PT/PI None None None None None 1M 1PT/PI X None None None None None None None None Y None None None None None None None None 9F: 5F: 1F: 5F: 1PT/FI, 5PT/PI 1M: PT/PI 5PT/PI 1PT/FI Total None 8PT/PI 20F/18M 5M: PT/PI 2M: 3M: 37PT/PI 7M: 5PT/PI 2PT/PI 3PT/PI 7PT/PI Note. Comm. Coll. = Community College; F = Female; M = Male; PT = part-time with team; FI = full-time with institution; PI = part-time with institution or volunteer.

Table 8

Total Assistant Coaches Assigned to Men’s Sports by Gender and Employment Status at

North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Track Community & Field, Total Total Baseball Basketball Golf Soccer College Cross- (Gender) (Status) Country 1M: A None None None None 1M 1PT/PI PT/PI B None 1M: PT/PI None None None 1M 1PT/PI C None None None None None None None 2M: 3M: D None None None 5M 5PT/PI 2PT/PI 3PT/PI 1M: E None None None None 1M 1PT/PI PT/PI F None 1M: PT/PI None None None 1M 1PT/PI G None None None None None None None 2M: H None None None None 2M 2PT/PI 2PT/PI I None 1M: PT/PI None None None 1M 1PT/PI J None None None None None None None

35

Table 8 (continued)

Track Community & Field, Total Total Baseball Basketball Golf Soccer College Cross- (Gender) (Status) Country 3M: 1M: 2PT/FI K 1PT/FI 1M: PT/FI None None 5M PT/PI 3PT/PI 2PT/PI 1M: L 1M: PT/PI None None None 2M 2PT/PI PT/PI 1M: 1M: M None None None 2M 2PT/PI PT/PI PT/PI 2M: N None None None None 2M 2PT/PI 2PT/PI 3M: 2M: O None None None 5M 5PT/PI 3PT/PI 2PT/PI 1M: P None None None None 1M 1PT/PI PT/PI 1M: Q None 1M: PT/PI None None 2M 2PT/PI PT/PI 2M: 2M: R None None None 4M 4PT/PI 2PT/PI 2PT/PI 1M: S 1M: PT/FI None None None 2M 2PT/FI PT/FI 2M: T None None None 2M 2PT/PI 2PT/PI U None 1M: PT/PI None None None 1M 1PT/PI 2M: 1M: V None None None 3M 3PT/PI 2PT/PI PT/PI W None None None None None None None X None 1M: PT/PI None None None 1M 1PT/PI Y None None None None None None None 22M: 18M: 1M: 3M: 4PT/FI Total 2PT/FI 2PT/FI None 44M 1PT/PI 3PT/PI 40PT/PI 20PT/PI 16PT/PI Note. F = Female; M = Male; PT = part-time with team; FI = full-time with institution; PI = part-time with institution or volunteer.

36

Table 9

Female Coaches at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 –

2014)

Female Female Female Female Head Head Assistant Assistant Total Community Coaches: Coaches: Coaches: Coaches: Female College Women's Men's Women's Men's Coaches Sports Sports Sports Sports A 0 0 1 0 1 B 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 0 5 0 5 E 1 0 0 0 1 F 0 0 0 0 0 G 0 0 0 0 0 H 1 0 1 0 2 I 0 0 0 0 0 J 1 0 0 0 1 K 2 0 4 0 6 L 1 0 3 0 4 M 1 0 0 0 1 N 1 0 1 0 2 O 2 0 0 0 2 P 0 0 0 0 0 Q 3 0 1 0 4 R 2 0 0 0 2 S 1 0 2 0 3 T 1 0 1 0 2 U 1 0 1 0 2 V 0 0 0 0 0 W 0 0 0 0 0 X 0 0 0 0 0 Y 0 0 0 0 0 Total 18 0 20 0 38

37

Table 10

Male Coaches at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 –

2014)

Male Male Male Male Total Head Head Assistant Assistant Total Community Coaches: Coaches: Coaches: Coaches: Coaches: Male College Female Women's Men's Women's Men's Coaches + Male Sports Sports Sports Sports A 1 1 0 1 3 4 B 1 2 0 1 4 4 C 0 1 0 0 1 1 D 2 2 0 5 9 14 E 0 1 0 1 2 3 F 1 1 1 1 4 4 G 0 1 0 0 1 1 H 2 2 1 2 7 9 I 1 2 1 1 5 5 J 0 0 1 0 1 2 K 4 5 0 5 14 20 L 1 2 2 2 7 11 M 1 2 2 2 7 8 N 0 1 0 2 3 5 O 0 2 2 5 9 11 P 0 1 0 1 2 2 Q 0 3 2 2 7 11 R 0 2 2 4 8 10 S 1 2 0 2 5 8 T 0 1 0 2 3 5 U 1 2 0 1 4 6 V 2 2 3 3 10 10 W 1 1 1 0 3 3 X 0 1 0 1 2 2 Y 1 1 0 0 2 2 Total 20 41 18 44 123 161

38

Table 11

Employment Type of Head Women’s Sports Coaches at North Carolina Public

Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Employment Type Female Male Total Assigned to Team on a Full-Time Basis (FT) and Full-Time 0 0 0 Institution Employee (FI) Assigned to Team on a Part-Time Basis (PT) and Full-Time 6 6 12 Institution Employee (FI) Assigned to Team on a Part-Time Basis (PT) and Part-Time 12 14 26 Institution Employee or Volunteer (PI) Total 18 20 38

39

Table 12

Employment Type of Head Men’s Sports Coaches at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Employment Type Female Male Total Assigned to Team on a Full-Time Basis (FT) and Full-Time 0 1 1 Institution Employee (FI) Assigned to Team on a Part-Time Basis (PT) and Full-Time 0 16 16 Institution Employee (FI) Assigned to Team on a Part-Time Basis (PT) and Part-Time 0 24 24 Institution Employee or Volunteer (PI) Total 0 41 41

40

Table 13

Employment Type of Assistant Women’s Sports Coaches at North Carolina Public

Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Employment Type Female Male Total Assigned to Team on a Full-Time Basis (FT) and Full-Time 0 0 0 Institution Employee (FI) Assigned to Team on a Part-Time Basis (PT) and Full-Time 1 0 1 Institution Employee (FI) Assigned to Team on a Part-Time Basis (PT) and Part-Time 19 18 37 Institution Employee or Volunteer (PI) Total 20 18 38

41

Table 14

Employment Type of Assistant Men’s Sports Coaches at North Carolina Public

Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Employment Type Female Male Total Assigned to Team on a Full-Time Basis (FT) and Full-Time 0 0 0 Institution Employee (FI) Assigned to Team on a Part-Time Basis (PT) and Full-Time 0 4 4 Institution Employee (FI) Assigned to Team on a Part-Time Basis (PT) and Part-Time 0 40 40 Institution Employee or Volunteer (PI) Total 0 44 44

Research Question Three

Research question three: What are the revenues and expenses at North Carolina’s public community college’s intercollegiate athletic programs?

The researcher found in Table 15 that the average annual institutional salary per

FTE for a men’s head coach was $28,534 and the average annual institutional salary per

FTE for a women’s head coach was $28,055. This finding indicated a difference of $479 on average where the men’s head coach was paid more than the women’s. The average annual institutional salary (not per FTE) for a men’s head coach was $6,515 and the average annual institutional salary (not per FTE) for a women’s head coach was $5,775.

This finding indicated a difference of $740 on average where the men’s head coach was

42

paid more than the women’s (not per FTE). The average annual institutional salary per

FTE for a men’s assistant coach was $23,379 and the average annual institutional salary per FTE for a women’s assistant coach was $25,208. This finding indicated a difference of $1,829 on average where the women’s assistant coach was paid more than the men’s.

The average annual institutional salary (not per FTE) for a men’s assistant coach was

$2,849 and the average annual institutional salary (not per FTE) for a women’s assistant coach was $2,313. This finding indicated a difference of $536 on average where the men’s assistant coach was paid more than the women’s (not per FTE).

Table 16 shows that 18 of the 25 North Carolina public community college athletic departments paid men’s head coaches more than women’s head coaches (not per

FTE). Only four departments paid women’s head coaches more than men’s head coaches.

When viewed as per FTE, the table shows that 16 out of the 25 North Carolina public community college athletic departments paid men’s head coaches more than women’s head coaches. Only 6 departments, per FTE, paid women’s head coaches more than men’s head coaches. Across the institutions, the researcher calculated the mean salary of men’s head coaches per FTE to be $25,363 as compared to $19,246 for women’s head coaches, a difference of $6,117. The researcher also calculated the mean salary of men’s head coaches (not per FTE) to be $6,191 compared to $3,530 for women’s head coaches

(not per FTE), a difference of $2,661.

The researcher found in Table 17 that 16 of the 25 North Carolina public community college athletic departments paid men’s assistant coaches more than women’s assistant coaches (not per FTE). Only five departments paid women’s assistant coaches more than men’s assistant coaches. When viewed as per FTE, the table shows that 15 out

43

of the 25 North Carolina public community college athletic departments paid men’s assistant coaches more than women’s assistant coaches. Only five departments, per FTE, paid women’s head coaches more than men’s head coaches. Across the institutions, the researcher calculated the mean salary of men’s assistant coaches per FTE to be $16,530 as compared to $11,658 for women’s head coaches, a difference of $4,873. The researcher also calculated the mean salary of men’s assistant coaches (not per FTE) to be

$3,211 compared to $1,173 for women’s assistant coaches (not per FTE), a difference of

$2,038.

Table 15

Average Annual Salary Comparison for Coaches at North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Subject Women's Teams Men's Teams Difference Head Coaches: Average Annual $5,775 $6,515 -$740 Institutional Salary Head Coaches: Average Annual Institutional Salary $28,055 $28,534 -$479 per Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Assistant Coaches: Average Annual $2,313 $2,849 -$536 Institutional Salary Assistant Coaches: Average Annual Institutional Salary $25,208 $23,379 $1,829 per Full-Time Equivalent (FTE)

44

Table 16

Average Annual Institutional Salary per Head Coach at North Carolina Public

Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Head Head Head Head Coaches Coaches Coaches Coaches of of of Men's of Men's Women's Women's Teams: C. C. Teams: Difference Teams: Difference Teams: Average Average Average Average Annual Annual Annual Annual Inst. per Inst. Inst. per Inst. FTE FTE A $3,000 $3,700 -$700 $18,750 $23,125 -$4,375 Ba $750 $1,500 -$750 $750 $1,500 -$750 C $0 $6,386 -$6,386 $0 $31,930 -$31,930 D $6,200 $6,200 $0 $24,800 $24,800 $0 E $3,300 $10,000 -$6,700 $33,000 $50,000 -$17,000 F $1,750 $4,000 -$2,250 $1,750 $8,000 -$6,250 G $0 $20,770 -$20,770 $0 $20,770 -$20,770 H $1,750 $1,625 $125 $26,250 $23,214 $3,036 I $5,000 $6,750 -$1,750 $50,000 $67,500 -$17,500 J $3,000 $0 $3,000 $12,000 $0 $12,000 K $6,250 $6,100 $150 $25,000 $24,400 $600 L $4,250 $4,250 $0 $17,000 $17,000 $0 M $4,750 $3,750 $1,000 $39,583 $41,667 -$2,084 N $6,000 $8,000 -$2,000 $30,000 $30,769 -$769 O $9,301 $10,528 -$1,227 $46,505 $52,640 -$6,135 P $0 $6,000 -$6,000 $0 $21,429 -$21,429 Q $14,880 $15,659 -$779 $30,162 $30,113 $49 R $3,985 $4,753 -$768 $30,654 $36,562 -$5,908 Sb $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 T $4,200 $5,750 -$1,550 $32,308 $22,115 $10,193 U $2,035 $2,954 -$919 $15,074 $15,149 -$75 V $4,000 $10,190 -$6,190 $16,000 $37,055 -$21,055 W $3,000 $3,000 $0 $3,000 $3,000 $0 X $0 $7,765 -$7,765 $0 $24,266 -$24,266 Y $857 $5,143 -$4,286 $28,567 $27,068 $1,499 Mean $3,530 $6,191 -$2,661 $19,246 $25,363 -$6,117 Note. C. C. = Community College; Inst. = Institutional; FTE = full-time equivalent. aWomen’s salary is for coed teams. bCoaches do not receive additional compensation.

45

Table 17

Average Annual Institutional Salary per Assistant Coach at North Carolina Public

Community and Technical Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Assistant Assistant Assistant Assistant Coaches Coaches Coaches Coaches of of of Men's of Men's Women's Community Women's Teams: Teams: Diff. Teams: Diff. College Teams: Average Average Average Average Annual Annual Annual Annual Inst. per Inst. Inst. per Inst. FTE FTE A $1,500 $1,850 -$350 $15,000 $18,500 -$3,500 B $0 $750 -$750 $0 $750 -$750 C $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 D $2,400 $2,040 $360 $26,667 $15,938 $10,729 E $0 $5,000 -$5,000 $0 $25,000 -$25,000 F $250 $1,000 -$750 $250 $1,000 -$750 G $0 $20,770 -$20,770 $0 $20,770 -$20,770 H $1,000 $1,750 -$750 $20,000 $17,500 $2,500 I $1,800 $2,800 -$1,000 $18,000 $28,000 -$10,000 J $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 K $1,025 $1,060 -$35 $21,579 $18,929 $2,650 L $1,333 $2,000 -$667 $21,047 $21,053 -$6 M $2,500 $2,250 $250 $38,462 $40,909 -$2,447 N $1,500 $750 $750 $30,000 $30,000 $0 O $10,500 $6,797 $3,703 $30,000 $29,552 $448 P $0 $4,000 -$4,000 $0 $21,053 -$21,053 Q $0 $12,750 -$12,750 $0 $25,000 -$25,000 R $1,250 $1,167 $83 $25,000 $25,007 -$7 Sa $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 T $1,300 $3,169 -$1,869 $14,444 $24,377 -$9,933 U $1,289 $1,500 -$211 $14,322 $15,000 -$678 V $1,667 $4,867 -$3,200 $16,670 $15,871 $799 W $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 X $0 $4,000 -$4,000 $0 $19,048 -$19,048 Y $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Mean $1,173 $3,211 -$2,038 $11,658 $16,530 -$4,873 Note. Inst. = Institutional; FTE = full-time equivalent. aMen’s assistants were full-time faculty/staff members with no additional compensation for coaching. Women’s assistants were strictly volunteers not employed by College S.

46

Table 18 shows that only 6 out of North Carolina’s 25 public community colleges with intercollegiate athletics spent more athletically related student aid on males than females. Likewise, 6 out of the 25 colleges spent more athletically related student aid on females than males. Interestingly, 13 of the colleges offered no student aid at all to males or females. 4 of the colleges spent a higher percentage of total athletically related student aid on females than males. Despite this, there was $184,654 of athletically related student aid spent of men’s teams and $173,248 spent on women’s teams, a difference of $11,406.

The researcher used a cost benefit analysis to look into the expenditures and revenues of each community college’s intercollegiate athletic department. This cost benefit analysis included figures that totaled the revenues and expenses of all 25 colleges that offered intercollegiate athletics during the 2013 – 2014 academic year. The data were gathered from the EADA survey.

Table 19 shows that 7 of the 25 community colleges made money on their intercollegiate athletic departments during the 2013 – 2014 academic year. The most profitable was College O, which made $32,739. Interestingly, 18 of the 25 community colleges spent the exact same amount on expenditures as they had in revenues, therefore breaking even for the year. None of the schools had more expenditures than revenues.

The total expense amount for the 25 community colleges was $4,082,664. The total revenue amount for the 25 community colleges was $4,139,760. Table 19 shows that intercollegiate athletics in North Carolina’s public community colleges generated

$57,096 during the 2013 – 2014 academic year. It is worth noting that none of these public community colleges offer football.

47

Table 18

Athletically Related Student Aid at North Carolina Public Community and Technical

Colleges (2013 – 2014)

Total Community Women's % of Men's % of College Difference College Teams Total Teams Total Athletic Aid A $5,400 33 $11,200 67 -$5,800 $16,600 B $0 N/A $0 N/A $0 $0 C $0 N/A $0 N/A $0 $0 D $37,198 50 $37,163 50 $35 $74,361 E $0 N/A $0 N/A $0 $0 F $0 N/A $0 N/A $0 $0 G $0 N/A $0 N/A $0 $0 H $6,250 64 $3,500 36 $2,750 $9,750 I $0 N/A $0 N/A $0 $0 J $2,975 100 $0 0 $2,975 $2,975 K $28,265 52 $25,630 48 $2,635 $53,895 L $22,625 49 $23,867 51 -$1,242 $46,492 M $0 N/A $0 N/A $0 $0 N $0 N/A $0 N/A $0 $0 O $11,674 45 $14,240 55 -$2,566 $25,914 P $0 N/A $0 N/A $0 $0 Q $22,200 52 $20,450 48 $1,750 $42,650 R $500 53 $450 47 $50 $950 S $28,561 43 $38,556 57 -$9,995 $67,117 T $0 N/A $0 N/A $0 $0 U $0 N/A $0 N/A $0 $0 V $7,100 47 $7,848 53 -$748 $14,948 W $0 N/A $0 N/A $0 $0 X $0 N/A $0 N/A $0 $0 Y $500 22 $1,750 78 -$1,250 $2,250 Means (non- $14,437 42 $16,787 54 -$2,349 $29,825 zero) Totals $173,248 48a $184,654 52 -$11,406 $357,902 aThe mean for Women’s % of Total was calculated without the outlier of College J’s 100%.

48

Table 19

North Carolina Public Community and Technical College Athletic Expenditures vs.

Revenues (2013 – 2014)

Community College Revenues Expenditures Difference A $91,541 $91,541 $0 B $13,790 $13,790 $0 C $20,117 $20,117 $0 D $292,625 $292,094 $531 E $105,020 $105,020 $0 F $40,000 $27,642 $12,358 G $43,129 $43,129 $0 H $130,521 $130,521 $0 I $54,731 $54,731 $0 J $48,898 $44,822 $4,076 K $647,422 $647,422 $0 L $340,129 $339,797 $332 M $222,455 $222,455 $0 N $157,857 $157,857 $0 O $434,761 $402,022 $32,739 P $79,677 $78,654 $1,023 Q $501,971 $501,971 $0 R $127,952 $127,952 $0 S $260,249 $260,249 $0 T $83,797 $83,797 $0 U $74,903 $74,903 $0 V $186,283 $186,283 $0 W $25,200 $19,163 $6,037 X $95,230 $95,230 $0 Y $61,502 $61,502 $0 Totals $4,139,760 $4,082,664 $57,096

Table 20 breaks down expenditures versus revenues further into women’s and men’s athletics. This table shows that only Community College W had a negative balance for women’s sports, whereas Community College K and W and negative balances for men’s sports. Also noteworthy from this table is that women’s sports were profitable overall by a margin of $26,168. Men’s sports had less of a profit margin at $19,964. 49

Table 21 shows athletic revenues and expenditures from sources other than men’s and women’s athletics.

Table 20

North Carolina Public Community College Athletic Expenditures vs. Revenues for Men’s and Women’s Sports (2013 – 2014)

C.C. Wom. Rev. Wom. Exp. Diff. Men’s Rev. Men’s Exp. Diff. A $31,801 $31,801 $0 $58,728 $58,728 $0 B $1,250 $1,250 $0 $12,040 $12,040 $0 C $0 $0 $0 $20,117 $20,117 $0 D $119,547 $118,090 $1,457 $137,976 $136,991 $985 E $10,005 $10,005 $0 $66,543 $66,543 $0 F $5,000 $3,647 $1,353 $15,000 $10,174 $4,826 G $0 $0 $0 $43,129 $43,129 $0 H $57,676 $57,676 $0 $65,505 $65,505 $0 I $12,942 $12,942 $0 $33,725 $33,725 $0 J $48,898 $44,822 $4,076 $0 $0 $0 K $151,956 $145,905 $6,051 $188,950 $191,021 -$2,071 L $108,682 $108,682 $0 $123,961 $123,629 $332 M $48,749 $48,749 $0 $67,660 $67,660 $0 N $45,678 $45,678 $0 $67,505 $67,505 $0 O $145,417 $129,952 $15,465 $188,996 $179,203 $9,793 P $0 $0 $0 $47,165 $47,165 $0 Q $124,964 $124,964 $0 $180,430 $180,430 $0 R $33,498 $33,498 $0 $62,543 $62,543 $0 S $77,667 $77,667 $0 $102,198 $102,198 $0 T $21,448 $21,448 $0 $46,349 $46,349 $0 U $20,936 $20,936 $0 $30,477 $30,477 $0 V $50,252 $50,252 $0 $106,230 $106,230 $0 W $100 $5,281 -$5,181 $100 $11,682 -$11,582 X $0 $0 $0 $65,181 $65,181 $0 Y $8,293 $5,346 $2,947 $49,753 $32,072 $17,681 ∑ $1,124,759 $1,098,591 $26,168 $1,780,261 $1,760,297 $19,964 Note. C.C. = Community College; Wom. = Women’s; Rev. = Revenues; Exp. = Expenditures; Diff. = Difference; ∑ = Totals.

50

Table 21

North Carolina Public Community College Athletic Expenditures vs. Revenues From

Other Sources (2013 – 2014)

Community College Other Revenue Other Expenditures A $1,012 $1,012 B $500 $500 C $0 $0 D $35,102 $37,013 E $28,472 $28,472 F $20,000 $13,821 G $0 $0 H $7,340 $7,340 I $8,064 $8,064 J $0 $0 K $306,516 $310,496 L $107,486 $107,486 M $106,046 $106,046 N $44,674 $44,674 O $100,348 $92,867 P $32,512 $31,489 Q $196,577 $196,577 R $31,911 $31,911 S $80,384 $80,384 T $16,000 $16,000 U $23,490 $23,490 V $29,801 $29,801 W $25,000 $2,200 X $30,049 $30,049 Y $3,456 $24,084 Totals $1,234,740 $1,223,776

51

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The purpose of this study was to provide an assessment of the impact athletic programs at North Carolina’s public community colleges. During the 2013 – 2014 academic year, 25 of North Carolina’s 58 public community colleges competed in and awarded scholarships for intercollegiate athletics as members of Region X of the National

Junior College Athletic Association. Region X was also comprised of colleges from

South Carolina and Virginia. Women’s sports offered included basketball, golf, soccer, softball, track and field/cross-country, and volleyball. Men’s sports offered included baseball, basketball, golf, soccer, and track and field/cross-country.

Conducting this study provided a comprehensive assessment that could be useful to North Carolina’s community and technical college presidents, athletic directors, coaches, and policy makers. Location, student participation, amount of athletically related student aid, teams sponsored, athletic revenues and expenses, and coaching staff salaries were described.

Summary

Chapter one provided the statement of the problem, purpose of the study, significance of the study, limitations and delimitations, and definition of terms. The purpose of this study was to analyze data that pertained to North Carolina’s public community and technical college athletic programs. Chapter two provided the review of

52

the related literature. Alexander’s similar 2009 study, A descriptive study of intercollegiate athletics in Mississippi’s public community and junior colleges, is described. One of his recommendations was that the study should be replicated in other

SREB states, such as North Carolina. While this study is a purposeful attempt to be similar, it is not described by the researcher as a replication of Alexander’s study.

Along with summaries of other related studies, chapter two also discussed the history of North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges. The economic impact of community and technical colleges and community college athletics is discussed. Community colleges were hailed by the Governor of North Carolina as the key to the state’s economic recovery, and it was stated that officials from North Carolina’s community colleges must be at the ‘leadership table’ of economic recovery.

Unfortunately, despite the significant role of the community college in the state’s economic well-being, funding has continued to be cut. One of the primary sufferers of cuts has been North Carolina’s higher cost technical and health programs at the community colleges. Since research has shown that the added skills of persons from these programs translate into higher earnings, increased tax receipts, less social services, and a more robust local economy, we must give high regard to the funding plight of these programs and our community colleges. Chapter two also discussed the role of athletics.

North Carolina’s community and technical college funding is currently based on enrollment, and so community and technical college leaders must take heed of research that points out a correlation between increased enrollment and increased athletic offerings.

53

Chapter three provided the research methodology, data sources, data collection, and data analysis information. Chapter three also provided the research questions and variables, as well as providing IRB information. The study was guided by the three broad research questions presented in chapter four. These questions were addressed by reporting on student participation levels, athletically related student aid, and information regarding the coaching staff. Descriptive statistics such as percentages, frequencies, differences, and measures of central tendency such as mean were used to display the findings from this study. The researcher located the data files of the EADA Survey and reported the findings from the 2013 – 2014 academic school year, which included data on participants, coaching staff and salaries, and revenues and expenses. Efforts were made to maintain the anonymity of each public community and technical college. The researcher randomly assigned a letter to represent each institution in the data tables presented in chapter four. The letters in the tables represent the 25 North Carolina public community and technical colleges that participated in intercollegiate athletics ranging from A to Y

Conclusions

Research Question One

To what extent are North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges involved in intercollegiate athletics?

The data were collected from the EADA survey and put into tables detailing what sports where offered by North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges. There were 9 main conclusions:

54

1. Only 25 out of 58 public community and technical colleges in North Carolina offered intercollegiate athletics. These 25 colleges offered their citizens 1,087 opportunities for its citizens to be student athletes in 50 out of 100 North Carolina counties.

2. None of North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges offered football during the 2013 – 2014 academic school year.

3. None of North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges offered cheerleading during the 2013 – 2014 academic school year.

4. The most prevalent sport at North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges was women’s volleyball, which was offered at 17 out of 25 colleges.

5. North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges offered more women’s sports (6) than men’s sports (5).

6. The sports with the highest number of participants were men’s baseball (350), men’s basketball (224), and women’s volleyball (168).

7. Only 6 out of the 25 North Carolina public community and technical colleges with athletics offered more men’s sports than women’s sports.

8. There were two colleges that offered more women’s sports than men’s sports.

9. There were 16 out of the 25 colleges (64%) that offered an equal number of women’s and men’s sports.

Research Question Two

How do intercollegiate athletics vary at each community and technical college in the state of North Carolina?

1. There were nearly twice as many male participants as there were female participants. The findings indicated that despite males having fewer sports, football not being offered, and women’s volleyball being the most prevalent sport offered at North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges, male participants in athletics outnumbered female participants 705 – 382, for a difference of 323 male athletes. Female athletes only made up approximately 35% of the total participants.

2. For female athletic participants, approximately 44% were volleyball players.

55

3. For male athletic participants, approximately 50% were baseball players.

4. There were more male coaching positions at 24 out of the 25 North Carolina public community and technical colleges that offered intercollegiate athletics during the 2013 -2014 academic year. None of the colleges had more female coaching positions, and College J had an equal number of female and male coaching positions, with one female and one male.

5. Females only accounted for approximately 23.6% of the total coaching positions. Out of 161 coaching positions, there were 38 female coaches, and 123 male coaches.

6. There were no female coaches, head or assistant, of any men’s sports.

7. North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges that offered athletics did not have female coaches at 40% of colleges. There were no female coaches at 10 out of 25 colleges.

8. There were only 7 female coaches employed full-time compared to 27 male coaches that were employed full-time, including 1 male coach who was assigned to full-time duties with his team. Thus, males had 3.8 times as many coaching opportunities with full-time employment status as female.

Research Question Three

What are the revenues and expenses at North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges’ intercollegiate athletic programs?

1. Football is not necessary for public community and technical college athletic programs to be financially viable. All of North Carolina’s pubic community and technical colleges involved in intercollegiate athletics during the 2013 – 2014 academic year operated with balanced budgets and turned an overall profit despite the lack of football.

2. Dosh (2011) asked if non-revenue sports should be cut, what would happen if we pretend there is no Title IX? The researcher has found with this study that football is not necessary for public community and technical colleges to have viable athletic programs, including women’s sports.

3. The average institutional salary per FTE for head coaches of men’s sports was $479 more than head coaches of women’s sports.

56

4. The average institutional salary (not per FTE) for head coaches of men’s sports was $740 more than head coaches of women’s sports.

5. The average institutional salary per FTE for assistant coaches of men’s sports was $1,829 less than assistant coaches of women’s sports.

6. The average institutional salary (not per FTE) for assistant coaches of men’s sports was $536 more than assistant coaches of women’s sports.

7. There were 18 out of 25 (72%) North Carolina public community and technical colleges with intercollegiate athletics in the 2013 – 2014 academic year that paid head coaches of men’s sports more than head coaches of women’s sports (not per FTE).

8. There were 16 out of 25 (64%) North Carolina public community and technical colleges with intercollegiate athletics in the 2013 – 2014 academic year that paid assistant coaches of men’s sports more than assistant coaches of women’s sports (per FTE).

9. There were 15 out of 25 (60%) North Carolina public community and technical colleges with intercollegiate athletics in the 2013 – 2014 academic year that paid assistant coaches of men’s sports more than assistant coaches of women’s sports (not per FTE).

10. Only 6 out of 25 (24%) North Carolina public community and technical colleges with intercollegiate athletics in the 2013 – 2014 academic year spent more athletically related student aid on males than females.

11. There were 6 out of 25 (24%) colleges that spend more athletically related student aid on females than males.

12. There were 13 out of 25 colleges (52%) that offered no athletically related student aid to males or females.

13. There was $11,406 more spent on athletically related student aid for males than females: $184,654 for men’s teams and $173,248 for women’s teams.

14. The cost benefit analysis found that just 7 of the 25 community colleges generated money from athletics during the 2013 – 2014 academic year.

15. The cost benefit analysis found that 18 of the 25 community colleges had athletic revenues that equaled expenditures, for no profit or loss.

16. The cost benefit analysis found that none of the schools had more expenditures than revenues.

57

17. The 25 North Carolina public community and technical colleges that participated in intercollegiate athletics during the 2013 – 2014 academic year combined for $4,082,664 in expenses and $4,139,760 in revenues, a difference of $57,096.

18. Only College W had a negative balance for women’s sports.

19. Two colleges, K and W, had negative balances for men’s sports.

20. Women’s sports versus men’s sports were profitable overall by a margin of $26,168 versus $19,964, respectively, a difference of $6,204.

Recommendations

The following recommendations are provided based on the results of the study:

1. A similar study utilizing the most recent data should be conducted for Mississippi.

a. Alexander’s (2009) study was for the 2007 – 2008 academic year.

2. Similar studies should be conducted in other SREB states.

a. The SREB states in the 2013 – 2014 academic year were Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia (SREB, 2015).

3. Similar studies should be conducted in non-SREB states.

4. The data compiled for this study were for the 2013 – 2014 academic year. The researcher recommends conducting a similar study over a multiple- year period to see if the findings of the study remain consistent.

5. The researcher recommends a comparison of the findings from this study to the findings from Alexander’s (2009) study of Mississippi.

6. The researcher recommends a comparison of the findings from this study to the findings from a similar Mississippi study utilizing the most recent data.

7. The researcher recommends a comparison of the findings from this study to findings from a similarly conducted study of another SREB state.

8. The researcher recommends a comparison of the findings from this study to the findings from a similar study of a non-SREB state.

58

9. The researcher recommends further study utilizing race/ethnicity of people involved in college athletics from student athletes to coaches and administrators.

10. The researcher recommends further study in regards to the effects of football versus non-football for community college athletic programs.

11. The researcher recommends further study of the possibility of increased involvement of public community, technical, and junior colleges with NCAA Division I-A athletics, especially football and men’s basketball, perhaps even exploring the transition of these and other sports from four- year universities to the community college. There are seven NCAA Division I-A universities in the state of North Carolina, each with prominent sports programs. Their total undergraduate enrollment for the 2013 – 2014 academic year was 88,952 (Office Of Postsecondary Education, 2015). In North Carolina, there are 58 community and technical colleges with at least one campus in all 100 counties that served a total of 780,146 students during the 2013 – 2014 academic year (NCCCS, 2015).

Evidence shows that student-athletes are attending Division I-A universities without the prerequisite education level required of non- athlete students to be successful at those schools. Many of the most talented student-athletes at their particular sport leave after their freshman or sophomore year without a degree or improved technical skill-set. The community and technical college is already adept at serving an under- educated population and providing them new skill-sets to be successful in today’s global economy. The community and technical college also successfully incorporates athletics into their campus culture. This study has shown that community and technical colleges are key to the local and state economy, athletics helps to drive enrollment at community and technical colleges, and community and technical colleges in North Carolina logistically handle nearly 9 times as many students per year as their NCAA I-A counterparts. There is a critical need to correct the many flaws that are plaguing NCAA Division I-A sports, where the structure of big-time college athletics itself is currently flawed, as student-athletes create billions of dollars for universities while earning nothing for themselves. The community and technical college can be a part of the solution (Branch, 2011).

59

a. The University of North Carolina (UNC) in Chapel Hill has had a massive academic scandal involving their student athletes brought to light. According to a 2014 report by former federal prosecutor Kenneth Wainstein, UNC offered athletes hundreds of irregular classes at UNC-Chapel Hill that had no class attendance or faculty involvement between 1993 and 2011 (University of North Carolina, 2015).

b. According to research conducted by former UNC-Chapel Hill athletic tutor Mary Willingham, 60% of UNC-Chapel Hill athletes who played football or basketball from 2004 to 2012 read between fourth- and eighth-grade levels, and between 8% and 10% read below a third-grade level (Ganim, 2014).

c. Seven players from the 2014 - 2015 University of Kentucky’s men’s basketball team have declared for the NBA draft, including six freshmen and sophomores (Tucker, 2015).

The community and technical college landscape is quickly changing. Soon, it may be vastly different from what we see now. The current President of the United States of

America is proposing a plan that would make two years of community college as free and universal as high school to all students (Sheehy, 2015). This influx of students could cause four-year institutions to lose an increasing number of students to the community college. These more selective tuition-driven four-year schools would fear having to compete with free community college (Marcus, 2015).

Community, technical, and junior college leaders must be prepared for the next generation of students that will have multiple schools competing for their attendance.

Since community college funding in North Carolina is currently driven by enrollment, and given that athletics plays an important role in the decision making process of which school students choose to attend, the leaders at North Carolina’s public community and technical colleges may benefit from the information provided in this study. These administrators can now perform an unbiased peer assessment concerning intercollegiate

60

athletics. Since free community college could become a reality that greatly increases enrollment at these schools, and because the community college will play an ever- increasing role in the state of North Carolina’s economy, the recommendations for further research in this study will provide some guidelines regarding an area in which much money is spent and little research has been conducted. Finally, administrators in

Mississippi and North Carolina now have comparable data from a different SREB state to which they can gauge their public community and technical college athletic programs.

61

REFERENCES

Alexander, B. (2009). A descriptive study of intercollegiate athletics in Mississippi's

public community and junior colleges (Doctoral dissertation). Mississippi State

University, Starkville, MS.

Ashburn, E. (2007). To increase enrollment, community colleges add more sports.

Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(44), A31.

Ball, J. (2015). Fewer students enroll at WNC community colleges. Retrieved June 5,

2015 from http://www.citizen-times.com/story/news/local/2015/06/05/fewer-

students-enroll-wnc-community-colleges/28534363/

Barreno, Y., & Traut, C. (2012). Student decisions to attend public two-year

community colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice,

36(11), 863-871.

Branch, T. (2011). The shame of college sports. Retrieved April 2, 2015 from

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2011/10/the-shame-of-college-

sports/308643/

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2014). Databases, tables, & calculators by subject. Retrieved

January 2, 2015 from www.bls.gov.data/

62

Bush, V., Castaneda, C., Hardy, D. E., & Katsinas, S. G. (2009). What the numbers say

about community colleges and athletics. New Directions for Community

Colleges, 147, 5-14. doi:10.1002/cc.373

Byrd, L., & Williams, M. R. (2007). Expansion of community college athletic programs.

Community College Enterprise, 13(2), 39-49.

Camden County College. (2002). Economic impact study. Retrieved May 2, 2014 from

http://www.camdencc.edu/communications/upload/Economic-Impact-Study.pdf

Cassuto, L. (2013). Ph.D. attrition: How much is too much? Retrieved January 5, 2014

from http://chronicle.com/article/PhD-Attrition-How-Much-Is/140045/

Castaneda, C., Katsinas, S., & Hardy, D. (2004). The importance of intercollegiate

athletics at rural-serving community colleges (Doctoral dissertation). University

of North Texas, Denton, TX.

Department of Homeland Security. (2012). What is community college? Retrieved

January 5, 2015 from https://studyinthestates.dhs.gov/2012/03/what-is-

community-college

Dosh, K. (2011). Does football fund other sports at college level? Retrieved February 25,

2015 from http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsmoney/2011/05/05/does-football-

fund-other-sports-at-college-level/

Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act of 1994, 20 U.S.C. § 1092 (1995).

63

Ganim, S. (2014). CNN analysis: Some college athletes play like adults, read like 5th

graders. Retrieved April 10, 2015 from http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/07/us/ncaa-

athletes-reading-scores/

Hardy, D. E. (2005). A two-year college typology for the 21st century: Updating and

utilizing the Katsinas-Lacey classification system (Doctoral

dissertation). University of North Texas, Denton, TX.

Lawrence, H. J., Mullin, C. M., & Horton Jr., D. (2009). Considerations for expanding,

eliminating, and maintaining community college athletic teams and programs.

New Directions for Community Colleges. 147, 39-51. doi:10.1002/cc.376

Marcus, J. (2015). The unexpected reason some in higher ed fear free

community college. Retrieved March 30, 2015 from

http://hechingerreport.org/unexpected-reason-higher-ed-fear-free-community-

college/

National Center For Education Statistics. (2015). Integrated postsecondary education

data system. Retrieved January 10, 2015 from https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/about

National Junior College Athletic Association. (2014). 2014-2015 NJCAA handbook and

casebook. Retrieved February 20, 2015 from

http://www.njcaa.org/Online%20Handbook_Casebook/2014-15/2014-

15_NJCAA_Handbook_Online_Version.pdf

64

North Carolina Community College System. (2011). Mission & history. Retrieved

February 1, 2014 from

http://son2.nccommunitycolleges.edu/pr/MissionHistory/mission-history.htm

North Carolina Community College System. (2014). State board of community colleges

code. Retrieved February 20, 2015 from

http://www.nccommunitycolleges.edu/sbcccode/chapter-g-full-time-equivalent-fte

North Carolina Community College System. (2015). Annual statistical reports.

Retrieved March 1, 2015 from http://www.nccommunitycolleges.edu/business-

intelligence/annual-statistical-reports

Office Of Postsecondary Education. (2015). The equity in athletics data analysis

cutting tool. Retrieved March 10, 2015 from

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/InstList.aspx

Sheehy, K. (2015). Obama’s free community college plan: What students need to

know. Retrieved February 20, 2015 from

http://www.usnews.com/education/community-

colleges/articles/2015/01/16/obamas-free-community-college-plan-what-students-

need-to-know

65

Sirota, A. (2015). North Carolina is not the poster child for trickle-down economics.

Retrieved June 9, 2015 from http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2015/06/09/north-

carolina-is-not-the-poster-child-for-trickle-down-economics/

Southern Regional Education Board. (2015). SREB and member states. Retrieved April

1, 2015 from http://www.sreb.org/page/1780/sreb_member_states.html

Stancill, J. (2013, August 17). Community colleges’ role lauded: McCrory calls for

linking funds to job productivity, sees economic boon. The News & Observer, pp.

1A.

Tucker, Kyle. (2015). Seven Kentucky basketball players declare for NBA draft.

Retrieved April 9, 2015 from

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2015/04/09/kentucky-basketball-

nba-declare-karl-anthony-towns-devin-booker-harrisons-trey-lyles/25523727/

United States Department of Education. (2014a). Get aggregated data for a group of

institutions. Retrieved March 10, 2015 from

http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/GetAggregatedData.aspx

United States Department of Education. (2014b). Glossary. Retrieved March 10, 2015

from https://surveys.ope.ed.gov/ATHLETICS/ViewGlossaryTerms.aspx

United States Department of Education. (2015). Glossary of terms. Retrieved January 2,

2015 from http://ope.ed.gov/athletics/glossaryPopup.aspx?idlink=1

66

United States Department of Health & Human Services. (2009). Code of Federal

Regulations. Retrieved January 28, 2014 from

http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/45cfr46.html#46.102

University of North Carolina. (2015) Frequently asked questions – Issues related to the

academic irregularities. Retrieved March 7, 2015 from

carolinacommitment.unc.edu

67

INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL LETTER

68

Tim Mounce

Study 14-193 NHSR: Intercollegiate Athletics among North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges 1 message [email protected] Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 10:10 AM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected], [email protected]

June 4, 2014

Tim Mounce College of Education Mississippi State , MS 39762

RE: HRPP Study #14-193 NHSR: Intercollegiate Athletics among North Carolina Public Community and Technical Colleges

Dear Mr. Mounce:

The review of your study referenced above has been completed. While we sincerely appreciate the submission of your study, it was determined from the review that it does not meet the regulatory definitions for human subjects research. Therefore, HRPP approval is not required as the study is currently designed.

The regulatory definition of human subject is listed below:

45 CFR 46.102(f) Human subject means a living individual about whom an investigator (whether professional or student) conducting research obtains: (1) Data through intervention or interaction with the individual, or (2) Identifiable private information.

The HRPP understands that all of the information to be used ! for your study is publicly available. Because your study uses solely existing, publicly available information, the project does not meet the regulatory definition of human subject (i.e., you or not intervening or interacting with individuals, nor obtaining identifiable, private information).

If in the future your study is revised such that it meets this definition, it must be submitted for HRPP review and approval prior to the conduct of such human subjects research.

If you have questions or concerns, please contact [email protected] or call 662-325-5220.

Sincerely,

Nicole Morse, CIP IRB Compliance Administrator

cc: James E. Davis (Advisor)

69

EQUITY IN ATHLETICS DISCLOSURE ACT SURVEYWOMEN’S, MEN’S, AND

COED TEAMS

70

Note that you cannot use this form to enter your data online. It is simply a facsimile of the actual online survey. To enter data into the survey system, you must first log in and register.

Print Form(s) Close Window

Screening Questions Please answer these questions carefully as your responses will determine which subsequent data entry screens are appropriate for your institution. 1. How will you report Operating (Game-day) Expenses?

By Team Per Participant

2. Select the type of varsity sports teams at your institution.

Men's Teams Women's Teams Coed Teams

3. Do any of your teams have assistant coaches?

Yes Men's Teams Women's Teams Coed Teams No

If you save the data on this screen, then return to the screen to make changes, note the following: 1) If you select an additional type of team remember to include associated data for that type of team on subsequent screens; 2) If you delete a type of team but have already entered associated data on other screens, all associated data for that type of team will be deleted from subsequent screens. However, because the survey system has to recalculate the totals, you must re-save every screen.

71

Sports Selection - Men's, Women's and Coed Teams Select the varsity sports teams at your institution. Sport Men's Women's Coed Sport Men's Women's Coed Archery Badminton Baseball Basketball Beach Volleyball Bowling Cross Country Diving Equestrian Fencing Field Hockey Football Golf Gymnastics Ice Hockey Lacrosse Rifle Rodeo Rowing Sailing Skiing Soccer Softball Squash Swimming and Diving Swimming (combined) Synchronized Swimming Table Tennis Team Handball Tennis Track and Field (Indoor) Track and Field (Outdoor) Track and Field and Cross Volleyball Country (combined) Water Polo Weight Lifting Other Sports (Specify Wrestling sports in the caveat box.)* CAVEAT

* If you indicated in the caveat box that your other sports are Dancing and/or Cheerleading, please also specify in the caveat box that your institution has a letter from the Office for Civil Rights confirming that the OCR has determined that Dancing and/or Cheerleading are varsity sports at your institution. If you save the data on this screen, then return to the screen to make changes, note the following: 1) If you select an additional team remember to include associated data for that sport on subsequent screens; 2) If you delete a sport but have already entered associated data on other screens, all associated data for that sport will be deleted from subsequent screens. However, because the survey system has to recalculate the totals, you must re-save every screen.

72

Athletics Participation - Men's, Women's and Coed Teams Enter the number of participants as of the day of the first scheduled contest. Men's Women's Varsity Teams Teams Teams Archery

Badminton

Baseball

Basketball

Beach Volleyball

Bowling

Cross Country

Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Field Hockey

Football

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Softball

Squash

Swimming and Diving (combined)

Swimming

Diving

Swimming

Synchronized Swimming

Table Tennis

Team Handball

Tennis

Track and Field (Indoor)

73

Track and Field (Outdoor)

Track and Field and Cross Country (combined)

Track and Field (Indoor)

Track and Field (Outdoor)

Cross Country

Volleyball

Water Polo

Weight Lifting

Wrestling

Other Sports Total Participants Men's and Women's Teams Coed Teams Varsity Teams # Men # Women

Archery

Badminton

Basketball

Beach Volleyball

Bowling

Cross Country

Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Squash

Swimming and Diving (combined)

Swimming

Diving

74

Swimming

Table Tennis

Team Handball

Tennis

Track and Field (Indoor)

Track and Field (Outdoor)

Track and Field and Cross Country (combined)

Track and Field (Indoor)

Track and Field (Outdoor)

Cross Country

Volleyball

Water Polo

Weight Lifting

Wrestling

Other Sports Total Participants Coed Teams Grand Total Participants Grand Total Participants Unduplicated Count of Participants (This is a head count. If an individual participates on more than one team, count that individual only once on this line.) CAVEAT (For each men's or women's team that includes opposite sex participants, specify the number of male and the number of female students on that team in this caveat box. This does not apply for coed teams. Additionally, provide any other clarifying information here.)

If you save the data on this screen, then return to the screen to make changes, please note you must re-save every screen because the survey system has to recalculate the totals.

75

Head Coaches - Men's Teams For each men's team, indicate whether the head coach is male or female, was assigned to the team on a full-time or part-time basis, and whether the coach was employed by the institution on a full-time basis or on a part-time or volunteer basis, by entering a 1 in the appropriate field. The Swimming and Diving (combined) fields allow up to 2 head coaches. The Track and Field and Cross Country (combined) fields allow up to 3. Male Head Coaches Female Head Coaches Assigned Assigned Part-Time Assigned Assigned Part-Time to Team to Team Institution to Team to Team Institution Varsity on a on a Full-Time Employee on a on a Full-Time Employee Total Teams Full-Time Part-Time Institution or Full-Time Part-Time Institution or Head Basis Basis Employee Volunteer Basis Basis Employee Volunteer Coaches Archery

Badminton

Baseball

Basketball Beach

Volleyball Bowling Cross

Country Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Football

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Squash Swimming and Diving (combined) Swimming Table

Tennis Team

Handball Tennis Track and

76

Field (Indoor)

Track and Field (Outdoor) Track and Field and Cross Country (combined) Volleyball

Water Polo Weight

Lifting Wrestling Other

Sports Coaching Position Totals CAVEAT

77

Head Coaches - Women's Teams For each women's team, indicate whether the head coach is male or female, was assigned to the team on a full-time or part-time basis, and whether the coach was employed by the institution on a full-time basis or on a part-time or volunteer basis, by entering a 1 in the appropriate field. The Swimming and Diving (combined) fields allow up to 2 head coaches. The Track and Field and Cross Country (combined) fields allow up to 3. Male Head Coaches Female Head Coaches Assigned Assigned Part-Time Assigned Assigned Part-Time to Team to Team Institution to Team to Team Institution Varsity on a on a Full-Time Employee on a on a Full-Time Employee Total Teams Full-Time Part-Time Institution or Full-Time Part-Time Institution or Head Basis Basis Employee Volunteer Basis Basis Employee Volunteer Coaches Archery

Badminton

Basketball Beach

Volleyball Bowling Cross

Country Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Field Hockey

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Softball

Squash Swimming and Diving (combined) Swimming Synchronized

Swimming Table Tennis Team

Handball

78

Tennis Track and

Field (Indoor) Track and Field (Outdoor) Track and Field and Cross Country (combined) Volleyball

Water Polo

Weight Lifting

Wrestling

Other Sports Coaching Position Totals CAVEAT

79

Head Coaches - Coed Teams For each coed team, indicate whether the head coach is male or female, was assigned to the team on a full-time or part-time basis, and whether the coach was employed by the institution on a full-time basis or on a part-time or volunteer basis, by entering a 1 in the appropriate field. The Swimming and Diving (combined) fields allow up to 2 head coaches. The Track and Field and Cross Country (combined) fields allow up to 3. Male Head Coaches Female Head Coaches Assigned Assigned Part-Time Assigned Assigned Part-Time to Team to Team Institution to Team to Team Institution Varsity on a on a Full-Time Employee on a on a Full-Time Employee Total Teams Full-Time Part-Time Institution or Full-Time Part-Time Institution or Head Basis Basis Employee Volunteer Basis Basis Employee Volunteer Coaches Archery

Badminton

Baseball

Basketball Beach

Volleyball Bowling Cross

Country Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Football

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Squash Swimming and Diving (combined) Swimming Table

Tennis Team

Handball Tennis Track and

80

Field (Indoor)

Track and Field (Outdoor) Track and Field and Cross Country (combined) Volleyball

Water Polo Weight

Lifting Wrestling Other

Sports Coaching Position Totals CAVEAT

81

Head Coaches' Salaries - Men's, Women's and Coed Teams Enter only salaries and bonuses that your institution pays head coaches as compensation for coaching. Do not include benefits on this screen. Do not include volunteer coaches in calculating the average salary and the Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Total. For help calculating the FTE total click on the "Need help? Click here for screen instructions" link on this screen. Men's Teams Women's Teams Coed Teams Average Annual Institutional Salary per Head

Coach (for coaching duties only) Number of Head Coaches Used to Calculate

the Average Number of Volunteer Head Coaches (Do not include these coaches in your salary or FTE calculations.) Average Annual Institutional Salary per Full-

time equivalent (FTE) Sum of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Positions

Used to Calculate the Average CAVEAT

82

Assistant Coaches - Men's Teams For each men's team, indicate whether the assistant coach is male or female, was assigned to the team on a full-time or part-time basis, and whether the coach was employed by the institution on a full-time basis or on a part-time or volunteer basis, by entering a 1 in the appropriate field. Male Assistant Coaches Female Assistant Coaches Assigned Assigned Part-Time Assigned Assigned Part-Time to Team to Team Institution to Team to Team Institution Varsity on a on a Full-Time Employee on a on a Full-Time Employee Total Teams Full-Time Part-Time Institution or Full-Time Part-Time Institution or Assistant Basis Basis Employee Volunteer Basis Basis Employee Volunteer Coaches Archery

Badminton

Baseball

Basketball Beach

Volleyball Bowling Cross

Country Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Football

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Squash Swimming and Diving (combined) Swimming Table

Tennis Team

Handball Tennis Track and

Field,Indoor

83

Track and

Field (Outdoor) Track and Field and Cross Country (combined) Volleyball

Water Polo Weight

Lifting Wrestling Other

Sports Coaching Position Totals CAVEAT

84

Assistant Coaches - Women's Teams For each women's team, indicate whether the assistant coach is male or female, was assigned to the team on a full-time or part-time basis, and whether the coach was employed by the institution on a full-time basis or on a part-time or volunteer basis, by entering a 1 in the appropriate field. Male Assistant Coaches Female Assistant Coaches Assigned Assigned Part-Time Assigned Assigned Part-Time to Team to Team Institution to Team to Team Institution Varsity on a on a Full-Time Employee on a on a Full-Time Employee Total Teams Full-Time Part-Time Institution or Full-Time Part-Time Institution or Assistant Basis Basis Employee Volunteer Basis Basis Employee Volunteer Coaches Archery

Badminton

Basketball Beach

Volleyball Bowling Cross

Country Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Field Hockey

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Softball

Squash Swimming and Diving (combined) Swimming Synchronized

Swimming Table Tennis Team

Handball Tennis Track and

85

Field (Indoor)

Track and Field (Outdoor) Track and Field and Cross Country (combined) Volleyball

Water Polo

Weight Lifting

Wrestling

Other Sports Coaching Position Totals CAVEAT

86

Assistant Coaches - Coed Teams For each coed team, indicate whether the assistant coach is male or female, was assigned to the team on a full-time or part-time basis, and whether the coach was employed by the institution on a full-time basis or on a part-time or volunteer basis, by entering a 1 in the appropriate field. Male Assistant Coaches Female Assistant Coaches Assigned Assigned Part-Time Assigned Assigned Part-Time to Team to Team Institution to Team to Team Institution Varsity on a on a Full-Time Employee on a on a Full-Time Employee Total Teams Full-Time Part-Time Institution or Full-Time Part-Time Institution or Assistant Basis Basis Employee Volunteer Basis Basis Employee Volunteer Coaches Archery

Badminton

Baseball

Basketball Beach

Volleyball Bowling Cross

Country Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Football

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Squash Swimming and Diving (combined) Swimming Table

Tennis Team

Handball Tennis Track and

Field,Indoor

87

Track and

Field (Outdoor) Track and Field and Cross Country (combined) Volleyball

Water Polo Weight

Lifting Wrestling Other

Sports Coaching Position Totals CAVEAT

88

Assistant Coaches' Salaries - Men's, Women's and Coed Teams Enter only salaries and bonuses that your institution pays assistant coaches as compensation for coaching. Do not include benefits on this screen. Do not include volunteer coaches in calculating the average salary and the Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Total. For help calculating the FTE total click on the "Need help? Click here for screen instructions" link on this screen. Men's Teams Women's Teams Coed Teams Average Annual Institutional Salary per

Assistant Coach (for coaching duties only) Number of Assistant Coaches Used to

Calculate the Average Number of Volunteer Assistant Coaches. (Do not include these coaches in your salary or FTE calculations.) Average Annual Institutional Salary per Full-

time equivalent (FTE) Sum of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Positions

Used to Calculate the Average CAVEAT

89

Athletically Related Student Aid - Men's, Women's and Coed Teams Athletically related student aid is any scholarship, grant, or other form of financial assistance, offered by an institution, the terms of which require the recipient to participate in a program of intercollegiate athletics at the institution. Other student aid, of which a student-athlete simply happens to be the recipient, is not athletically related student aid. If you do not have any aid to report, enter a 0. Men's Teams Women's Teams Coed Teams Total

Amount of Aid Ratio (percent) 100% CAVEAT

90

Recruiting Expenses - Men's, Women's and Coed Teams Recruiting expenses are all expenses an institution incurs attributable to recruiting activities. This includes, but is not limited to, expenses for lodging, meals, telephone use, and transportation (including vehicles used for recruiting purposes) for both recruits and personnel engaged in recruiting, and other expenses for official and unofficial visits, and all other expenses related to recruiting. If you do not have any recruiting expenses to report, enter a 0. Men's Teams Women's Teams Coed Teams Total

Total CAVEAT

91

Operating (Game-Day) Expenses - Men's, Women's and Coed Teams per Participant Operating expenses are all expenses an institution incurs attributable to home, away, and neutral-site intercollegiate athletic contests (commonly known as "game-day expenses"), for (A) Lodging, meals, transportation, uniforms, and equipment for coaches, team members, support staff (including, but not limited to team managers and trainers), and others; and (B) Officials. For a sport with a men's team and a women's team that have a combined budget, click on the "Need help? Click here for screen instructions" link for special instructions. Men's Teams Women's Teams Operating Operating By By Total Operating Varsity Teams Participants Expenses per Participants Expenses per Team Team Expenses Participant Participant Basketball

Football

Archery

Badminton

Baseball Beach

Volleyball Bowling

Cross Country

Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Field Hockey

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Softball

Squash Swimming and Diving (combined) Swimming Synchronized

Swimming

92

Table Tennis Team

Handball Tennis Track and

Field (Indoor) Track and Field (Outdoor) Track and Field and

Cross Country (combined) Volleyball

Water Polo

Weight Lifting

Wrestling

Other Sports Total Operating Expenses

Men's and Women's Teams Coed Teams Men Women Operating Operating By By Total Operating Varsity Teams Participants Expenses per Participants Expenses per Team Team Expenses Participant Participant Basketball

Archery

Badminton Beach

Volleyball Bowling

Cross Country

Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

93

Skiing

Soccer

Squash Swimming and Diving (combined) Swimming

Table Tennis Team

Handball Tennis Track and

Field (Indoor) Track and Field (Outdoor) Track and Field and

Cross Country (combined) Volleyball

Water Polo

Weight Lifting

Wrestling

Other Sports Total Operating

Expenses of Coed Teams Grand Total Operating Expenses Grand Total Operating Expenses CAVEAT

Note: This screen is for game-day expenses only.

94

Operating (Game-Day) Expenses - Men's, Women's and Coed Teams by Team Operating expenses are all expenses an institution incurs attributable to home, away, and neutral-site intercollegiate athletic contests (commonly known as "game-day expenses"), for (A) Lodging, meals, transportation, uniforms, and equipment for coaches, team members, support staff (including, but not limited to team managers and trainers), and others; and (B) Officials. For a sport with a men's team and a women's team that have a combined budget, click on the "Need help? Click here for screen instructions" link for special instructions. Men's Teams Women's Teams Operating Operating Varsity Expenses Expenses Total Operating Participants By Team Participants By Team Teams per per Expenses Participant Participant Basketball

Football

Archery

Badminton

Baseball Beach

Volleyball Bowling Cross

Country Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Field Hockey

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Softball

Squash Swimming and Diving (combined) Swimming Synchronized

Swimming

95

Table Tennis Team

Handball Tennis Track and

Field (Indoor) Track and Field (Outdoor) Track and Field and Cross Country (combined) Volleyball

Water Polo

Weight Lifting

Wrestling

Other Sports Total Operating Expenses

Men's and Women's Teams Coed Teams Men Women Operating Operating Varsity Expenses Expenses Total Operating Participants By Team Participants By Team Teams per per Expenses Participant Participant Basketball

Archery

Badminton Beach

Volleyball Bowling Cross

Country Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

96

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Squash Swimming and Diving (combined) Swimming

Table Tennis Team

Handball Tennis Track and

Field (Indoor) Track and Field (Outdoor) Track and Field and Cross Country (combined) Volleyball

Water Polo

Weight Lifting

Wrestling

Other Sports Total Operating

Expenses of Coed Teams Grand Total Operating Expenses Grand Total Operating Expenses CAVEAT

Note: This screen is for game-day expenses only.

97

Total Expenses - Men's, Women's and Coed Teams Enter all expenses attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities. This includes appearance guarantees and options, athletically related student aid, contract services, equipment, fundraising activities, operating expenses, promotional activities, recruiting expenses, salaries and benefits, supplies, travel, and any other expenses attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities. Varsity Teams Men's Teams Women's Teams Total

Basketball

Football

Archery

Badminton

Baseball

Beach Volleyball

Bowling

Cross Country

Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Field Hockey

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Softball

Squash

Swimming and Diving (combined)

Swimming

Synchronized Swimming

Table Tennis

Team Handball

Tennis

Track and Field (Indoor)

Track and Field (Outdoor)

98

Total Expenses - Men's, Women's and Coed Teams Enter all expenses attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities. This includes appearance guarantees and options, athletically related student aid, contract services, equipment, fundraising activities, operating expenses, promotional activities, recruiting expenses, salaries and benefits, supplies, travel, and any other expenses attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities. Varsity Teams Men's Teams Women's Teams Total

Basketball

Football

Archery

Badminton

Baseball

Beach Volleyball

Bowling

Cross Country

Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Field Hockey

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Softball

Squash

Swimming and Diving (combined)

Swimming

Synchronized Swimming

Table Tennis

Team Handball

Tennis

Track and Field (Indoor)

Track and Field (Outdoor)

99

Track and Field and Cross Country (combined)

Volleyball

Water Polo

Weight Lifting

Wrestling

Other Sports Total Expenses of all Sports, Except Football and Basketball,Combined (Men's and Women's Teams) Total Expenses Men's and Women's Teams Coed Teams Amount Allocated Amount Allocated Varsity Teams Total to Men to Women Basketball

Archery

Badminton

Beach Volleyball

Bowling

Cross Country

Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Squash

Swimming and Diving (combined)

Swimming

Table Tennis

Team Handball

Tennis

Track and Field (Indoor)

100

Track and Field (Outdoor)

Track and Field and Cross Country (combined)

Volleyball

Water Polo

Weight Lifting

Wrestling

Other Sports Total Expenses Coed Teams Grand Total Expenses Total Expenses Men's, Women's and Coed

Teams Not Allocated by Gender/Sport (Expenses not attributable to a particular sport or sports) Grand Total Expenses CAVEAT

101

Total Revenues - Men's, Women's and Coed Teams Your total revenues must cover your total expenses. Enter all revenues attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities. This includes revenues from appearance guarantees and options, an athletic conference, tournament or bowl games, concessions, contributions from alumni and others, institutional support, program advertising and sales, radio and television, royalties, signage and other sponsorships, sport camps, state or other government support, student activity fees, ticket and luxury box sales, and any other revenues attributable to intercollegiate athletic activities. Varsity Team Men's Teams Women's Teams Total

Basketball

Football

Archery

Badminton

Baseball

Beach Volleyball

Bowling

Cross Country

Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Field Hockey

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Softball

Squash

Swimming and Diving (combined)

Swimming

Synchronized Swimming

Table Tennis

Team Handball

Tennis

Track and Field (Indoor)

102

Track and Field (Outdoor)

Track and Field and Cross Country (combined)

Volleyball

Water Polo

Weight Lifting

Wrestling

Other Sports Total Revenues of all Sports, Except Football and Basketball,Combined (Men's and Women's Teams) Total Revenues Men's and Women's Teams Coed Teams Amount Allocated Amount Allocated Varsity Team Total to Men to Women Basketball

Archery

Badminton

Beach Volleyball

Bowling

Cross Country

Diving

Equestrian

Fencing

Golf

Gymnastics

Ice Hockey

Lacrosse

Rifle

Rodeo

Rowing

Sailing

Skiing

Soccer

Squash

Swimming and Diving (combined)

Swimming

Table Tennis

Team Handball

Tennis

103

Track and Field (Indoor)

Track and Field (Outdoor)

Track and Field and Cross Country (combined)

Volleyball

Water Polo

Weight Lifting

Wrestling

Other Sports Total Revenues Coed Teams Grand Total Revenues Total Revenues Men's, Women's and Coed

Teams Not Allocated by Gender/Sport (Revenues not attributable to a particular sport or sports) Grand Total Revenues for all Teams (includes by team and not allocated by gender/sport) CAVEAT

104

Summary - Men's, Women's and Coed Teams Your Grand Total Revenues must be equal to or greater than your Grand Total Expenses or you will not be able to lock your survey. Men's Women's Coed Total Teams Teams Teams 1 Total of Head Coaches' Salaries 2 Total of Assistant Coaches' Salaries 3 Total Salaries (Lines 1+2) 4 Athletically Related Student Aid 5 Recruiting Expenses 6 Operating (Game-Day) Expenses 7 Summary of Subset Expenses (Lines 3+4+5+6) 8 Total Expenses for Teams Total Expenses for Teams Minus Subset Expenses (Line 8 – Line 9 7) 10 Not Allocated Expenses 11 Grand Total Expenses (Lines 8+10) 12 Total Revenues for Teams 13 Not Allocated Revenues 14 Grand Total Revenues (Lines 12+13) Total Revenues for Teams minus Total Expenses for Teams (Line 15 12-Line 8) Grand Total Revenues Minus Grand Total Expenses (Line 14- 16 Line 11)

To return to a data entry screen, click on the link in the Navigation Menu. To proceed to the Supplemental Information screen, click on the link in the Navigation Menu or click on the “Next” button on this screen.

105

106

NORTH CAROLINA PUBLIC COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGE WEB

SITES (* DENOTES ATHLETIC PARTICIPANT DURING 2013 – 2014 SCHOOL

YEAR)

107

COLLEGE WEBSITE

Alamance Community College https://www.alamancecc.edu

Asheville–Buncombe Technical Community College https://www.abtech.edu

Beaufort County Community College http://www.beaufortccc.edu

Bladen Community College http://www.bladen.cc.nc.us

*Blue Ridge Community College http://www.blueridge.edu

*Brunswick Community College http://www.brunswickcc.edu

*Caldwell Community College & Technical Institute http://www.cccti.edu

*Cape Fear Community College http://cfcc.edu

Carteret Community College http://www.carteret.edu

*Catawba Valley Community College http://www.cvcc.edu

*Central Carolina Community College, http://www.cccc.edu

Central Piedmont Community College http://www.cpcc.edu

Cleveland Community College http://www.clevelandcc.edu

Coastal Carolina Community College http://www.coastalcarolina.edu

*College of The Albemarle http://albemarle.edu

*Craven Community College http://cravencc.edu

*Davidson County Community College https://www.davidsonccc.edu

Durham Technical Community College http://www.durhamtech.edu

Edgecombe Community College http://www.edgecombe.edu

Fayetteville Technical Community College http://www.faytechcc.edu

*Forsyth Technical Community College http://www.forsythtech.edu

108

Gaston College http://www.gaston.edu

*Guilford Technical Community College http://www.gtcc.edu

Halifax Community College http://www.halifaxcc.edu

Haywood Community College https://www.haywood.edu

Isothermal Community College http://www.isothermal.edu

James Sprunt Community College http://www.jamessprunt.edu

*Johnston Community College http://www.johnstoncc.edu

*Lenoir Community College http://www.lenoircc.edu

Martin Community College http://www.martin.cc.nc.us

*Mayland Community College http://www.mayland.edu

McDowell Technical Community College http://www.mcdowelltech.edu

Mitchell Community College http://www.mitchellcc.edu

Montgomery Community College http://www.montgomery.cc.nc.us

Nash Community College http://www.nash.cc.nc.us

Pamlico Community College http://www.pamlicocc.edu

Piedmont Community College http://www.piedmontcc.edu

*Pitt Community College http://www.pittcc.edu

Randolph Community College http://www.randolph.edu

Richmond Community College http://richmondcc.edu

*Roanoke–Chowan Community College http://www.roanoke.cc.nc.us

Robeson Community College http://www.robeson.edu

*Rockingham Community College http://www.rockinghamcc.edu

109

Rowan–Cabarrus Community College https://www.rccc.edu

*Sampson Community College http://www.sampsoncc.edu

*Sandhills Community College http://www.sandhills.edu

South Piedmont Community College http://www.spcc.edu

*Southeastern Community College http://www.sccnc.edu

Southwestern Community College https://www.southwesterncc.edu

*Stanly Community College http://www.stanly.edu

*Surry Community College http://www.surry.edu

Tri-County Community College http://www.tricountycc.edu

*Vance–Granville Community College http://www.tricountycc.edu

*Wake Technical Community College http://www.waketech.edu

Wayne Community College http://www.waynecc.edu

Western Piedmont Community College http://www.wpcc.edu

*Wilkes Community College http://www.wilkescc.edu

110