RULES AND REGULATIONS HAVE TO BE FOLLOWED WHEN NCAA PROBES ALLEGATIONS

Over the last few days, the area's athletics community has been following the story of a change in leadership of the Southeast Missouri State University men's basketball program.

As the university's faculty representative to the NCAA, I have become concerned about some of the comments I have heard and read.

There seems to be a belief in some quarters that the university should have waited until the NCAA makes a pronouncement before making any decision involving the coaching staff. Those who take this position apparently believe the university should wait until the NCAA tells the institution how serious it believes any alleged rules violations may have been.

I would simply like to take this opportunity to explain how allegations involving university personnel and athletics must be handled under university and NCAA policies. Violations may be of two types -- one involving only university policies and procedures, and one involving violations of NCAA rules. It is also possible that violations may involve acts contrary to both university and NCAA guidelines.

In general, if there is an allegation that a university policy has been violated, a process automatically "kicks in," and the institution conducts an internal inquiry. Such an inquiry involves interviews with personnel who might have some knowledge of the alleged activity, and the locating of written records that could either support or help to disprove the allegation. The final step is a review of the findings by someone in authority, followed by three decisions -- first, whether a violation actually took place; second, if there was a violation, how serious it was; and third, what action, if any, is to be taken to correct the situation.

If the alleged violation involves an intercollegiate athletics program, there are two additional steps in the process. Both the institution's athletics conference and the NCAA's Committee on Infractions must be notified of the allegations. Historically, failure to do so can lead to serious consequences for an institution. After it is notified, the NCAA normally conducts an inquiry, which may parallel the internal investigation, or be more extensive, at the discretion of the NCAA hearing officer.

It has already been announced that the Southeast men's basketball program is currently the subject of an NCAA inquiry, and it appears that the NCAA will not release its findings for several months.

It does not necessarily follow that a university should wait several months to take corrective action. In fact, a university is expected to take decisive action, both independently and in consultation with the NCAA.

An essential principle governing the NCAA is that of "institutional control." The NCAA Constitution clearly states that, "It is the responsibility of each member institution to control its intercollegiate athletics program in compliance with the rules and regulations of the Association. ..."

And it continues, "The institution's responsibility ... includes responsibility for the actions of its staff members and for the actions of another individual or organization engaged in activities promoting the athletics interests of the institution."

In keeping with that principle, an NCAA-member university is responsible for evaluating the evidence from any investigation of rules violations, and for determining whether the athletics program is operating as it must function -- within NCAA guidelines. If the answer is "no," then the university has the responsibility to take corrective action immediately.

A secondary reason for taking immediate action is that in determining whether sanctions are to be applied for any proven violations, and how severe those sanctions might be, the NCAA has historically looked closely at the institution's actions after learning of a possible violation -- whether the university took control of the situation promptly and made an appropriate response.

While the NCAA's decision is pending, it is not appropriate for details of the inquiry to be disclosed.

And there is one more factor in the decision not to discuss the details publicly at this time. That factor is called "due process." The termination of a university employee is governed by institutional personnel policies. Those policies are designed to ensure that employees are treated fairly by the institution, so there is an internal process under which the terminated employee may seek redress of any perceived wrong perpetrated by his or her employer. In addition, there is always the possibility that former employees may pursue remedies through an eternal legal process. It is important that these potential processes not be prejudiced by the premature release of information about the case.

The public has supported the Southeast athletics program for many years, and we have many loyal fans who enjoy Southeast men's basketball.

For any institution, a situation such as this one is a wrenching experience. No one associated with a university or its athletics programs enjoys the process, but the regulations have been established to maintain the integrity of intercollegiate competition and must be adhered to.

Dr. Joseph H. Low Jr. Southeast Missouri State University faculty representative to the NCAA