CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY CHANNEL ISLANDS Models and Considerations for Beginning an Intercollegiate Athletics Program Final Version Submitted: January 2015 Table of Contents Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 BACKGROUND 3 SCOPE OF STUDY 4 SECTION ONE: PROGRAMMATIC IMPLICATIONS 5 National Affiliation Options 5 Demographic Compatibility 7 Conference Affiliation Options 9 SECTION TWO: TIMELINE AND REQUIREMENTS 13 Timeline 13 NCAA and NAIA Requirements and EXpectations 15 Student-Athlete EXperience and Opportunities 20 Costs and Funding 22 Conference Competitiveness 27 Sport-Specific Analysis 30 Men’s Sports 30 Women’s Sports 32 Individual Sports 34 Scheduling 36 Title IX, CSU/Cal NOW Consent Decree Compliance 43 SECTION THREE: APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS AND EXPECTATIONS 47 Application Requirements 47 NCAA Division II Model Athletics Program 51 CSU Channel Islands Models This document contains proprietary, confidential, information. No part of this document may be reproduced or disclosed to a third party without the prior written consent of Strategic Edge, LLC Page 1 of 57 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Channel Islands’ (CI) conclusions in 2006 regarding intercollegiate athletics are still viable. The best fit for the university remains NCAA Division II, as a member of the California Collegiate Athletic Association (CCAA). Three approaches could be used: 1. Begin 11 sports at once beginning 2017-18, apply to join NCAA Division II in February, 2019. Achieve full active NCAA membership status by fall, 2022. 2. Use a phase-in approach, with an accelerated timeline for bypassing membership in the National Association for Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA). Begin 11 sports over a two year period, apply to join NCAA Division II in February, 2020. Achieve full active NCAA membership status by fall, 2023. 3. Phase sports sponsorship over a number of years, and join the NAIA as an independent member, followed by a four-year transition to NCAA Division II and the CCAA. The entire process could require 8-10 years to complete. All options are viable, depending on factors such as funding and facilities. Another consideration is how long the window of opportunity for NCAA Division II membership will remain open and what the standards will be. The Division II Membership Committee has made it clear that standards for being admitted into the process will continue to become more stringent and that growth will be limited by the resources available to Division II. In addition, while the CCAA is interested in CI joining the conference, how long this opportunity will be available to CI is also unknown. National Affiliation Affiliation with the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division II would align Channel Islands with other California State Universities and with the recognizable NCAA brand. Institutions typically report that they have greater regional name recognition as a result of NCAA membership and prospective students and student-athletes seem to equate NCAA membership with some level of institutional prestige. If CI were to begin its athletics program as a member of the NAIA, the affiliation should be viewed as a ‘place holder’ as the university prepares to meet NCAA requirements. The NAIA’s Champions of Character programming and simpler rules compliance requirements make it an attractive option for small start-up programs. Also, immediate access to post-season play would provide championship opportunities for Channel Islands student-athletes that would remain unavailable for three years were the university to move directly to NCAA Division II. In an NCAA Division II environment, student-athletes would benefit from more study time and less time on the field than is typical in an NAIA environment. If CI were to choose to move directly to NCAA Division II, the university should expect to see better academic performance by student-athletes than by general students as a result of more stringent NCAA academic requirements. Student-athletes graduate CSU Channel Islands Models This document contains proprietary, confidential, information. No part of this document may be reproduced or disclosed to a third party without the prior written consent of Strategic Edge, LLC Page 2 of 57 at rates 10% higher than their non-athlete counterparts and have an average Academic Success Rate of over 70%. Because of their data-driven approach, Division II presidents are able to structure eligibility, recruiting and playing and practice season rules to improve academic success. Conference Affiliation When considering options for conference affiliation, Channel Islands should take into account that its NAIA conference options are very limited. The Golden State Conference (GSAC) is one of the NAIA’s strongest and most stable conferences, but it is comprised of small, faith-based private schools. Based on its current make-up, it is unlikely to be interested in CI as a conference member. The other NAIA conference in California, the California Pacific Conference (Cal Pac), is based in the San Francisco bay area. It has public institutions as members but no members in Southern California. The third option, taken by CSU San Marcos when it began its sports program over a decade ago, is to join the Association of Independent Institutions (A.I.I.), a conference that is made up of 22 independent NAIA institutions, 18 of which are full members and four of which are associate or provisional members. None of the conference options is particularly desirable, but some affiliation will be necessary should CI choose the transitional approach. The California Collegiate Athletic Association has already eXpressed an interest in CI and is the NCAA conference that is the most logical for CI, both in terms of geography and type of institution. It is currently comprised of 12 California State University members and one University of California member. California State University San Marcos was recently accepted into the NCAA Division II membership process and is on schedule to become a full active member in 2017-18. The CCAA currently sponsors championship competition in all the sports Channel Islands is interested in offering. BACKGROUND California State University Channel Islands (CI), founded in 2002 with an enrollment of 1320 during its inaugural year, is the youngest of the 23 California State University campuses. By fall 2013 enrollment grew to 5080 students and in fall 2014 enrollment was over 5800. In 2003, CI began eXploring the possibility of beginning a recreation, intramural and intercollegiate athletics program. Since that time, several attempts have been made at gathering information related to the structure and potential cost of an intercollegiate athletics program at CI, including what sports should be offered and what is the optimal conference and national affiliation for intercollegiate athletics. A comprehensive report was drafted by Dr. Wm. Gregory Sawyer, Vice-President for Student Affairs, in 2003 that included a Mission Statement for Intercollegiate Athletics as well as a listing of “traditional sports”, meaning those sports offered at other institutions against which CI may compete. The report included an overview of both the National Association for Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) and the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) as potential national affiliations for CI’s intercollegiate athletics program. CSU Channel Islands Models This document contains proprietary, confidential, information. No part of this document may be reproduced or disclosed to a third party without the prior written consent of Strategic Edge, LLC Page 3 of 57 The 2003 report was followed by the appointment of a committee to assist in the design of an athletics program for CI. The university engaged the services of Dr. Cedric Dempsey in june 2005 to work with CI’s Athletics Advisory Committee. The Committee’s report, which was published in 2006, included the following recommendations: Ø That Division II is the best level of competition for CI in the neXt decade. Ø That CI submit an application to the California Collegiate Athletic Association, noting that the CCAA is comprised of primarily sister CSU institutions. Ø That while intercollegiate athletics, club sports, intramural and recreational programs should be administered by the director of athletics, there should be separate budgets for intercollegiate athletics and for the other programs. Ø That the intercollegiate athletics program consist of the following sports [Note: A 2014-18 Financial Plan developed by CI in 2013 includes all of the sports below with the eXception of tennis]: o Women’s individual sports (in order of priority): Tennis, Cross Country, Golf o Women’s team sports (in order of priority): Soccer, Volleyball, Basketball, Softball o Men’s individual sports (in order of priority): Golf, Cross Country, Tennis o Men’s team sports (in order of priority): Soccer, Basketball, Baseball Ø That a master plan for intercollegiate athletics facilities and recreational facilities for all students should be developed in the immediate future. Ø That the Director of Athletics report to the Vice President for Student Affairs on daily operational issues and to the President on policy matters. The structure also included the appointment of a Senior Woman Administrator (SWA). Discussion about starting an intercollegiate athletics program has continued since the 2006 report and in 2013 a Research Group was appointed to assist with presenting alternatives for starting an intercollegiate athletics program. The group reviewed national and conference