POSTED: Monday August 22nd 2011
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

University of Miami-NCAA Enforcement Case: Investigative and Compliance Strategies

College Athletics Best Practices Alert

Divisions I, II and III Column:

NCAA Enforcement Investigation of the University of Miami: How to Respond if Similar Allegations Surface at Your Institution

Author: Michael L. Buckner, Esquire (Shareholder)
 

The August 16, 2011, release of a Yahoo! Sports article and subsequent media reports concerning alleged rules-violations at the University of Miami (UM) has placed the NCAA membership on high alert for similar contentions to surface on other campuses. This article is designed to provide administrators with the initial steps to follow if allegations tied to the UM enforcement case are reported at other colleges or universities. 

 
Summary of the UM Allegations

Yahoo! Sports reported Nevin Shapiro, a former UM booster who is serving a 20-year prison sentence for operating a $930 million Ponzi scheme, allegedly provided impermissible benefits to approximately 72 UM football student-athletes and other student-athletes between 2002 and 2010. According to Yahoo! Sports and other media reports, Shapiro reportedly provided money, cars, yacht trips, jewelry, televisions and other gifts to numerous former and current UM student-athletes. Shapiro also claimed he paid for nightclub outings, sex parties, meals and, in one case, an abortion for a woman impregnated by a student-athlete.

Investigative Process and Procedures

The NCAA enforcement staff's investigation of the UM athletics program presents a few unique challenges. Due to the large numbers of current and former student-athletes and employees allegedly connected, it is not surprising that other NCAA member institutions are also involved (or will be implicated at some point during the case). If your institution learns that the athletics program, or one of its employees or student-athletes, is connected (directly or indirectly) in the UM enforcement case, then the Michael L. Buckner Law Firm recommends NCAA member institutions follow the steps described below:

Step 1: Document the allegation and verify through non-invasive means (e.g., review of athletics files, search of Internet resources) to determine whether it is a substantial contention or mere rumor, innuendo or gossip. Further, if the allegation is substantiated, suspend the institution's document destruction policy in the areas involved in the allegation. [Note: The Buckner Law Firm does not recommend institutions conduct interviews, collect documents or engage in other invasive investigative activities during this step.]

Step 2: Contact Julie Roe Lach, NCAA vice-president for enforcement, to: report the allegation; obtain permission to launch an immediate internal investigation; and coordinate any investigative activities with the enforcement staff. [Note: The NCAA enforcement staff may request the institution not to begin an internal investigation to prevent interference with the staff's ongoing inquiry.]

Step 3: [Implement only if the NCAA enforcement staff approves the start of an internal investigation.] Follow the institution's athletics internal investigation policy. An internal investigation policy should:

  Be in writing.
  Be approved by the president or chancellor.
  Identify the investigator (or describe how an investigator is selected or appointed).
  Lists the duties and responsibilities of pertinent institutional personnel during an investigation.
  Require a timely review of all allegations.
  Include a procedure to educate institutional personnel about the policy.
  Address how allegations of alleged major and secondary rules-violations are processed by the institution.
  Satisfy due and fair process requirements, state law and, if relevant, collective-bargaining agreements.
  State how findings are reported to the president, conference and NCAA enforcement staff.

Step 4: Select a qualified person or law firm (for example, the Michael L. Buckner Law Firm) to conduct the internal investigation.

Step 5: Secure all relevant sources of evidence (e.g., documents, e-mails, electronic data) and establish the chain-of-custody of evidence already collected.

Contact Michael L. Buckner (954-941-1844;  mbuckner@michaelbucknerlaw.com) for additional investigative-related recommendations addressing similar rules-violations as those described in media reports on the University of Miami-NCAA enforcement case.

Divisions I, II and III Column:

University of Miami-NCAA Enforcement Case: Compliance Strategies for Booster and Third-Party Issues

Author: Michael L. Buckner (Shareholder)

The following article is derived from a post published on the Michael L. Buckner Law Firm blog.

The August 16, 2011, Yahoo! Sports article concerning alleged NCAA rules-violations at the University of Miami (UM) provides important lessons to other colleges and universities. Yahoo! Sports and other media outlets reported Nevin Shapiro, a former UM booster who is serving a 20-year prison sentence for operating a $930 million Ponzi scheme, allegedly provided impermissible benefits to approximately 72 UM football student-athletes and other student-athletes between 2002 and 2010. Specifically, Shapiro purportedly provided cash, vehicles, yacht trips, jewelry, televisions, as well as paid for nightclub outings, meals, sex parties and other illicit benefits, to the student-athletes.

The NCAA investigation at UM involving the high-profile student-athletes and a booster underscore the hidden dangers of colleges and universities failing to adhere to the standards imposed by the NCAA Division I Committee on Infractions on June 10, 2010, in the University of Southern California (USC) case. The Yahoo! Sports article provided further proof that an institution is only one Facebook entry, blog post or Internet rumor away from intense scrutiny. The difficult task facing institutions is how to get a handle on illicit benefits high-profile athletes receive from boosters and other third-parties (e.g., individuals associated with a prospect, sports agents, runners, sports marketers, financial planners, investment advisers). An institution cannot afford to treat the UM enforcement case as an once-in-a-lifetime event or to be reactive or programmatic. The solution requires an institution to transform its rules-compliance program. Moreover, an institution should constantly adjust and manage for ongoing changes in this area.

The Michael L. Buckner Law Firm recommends institutions consider implementing the following measures to assist administrators with: identifying high-profile athletes (prospective and enrolled); collecting pertinent rules-compliance data and information; discovering "red flags" of possible illicit activity involving high-profile athletes and third-parties; and developing solutions to minimize major amateurism and extra-benefit rules-violations. [Note: We acknowledge it may be difficult, if not impossible, to prevent all rules-violations, but the Committee on Infractions requires an institution to demonstrate it fulfilled its duty to monitor proactively compliance with NCAA legislation.] The following checklist includes the minimum elements of a "transformative due-diligence program":

1. Develop (for adoption by the institution's governing board, president or chancellor) a high-profile student-athlete due-diligence policy.

2. Create an objective (non-discriminatory) set of criteria to identify the institution's high-profile student-athletes (prospective and enrolled).

3. Implement the following registration and monitoring activities: a) sports agent/sports marketer/financial planner/investment advisor program; b) student-athlete vehicle registration program; c) student-athlete and parental housing registration program; and d) student-athlete employment program.

4. Increase monitoring activities of (and limit access to) the following areas: a) athletics facilities (including locker-rooms and practice areas); b) sidelines or other limited-access areas during athletics contests; and c) team-chartered transportation.

5. Monitor social-network and other Internet sites (including, but not limited to, Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, blogs and sports media websites).

6. Create a daily Google search/alert for compliance-related news on identified high-profile student-athletes.

7. Follow-up reports of high-profile student-athletes attending parties or other social gatherings hosted or organized by boosters, individuals associated with a prospect, professional athletes, corporations, sports agents, runners, sports marketers, financial planners, investment advisers or other third-parties. [Note: Use in conjunction with Recommendation No. 13.]

8. Require student-athletes to read and sign a statement acknowledging receipt and understanding of legislation and institutional policies concerning third-parties, amateurism and extra-benefits.

9. Schedule regular rules-education sessions for student-athletes, coaches, athletics administrators and staff, university employees with athletically-related duties and responsibilities and booster/alumni groups highlighting: NCAA legislation implicated in the UM enforcement case; and issues relating to sports agents (as well as runners, sports marketers, financial planners and investment advisers), amateurism and extra-benefits. [Note: Maintain attendance sheets, agendas and handouts.]

10. Address issues relating to boosters, sports agents (as well as runners, sports marketers, financial planners and investment advisers), amateurism and extra-benefits during at least one student-athlete advisory committee (SAAC) meeting each academic year.

11. Include questions relating to boosters, sports agents, runners, sports marketers, financial planners and investment advisers in student-athlete exit interviews (for seniors, transferring student-athletes or student-athletes without eligibility) and annual student-athlete surveys (for returning student-athletes).

 

12. Create an anonymous hotline to receive allegations, tips, questions or other information concerning alleged NCAA rules-violations.

13. Implement (in conjunction with Recommendation No. 7) a sign-out policy for all student-athletes who will leave campus for a period that exceeds 24 hours in duration. [Note: The policy would apply only when the student-athlete is: enrolled in academic courses; under the supervision or control of the institution; and/or participating in countable athletically-related activities.]

14. Address issues involving third-parties in regular rules-compliance audits.

15. Benchmark the institution's due-diligence program with protocols used at other NCAA member institutions to monitor high-profile student-athletes and third-parties.

Contact Michael L. Buckner (954-941-1844; mbuckner@michaelbucknerlaw.com) for more compliance-related recommendations pertaining to boosters and other third-parties. 

Find us on Facebook

View our profile on LinkedIn

Follow us on Twitter

View our videos on YouTube

Visit our blog

Divisions II and III Webinars: "Strategies to Address Compliance Hot Topics for the 2011-12 School Year"
 
Dates:

Division II: Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Division III: Wednesday, September 28, 2011  

Time: 12 noon to 1:00 pm EDT (9:00 am to 10:00 am PDT)

Course Summary: National attention has focused on several NCAA enforcement investigations involving high-profile coaches and student-athletes. Further, new NCAA legislation will add to the already complex set of rules that must be maintained by an institution's compliance staff and the general counsel's office. The workshop will assist compliance officers, general counsel and higher-education professionals with identifying issues, as well as developing solutions to minimize challenges resulting from rules-compliance "hot topics", infractions decisions and new legislation, including, but not limited to, the following questions:
1. What rules-compliance strategies can be developed using an objective analysis of recent enforcement cases and current investigations of alleged NCAA rules-violations?
2. What "hot topics" (and strategies to each) were identified by university administrators in the national survey?
3. What measures can schools use to demonstrate compliance with new NCAA legislation?
4. What procedures should universities use to address rules-compliance issues involving high-profile student-athletes, head coaches, local merchants and sports agents?

Click on the respective links to find out more information on, or to register for, your division-specific webinar:

Division II Webinar (September 21, 2011).

Division III Webinar (September 28, 2011). 

About the Firm

The Michael L. Buckner Law Firm is a boutique law firm that assists college and university presidents, general counsel, and athletic administrators with addressing NCAA enforcement investigations, infractions appeals and rules-compliance issues. The law firm website can be found at http://www.michaelbucknerlaw.com.

Issue: 25
Basketball
In This Issue
University of Miami-NCAA Enforcement Case: Investigative Strategies
University of Miami-NCAA Enforcement Case: Compliance Strategies
DII and III Webinars: 2011-12 Compliance Hot Topics

YouTube Channel

The Michael L. Buckner Law Firm's "Information Nuggets" video newsletter series, which provides in-depth analysis on pertinent NCAA compliance and enforcement issues, can be viewed at the firm's YouTube channel.

Resources for You
Prior issues of the Best Practices Alert newsletter, as well as other complimentary articles, checklists, toolkits and resources, can be located on our website.

MLBLF Media Center  

Insight and commentary on college sports issues can be found on the Media Center page of the law firm website . The online resource contains links to law firm press releases, media articles and Michael L. Buckner's published books, as well as Mr. Buckner's radio and TV interviews.

Michael L. Buckner Law Firm
Telephone: 954-941-1844
Facsimile: 954-941-1846
E-mail: mbuckner@michaelbucknerlaw.com
Website: http://www.michaelbucknerlaw.com
Blog: http://michaelbucknerlaw.wordpress.com
Twitter: @mbucknerlaw
LinkedIn: @michaelbucknerlawfirm
Facebook: http://tinyurl.com/michaelbucknerlaw

YouTube: @michaelbucknerlaw

# # #

---

Keywords · Michael Buckner · NCAA · compliances · webinar

---

Name: Michael L. Buckner Law Firm
Organization: Michael L. Buckner Law Firm
Email:
Phone: (954) 941-1844 (Office)
URL: http://www.michaelbucknerlaw.com

---

Please refer all questions to the company listed above issuing the press release. SFC will not be able to assist you with any inquiries and disclaims any content in these press releases.