Fraggle145
12/13/2010, 03:04 PM
http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/OU/article.aspx?subjectid=92&articleid=20101212_92_B1_Afters284255&rss_lnk=92
OU makes moves to strengthen compliance department
By MATT BAKER World Sports Writer
Published: 12/12/2010**2:25 AM
Last Modified: 12/13/2010**10:00 AM
After separate investigations into its football and men's basketball programs in a six-year span, the University of Oklahoma's compliance department made major changes.
Among the points revealed in a months-long study by the Tulsa World:
-- From 2005-10, OU's compliance staff doubled to about three times the national average.
-- In 2008, OU spent more on compliance than it did on recruiting.
-- The department's size and budget grew twice as much as the average Big 12 program did.
-- The compliance budget more than doubled to more than $846,000 - almost twice the conference average.
-- OU changed the department's structure to eliminate bias and added more specialized employees.
Yet the Sooners are under investigation again, this time over alleged ties between a financial adviser and at least one former men's basketball player and ex-assistant coach.
OU faces the same challenges other schools do - the growing complexity in NCAA rules and ever-changing ways for people to break them. That's why the NCAA has recently investigated programs ranging from UConn to USC.
Regardless of how OU and others change their strategies or boost their spending, here's the stark reality:
They can prevent charges of failure to monitor the program, but they can't always keep someone from breaking a rule.
"We can't stop a major infractions case," said OU executive director of compliance Jason Leonard. "If there's somebody that's out there that's just cheating, that completely has a double life than what they portray to us here in compliance, we can't stop that.
"The only thing we can do is, we can do everything we can to make sure that our compliance office didn't fail in any way." "The only thing we can do is, we can do everything we can to make sure that our compliance office didn't fail in any way."
Bigger staffs
In March 2006, tipsters reported that OU football players were getting money for work that wasn't performed at the Norman car dealership Big Red Sports and Imports.
Two months later, the NCAA released its report detailing improper phone calls made by former men's basketball coach Kelvin Sampson.
Those investigations led to several changes in OU's compliance department.
Start with size.
In 2005, it had four full-time compliance employees and a part-timer. In 2010, OU had eight full-time staff members and the equivalent of another 1.5 full-time employees.
That staff size dwarfs the BCS-school average of 3.5, according to the National Association for Athletics Compliance. In the Big 12, only Texas (10 full-time equivalent employees) has a larger staff than the Sooners' department, including part-time workers.
"We wanted to make sure we're able to have all of our checks and balances in place," Leonard said.
Other schools' compliance departments are also growing.
Oklahoma State went from one compliance officer in 2005 to six in 2010.
From 2005-10, the other public Big 12 schools with available data besides OU increased their staff sizes by an average of 46 percent, according to information compiled from open-records requests.
OU's compliance department grew at more than twice that rate.
Texas A&M officials feared their department was too small and requested another staff member in September 2009. The school's duties had grown more complicated, but its staff size hadn't changed in 15 years.
"Increased demands on the staff have in many ways transformed the compliance office from an insurance program to that of a fire department providing education and protective services but primarily dealing with urgent issues..." reads a human resources e-mail obtained through an open-records request.
"It has been said many times that it is not a matter of whether or not a major infraction will occur but a matter of when, and a deficiency in staffing levels increases the likelihood of this statement becoming factual for Texas A&M."
Rising costs
OU is also spending significantly more on compliance.
In 2007, the NCAA sanctioned OU for the Big Red scandal.
In 2008, OU's compliance expenses nearly doubled and reached almost $1 million, thanks to one-time costs of office furniture ($63,000) and computers/software ($80,000).
OU's athletic department spent more on compliance ($967,264) that year than it did on recruiting ($935,927), according to figures reported by the school.
"All we can do," said Anil Gollahalli, OU's vice president and general counsel, "is make sure we've adequately resourced our department and done the proper education we can to staff and student-athletes to demonstrate to the NCAA and the University of Oklahoma we're doing things the right way."
For the 2010 fiscal year, OU's compliance expenses were $846,000 - the largest in the conference. Only Texas ($841,000) had a budget within $300,000 of OU's.
Public Big 12 schools increased compliance spending by 53 percent from 2005-2010. Expenses averaged $436,000 for the last fiscal year, according to public records.
The NCAA has blamed at least one school for not funding its compliance department fully.
"NCAA members, including USC, invest substantial resources to compete in athletics competition at the highest levels, particularly in football and men's basketball," the committee on infractions wrote in its ruling on the Reggie Bush case.
"They must commit comparable resources to detect violations and monitor conduct with a realistic understanding and appraisal of what that effort entails, and what it will cost."
OU's budget has grown for several reasons.
More staff means more expenses, and OU is also spending more money on specialized professionals dealing with one specific area, like recruiting or initial eligibility. Salaries are also higher than industry averages to keep people in Norman.
"Turnover in compliance is not a good thing," said Leonard, the compliance director. "Coaches get used to certain things, and things can fall through the cracks when people leave."
The school has added specialized software that tracks coaches' phone calls and players' paperwork. If a player hasn't turned in his or her preseason forms or if a coach calls a recruit too many times, the system flags it.
OU athletic director Joe Castiglione said the compliance staff has grown because the athletic department has added more staff and sports. Other changes have come after NCAA rulings and consulting other experts.
The school didn't have procedures in place to scrutinize Sampson's phone calls, and steps to track employment failed in the Big Red case.
"The experience we've had, the knowledge we've gained through that process has helped us become a better program," Castiglione said. "Those were intentional steps we were taking to ultimately create what in time could become a model compliance program."
OU also rearranged the way its compliance department functions. It no longer reports to the athletic department, stripping away the possibility of a conflict of interest. Instead, OU's legal counsel, led by Gollahalli, supervises compliance. Gollahalli reports to the university president.
The school has also added a hot line for people to report anonymous tips.
"It's a constant oversight," Castiglione said. "We're always finding ways we can improve."
Valuable reputation
Although some of OU's changes have been costly, it's cheaper to pay more staffers now than it is to fight the NCAA later.
Legal fees for major infraction cases can exceed $1 million - and that doesn't include the bad publicity or negative recruiting that decrease donations or stain a program's image indefinitely.
"Fiscal cost aside, the reputational hit is what we're trying to stave off against," said Gollahalli, OU's general counsel. "The reputation of the institution is very valuable to us."
Spending more money and restructuring offices isn't guaranteed to work. Officials acknowledged that violations - inadvertent or otherwise - are inevitable.
But a larger staff and revised policies show that OU is striving to catch problems.
Even if rules are broken, these changes could keep the school from being charged with failure to monitor or lack of institutional control - two serious charges that can cripple an athletic department and lead to penalties like postseason bans.
"It really doesn't matter how much money and effort and time you put into compliance," Leonard said. "At the end of the day, you're still going to be responsible - 100 percent."
:gary:
OU makes moves to strengthen compliance department
By MATT BAKER World Sports Writer
Published: 12/12/2010**2:25 AM
Last Modified: 12/13/2010**10:00 AM
After separate investigations into its football and men's basketball programs in a six-year span, the University of Oklahoma's compliance department made major changes.
Among the points revealed in a months-long study by the Tulsa World:
-- From 2005-10, OU's compliance staff doubled to about three times the national average.
-- In 2008, OU spent more on compliance than it did on recruiting.
-- The department's size and budget grew twice as much as the average Big 12 program did.
-- The compliance budget more than doubled to more than $846,000 - almost twice the conference average.
-- OU changed the department's structure to eliminate bias and added more specialized employees.
Yet the Sooners are under investigation again, this time over alleged ties between a financial adviser and at least one former men's basketball player and ex-assistant coach.
OU faces the same challenges other schools do - the growing complexity in NCAA rules and ever-changing ways for people to break them. That's why the NCAA has recently investigated programs ranging from UConn to USC.
Regardless of how OU and others change their strategies or boost their spending, here's the stark reality:
They can prevent charges of failure to monitor the program, but they can't always keep someone from breaking a rule.
"We can't stop a major infractions case," said OU executive director of compliance Jason Leonard. "If there's somebody that's out there that's just cheating, that completely has a double life than what they portray to us here in compliance, we can't stop that.
"The only thing we can do is, we can do everything we can to make sure that our compliance office didn't fail in any way." "The only thing we can do is, we can do everything we can to make sure that our compliance office didn't fail in any way."
Bigger staffs
In March 2006, tipsters reported that OU football players were getting money for work that wasn't performed at the Norman car dealership Big Red Sports and Imports.
Two months later, the NCAA released its report detailing improper phone calls made by former men's basketball coach Kelvin Sampson.
Those investigations led to several changes in OU's compliance department.
Start with size.
In 2005, it had four full-time compliance employees and a part-timer. In 2010, OU had eight full-time staff members and the equivalent of another 1.5 full-time employees.
That staff size dwarfs the BCS-school average of 3.5, according to the National Association for Athletics Compliance. In the Big 12, only Texas (10 full-time equivalent employees) has a larger staff than the Sooners' department, including part-time workers.
"We wanted to make sure we're able to have all of our checks and balances in place," Leonard said.
Other schools' compliance departments are also growing.
Oklahoma State went from one compliance officer in 2005 to six in 2010.
From 2005-10, the other public Big 12 schools with available data besides OU increased their staff sizes by an average of 46 percent, according to information compiled from open-records requests.
OU's compliance department grew at more than twice that rate.
Texas A&M officials feared their department was too small and requested another staff member in September 2009. The school's duties had grown more complicated, but its staff size hadn't changed in 15 years.
"Increased demands on the staff have in many ways transformed the compliance office from an insurance program to that of a fire department providing education and protective services but primarily dealing with urgent issues..." reads a human resources e-mail obtained through an open-records request.
"It has been said many times that it is not a matter of whether or not a major infraction will occur but a matter of when, and a deficiency in staffing levels increases the likelihood of this statement becoming factual for Texas A&M."
Rising costs
OU is also spending significantly more on compliance.
In 2007, the NCAA sanctioned OU for the Big Red scandal.
In 2008, OU's compliance expenses nearly doubled and reached almost $1 million, thanks to one-time costs of office furniture ($63,000) and computers/software ($80,000).
OU's athletic department spent more on compliance ($967,264) that year than it did on recruiting ($935,927), according to figures reported by the school.
"All we can do," said Anil Gollahalli, OU's vice president and general counsel, "is make sure we've adequately resourced our department and done the proper education we can to staff and student-athletes to demonstrate to the NCAA and the University of Oklahoma we're doing things the right way."
For the 2010 fiscal year, OU's compliance expenses were $846,000 - the largest in the conference. Only Texas ($841,000) had a budget within $300,000 of OU's.
Public Big 12 schools increased compliance spending by 53 percent from 2005-2010. Expenses averaged $436,000 for the last fiscal year, according to public records.
The NCAA has blamed at least one school for not funding its compliance department fully.
"NCAA members, including USC, invest substantial resources to compete in athletics competition at the highest levels, particularly in football and men's basketball," the committee on infractions wrote in its ruling on the Reggie Bush case.
"They must commit comparable resources to detect violations and monitor conduct with a realistic understanding and appraisal of what that effort entails, and what it will cost."
OU's budget has grown for several reasons.
More staff means more expenses, and OU is also spending more money on specialized professionals dealing with one specific area, like recruiting or initial eligibility. Salaries are also higher than industry averages to keep people in Norman.
"Turnover in compliance is not a good thing," said Leonard, the compliance director. "Coaches get used to certain things, and things can fall through the cracks when people leave."
The school has added specialized software that tracks coaches' phone calls and players' paperwork. If a player hasn't turned in his or her preseason forms or if a coach calls a recruit too many times, the system flags it.
OU athletic director Joe Castiglione said the compliance staff has grown because the athletic department has added more staff and sports. Other changes have come after NCAA rulings and consulting other experts.
The school didn't have procedures in place to scrutinize Sampson's phone calls, and steps to track employment failed in the Big Red case.
"The experience we've had, the knowledge we've gained through that process has helped us become a better program," Castiglione said. "Those were intentional steps we were taking to ultimately create what in time could become a model compliance program."
OU also rearranged the way its compliance department functions. It no longer reports to the athletic department, stripping away the possibility of a conflict of interest. Instead, OU's legal counsel, led by Gollahalli, supervises compliance. Gollahalli reports to the university president.
The school has also added a hot line for people to report anonymous tips.
"It's a constant oversight," Castiglione said. "We're always finding ways we can improve."
Valuable reputation
Although some of OU's changes have been costly, it's cheaper to pay more staffers now than it is to fight the NCAA later.
Legal fees for major infraction cases can exceed $1 million - and that doesn't include the bad publicity or negative recruiting that decrease donations or stain a program's image indefinitely.
"Fiscal cost aside, the reputational hit is what we're trying to stave off against," said Gollahalli, OU's general counsel. "The reputation of the institution is very valuable to us."
Spending more money and restructuring offices isn't guaranteed to work. Officials acknowledged that violations - inadvertent or otherwise - are inevitable.
But a larger staff and revised policies show that OU is striving to catch problems.
Even if rules are broken, these changes could keep the school from being charged with failure to monitor or lack of institutional control - two serious charges that can cripple an athletic department and lead to penalties like postseason bans.
"It really doesn't matter how much money and effort and time you put into compliance," Leonard said. "At the end of the day, you're still going to be responsible - 100 percent."
:gary: