Enforcement Reform – effective August 1, 2013

Enforcement Reform – effective August 1, 2013

New changes to the NCAA’s enforcement program take effect today. Provided below is some quick reference information distributed by the NCAA to help guide you through these changes.  A new enforcement/infractions page on the NCAA website provides additional resources and more detailed information about the various changes and coaches should consult with their Institutional compliance office to review all these materials.

Bylaw Article 19 (NCAA Manual) 

Guidelines to the penalty structure


New Infractions Reform Frequently Asked Questions

Here are answers to some of the questions the new enforcement structure may raise among NCAA members.

Q: Does the new enforcement structure apply only to Division I schools?

A: Yes.

Q: How long is a head coach suspended for a Level I or II violation?

A: Depending upon the nature of the violation, including aggravating and/or mitigating circumstances, a head coach could receive a show cause order and could be suspended from 50 percent to an entire coaching season.

Q: What are some of the Level III violations that could result in a head coach suspension?

  1. The following are a few examples of Level III violations that could result in a head coach suspension:
  • In-person, off-campus contacts during a dead period (particularly during the National Letter of Intent signing dead period);
  • Intentional or significant game-day simulations and/or impermissible recruiting aids;
  • Exceeding the permissible number of contacts with a prospective student-athlete;
  • Providing team gear or other inducements to prospective student-athletes;
  • Providing a written offer of athletically related financial aid to a prospective student-athlete prior to August 1 of the prospect's senior year in high school.

Q: How does the new penalty structure provide greater predictability and consistency?

A: The new penalty structure clearly outlines the range of penalties available to the Committee on Infractions for each level of violation, including the factors relied upon for the penalties imposed.

Q: What are some examples of aggravating factors the committee will rely upon to impose penalties?

A: The following are a few examples of aggravating factors affecting penalties:

  • Multiple Level I violations by the institution or involved individual;
  • A history of Level I, Level II or major violations by the institution, sport program(s) or involved individual. Additional considerations include:
    • Lack of institutional control;
    • Obstructing an investigation or attempting to conceal the violation;
    • Unethical conduct, compromising the integrity of an investigation, failing to cooperate during an investigation or refusing to provide all relevant or requested information;
    • Violations were deliberate, premeditated or committed after substantial planning.

Q: What are some examples of mitigating factors the committee will rely upon to impose penalties?

A: The following are a few examples of mitigating factors affecting penalties:

  • Prompt self-detection and self-disclosure of the bylaw violation(s);
  • Prompt acknowledgement of the violation, acceptance of responsibility and (for an institution) imposition of meaningful corrective measures and/or penalties;
  • Affirmative steps to expedite final resolution of the matter;
  • An established history of self-reporting Level III or secondary violations;
  • Implementation of a system of compliance methods designed to ensure rules compliance and satisfaction of institutional/coaches control standards;
  • Exemplary cooperation.

Q: What are some examples of Level I and Level II violations:

A: The following are a few examples of Level I and Level II violations:

Level I Violations

Level II Violations

Lack of institutional control

Violations that do not rise to the level of Level I violations and are more serious than Level III violations

Academic fraud

Failure to monitor

Failure to cooperate in an NCAA enforcement investigation

Systemic violations that do not amount to a lack of institutional control;

Individual unethical or dishonest conduct

Multiple recruiting, financial aid, or eligibility violations that do not amount to a lack of institutional control;

Head coach responsibility violation by a head coach resulting from an underlying Level I violation by an individual within the sport program

 Collective Level III violations

Additional Information
  • Coaches Workspace
  • Players in the Pros
  • ITA Advantage - Member Discounts



  • Subscribe to the ITA Newsletter!
    Email: