3.2 Active Membership.

[3.2.1 through 3.2.3 unchanged.]

3.2.4 Conditions and Obligations of Membership.

[3.2.4.1 through 3.2.4.9 unchanged.]

3.2.4.10 Institutional Performance Program. To meet the provisions of the institutional performance program of the Association, member institutions shall complete, at least once every 10 years, an institutional self-study, verified and evaluated through external peer review, in accordance with the Association's constitution and bylaws. A Division II or III institution that sponsors a sport in Division I is not required to participate in the institutional performance program. (See Bylaws 22 and 33.)

[3.2.4.11 through 3.2.4.20 renumbered as 3.2.4.10 through 3.2.4.19, unchanged.]

3.2.5 Loss of Active Membership.

[3.2.5.1 through 3.2.5.4 unchanged.]

3.2.5.5 Failure to Address Institutional Performance Problems. The Committee on Institutional Performance may place a member institution in a restricted membership category if it concludes that the institution has not addressed properly the problems identified pursuant to the institutional performance program of the Association.

[3.2.5.6 through 3.2.5.7 renumbered as 3.2.5.5 through 3.2.5.6, unchanged.]

3.3 Member Conference.

[3.3.1 through 3.3.3 unchanged.]

3.3.4 Conditions and Obligations of Membership.

[3.3.4.1 unchanged.]

3.3.4.2 Institutional Performance Program. Member conferences shall facilitate the institutional performance program of the Association in accordance with the Association's constitution and bylaws.

[3.3.4.3 through 3.3.4.8 renumbered as 3.3.4.2 through 3.3.4.7, unchanged.]

[3.3.5 through 3.3.6 unchanged.]

5.2.3 Administrative Bylaws. The administrative bylaws of the Association (administrative regulations, executive regulations, and enforcement policies and procedures, and institutional performance program policies and procedures) provide rules and regulations for the implementation of policy adopted by the membership as set forth in the constitution and operating bylaws. They are distinct from the operating bylaws in that, to provide greater flexibility and efficiency in the conduct of the affairs of the Association, they may be adopted or amended by the applicable divisional presidential administrative group, the Division I Legislative Council and the Division III Management Council.

[5.2.3.1 through 5.2.3.3 unchanged.]

5.2.3.4 Institutional Performance Policies and Procedures. The Committee on Institutional Performance is empowered to adopt or revise policies and procedures for the conduct of the Association's institutional performance program, subject to approval by the Legislative Council. These policies and procedures shall be developed by the Committee on Institutional Performance, shall not be inconsistent with the provisions of the constitution and bylaws, and shall be subject to amendment by the membership.

[5.2.3.5 renumbered as 5.2.3.4, unchanged.]

6.3 Self Study and Evaluation.

6.3.1 Self-Study Report. Member institutions shall conduct a comprehensive self-study and evaluation of their intercollegiate athletics programs at least once every 10 years pursuant to the institutional performance program process (see Bylaws 22 and 33).

6.3.2 Exit Interviews. The institution's director of athletics, senior woman administrator or designated representatives (excluding coaching staff members) shall conduct exit interviews in each sport with a sample of student-athletes (as determined by the institution) whose eligibility has expired. Interviews shall include questions regarding the value of the students' athletics experiences, the extent of the athletics time demands encountered by the student-athletes, proposed changes in intercollegiate athletics and concerns related to the administration of the student-athletes' specific sports.

14.7.2 Residence Requirement Waivers. The Legislative Council Subcommittee for Legislative Relief may waive the one-year residence requirement for student-athletes under the following conditions or circumstances:

[14.7.2-(a) through 14.7.2-(b) unchanged.]

(c) On the recommendation of the Committee on Infractions, for a student-athlete who transfers to a member institution to continue the student-athlete's opportunity for full participation in a sport because the student-athlete's original institution was placed on probation by the NCAA with sanctions that would preclude the institution's team in that sport from participating in postseason competition during all of the remaining seasons of the student-athlete's eligibility (see also Bylaw 13.1.1.3.3); and

(d) On the recommendation of the Committee on Institutional Performance for a student-athlete who transfers to a member institution to continue the student-athlete's opportunity for full participation in a sport because the student-athlete's original institution, per Bylaw 22.3.3, is placed in a membership category that would preclude the institution's team in that sport from participating in postseason competition during all of the remaining seasons of the student-athlete's eligibility; and

[14.7.2-(e) relettered as 14.7.2-(d), unchanged.]

19.9 Penalties.

[19.9.1 through 19.9.10 unchanged.]

19.9.11 Recommendation to Committee on Institutional Performance. The hearing panel may recommend to the Committee on Institutional Performance that an institution's institutional performance program status be reviewed as a result of the institution's completed infractions case.

[19.9.12 renumbered as 19.9.11, unchanged.]

20.2.5.3 Waivers of Division I Membership Criteria. The Administration Cabinet, by a two-thirds majority of its members present and voting, may grant waivers of the Division I membership criteria according to the procedures specified below.

[20.2.5.3.1 unchanged.]

20.2.5.3.2 Waiver -- Restricted Membership Status. If an institution has been placed in the restricted membership category by the Committee on Institutional Performance, the institution may request a waiver of such status from the Administration Cabinet immediately on rectifying deficiencies outlined by the Committee on Institutional Performance. Such a waiver shall be submitted to the Administration Cabinet at least 60 days prior to the meeting in which the Administration Cabinet will act on the waiver. The Administration Cabinet, by a two-thirds majority of its members present and voting, may waive the 60-day deadline due to circumstances beyond an institution's control.

[20.2.5.3.3 through 20.2.5.3.5 renumbered as 20.2.5.3.2 through 20.2.5.3.4, unchanged.]

20.4 Multidivision Classification/Reclassification of Football Subdivision.

20.4.1 Multidivision Classification. A member of Division II or Division III may have a sport classified in Division I, provided the sport was so classified during the 2010-11 academic year. Such a classification shall continue until the institution fails to conduct the sport in Division I in any following academic year.

20.4.1.1 Reclassification of a Sport of the Opposite Gender. A member of Division II or Division III that had one sport classified in Division I during the 2010-11 academic year may petition to have one sport of the opposite gender, other than football or basketball, classified in Division I, provided the original sport remains classified in Division I.

20.4.1.1.1 Notification/Application Requirement. An institution's chancellor or president shall submit to the national office written notice of the institution's intention to reclassify and a completed application. The notice and application shall be received in the national office (by mail or electronic transmission) not later than June 1 two years prior to August 1 of the year the institution intends to reclassify the applicable sport. Any form received after June 1 shall be postmarked not later than May 25. The notice and application shall be accompanied by a $10,000 fee and a strategic plan that addresses the Division I philosophy statement (see Bylaw 20.9.2) and the requirements of the institutional performance program operating principles (see Bylaw 22). If the institution fails to meet the requirements of reclassification, the application fee shall be refunded, less any expenditure for educational costs related to the reclassification process.

[20.4.1.1.2 through 20.4.1.1.3 unchanged.]

20.4.2 Football Subdivision Reclassification Options. A member of Division I may petition to be
classified in football in the Football Bowl Subdivision or the Football Championship Subdivision.

20.4.2.1 Reclassification from Football Championship Subdivision to Football Bowl Subdivision.

[20.4.2.1.1 unchanged.]

20.4.2.1.2 Notification/Application Requirement. The chancellor or president from a Football Championship Subdivision institution that intends to petition for reclassification to the Football Bowl Subdivision, per Bylaw 20.4.2, shall submit to the national office written notice of the institution's intention to reclassify and a completed application. The notice and application shall be received in the national office (by mail or electronic transmission) not later than June 1 two years prior to the August 1 when the institution intends to reclassify to the Football Bowl Subdivision. Any form received after June 1 shall be postmarked not later than May 25. The notice and application shall be accompanied by a $5,000 fee and a strategic plan that addresses the Division I philosophy statement (see Bylaw 20.9) and institutional performance program requirements operating principles (see Bylaw 22). If the institution fails to qualify for membership in the Football Bowl Subdivision, the application fee shall be refunded, less any expenditure for educational costs related to the reclassification process.

[20.4.2.1.3 through 20.4.2.1.4 unchanged.]

20.5.2 Requesting Reclassification. In order to petition to change its membership to Division I, the institution and its sponsoring conference shall complete an application and submit it to the Administration Cabinet on a form approved by the cabinet.

[20.5.2.1 through 20.5.2.2 unchanged.]

20.5.2.3 Initial Strategic Plan. The institution's application shall include an initial strategic plan that addresses the Division I philosophy statement (see Bylaw 20.9) and the institutional performance program requirements operating principles (see Bylaw 22.2). The initial strategic plan must be approved by the sponsoring conference.

[20.5.2.4 through 20.5.2.5 unchanged.]

20.5.2.5.1 First Year. During the first year of reclassification, an institution shall satisfy the following requirements:

[20.5.2.5.1-(a) through 20.5.2.5.1-(d) unchanged.]

(e) Completion of a preliminary NCAA institutional performance program requirements orientation, which shall require attendance by representatives from the sponsoring conference;

[20.5.2.5.1-(f) through 20.5.2.5.1-(g) unchanged.]

[20.5.2.5.2 unchanged.]

20.5.2.5.3 Third Year. During the third year of reclassification, an institution shall satisfy the following requirements:

[20.5.2.5.3-(a) through 20.5.2.5.1-(b) unchanged.]

(c) Completion of an NCAA institutional performance program requirements orientation;

[20.5.2.5.3-(d) through 20.5.2.5.3-(e) unchanged.]

20.5.2.5.4 Fourth Year. During the fourth year of reclassification, an institution shall satisfy the following requirements:

(a) Successfully complete an NCAA institutional performance program requirements self-study and evaluation visit;

[20.5.2.5.4-(b) through 20.5.2.5.4-(e) unchanged.]

20.5.3 Institutional Performance Progress Report. The institution shall submit a report to the Committee on Institutional Performance regarding the progress of any plans for improvement (as recommended by the committee) not later than the conclusion of its second year of active Division I membership.

[20.5.4 through 20.5.5 renumbered as 20.5.3 through 20.5.4, unchanged.]

21.7.6 Committees Reporting to the Leadership Council.

[21.7.6.1 through 21.7.6.2 unchanged.]

21.7.6.3 Committee on Institutional Performance. The Committee on Institutional Performance shall be appointed as provided in Bylaw 22.1 and its duties assigned as set forth in Bylaw 22.1. (See Bylaw 22 for details regarding the committee and the division's procedures related to the institutional performance program.)

21.7.7 Committees Reporting to the Legislative Council.

21.7.7.1 Committee on Institutional Performance. The Committee on Institutional Performance shall be appointed as provided in Bylaw 22.1 and its duties assigned as set forth in Bylaw 22.1.2 (See Bylaws 22 and 33 for details regarding the committee and the division's procedures related to the institutional performance program.)

[21.7.7.2 through 21.7.7.3 renumbered as 21.7.7.1 through 21.7.7.2, unchanged.]

22 Institutional Performance Program

22.01 General Principle. The central purpose of the institutional performance program of the Association shall be to validate the funda¬mental integrity of member institutions' athletics programs through a verified and evaluated institutional self-study. The involvement of peer reviewers external to the institution shall provide the verification and evaluation of the methodology and results of the self-study. The central purpose of the institutional performance program is to provide institutional leaders with vital and significant data to assist with planning, performance and oversight of their intercollegiate athletics programs. The program is intended to guide and support members of Division I with models, management and reporting in an effort to safeguard the health and well-being of student-athletes and to promote the integrity of an institution's athletics program.

[22.1 unchanged.]

22.2 Mandatory Self-Study and External Peer Review. Each member institution, at least once every 10 years, shall complete an institutional self-study, verified and evaluated through external peer review. The self-study shall encompass the following operating principles in three basic areas as set forth in Bylaws 22.2.1, 22.2.2 and 22.2.3.

22.2.1 Governance and Commitment to Rules Compliance.

22.2.1.1 Institutional Control, Presidential Authority and Shared Responsibilities. The Association's principle of institutional control vests in the institution the responsibility for the conduct of its athletics program, including the actions of its staff members and representatives of its athletics interests. In fulfilling this principle, the institution shall demonstrate that:

(a) The institution's governing board provides oversight and broad policy formulation for intercollegiate athletics in a manner consistent with other units of the institution;

(b) The chancellor or president is assigned ultimate responsibility and authority for the operation, fiscal integrity and personnel of the athletics program; and

(c) Appropriate campus constituencies have the opportunity, under the purview of the president or chancellor, to provide input into the formulation of policies relating to the conduct of the athletics program and to review periodically the implementation of such policies.

22.2.1.2 Rules Compliance. Membership in the Association places the responsibility on each institution to ensure that its staff, student-athletes and other individuals and groups representing the institution's athletics interests comply with the applicable Association rules and regulations. Consistent with this responsibility, the institution shall demonstrate that:

(a) It has in place a set of written policies and procedures that are clearly communicated to athletics staff members and those individuals outside athletics who have rules-compliance responsibilities. These written policies and procedures must assign specific responsibilities in the areas of rules compliance, including assignment of direct accountability for rules compliance to the individual the president or chancellor assigns overall responsibility for the athletics program;

(b) In critical and sensitive areas, institutional compliance procedures provide for the regular participation of persons outside of the athletics department. The responsibility for admission, certification of academic standing, evaluation of academic performance and administration of financial aid for student-athletes must be vested in the same agencies that have authority in these matters for students in general;

(c) Rules compliance is the subject of a continuous, comprehensive educational effort to a wide range of constituencies;

(d) A clear and unambiguous commitment to rules compliance is a central element in all personnel matters for individuals involved in the intercollegiate athletics program; and

(e) At least once every four years, its rules-compliance program is the subject of evaluation by an authority outside the athletics department. The evaluation shall include a review of the following program areas:

(1) Governance and organization;

(2) Initial-eligibility certification;

(3) Continuing-eligibility certification;

(4) Transfer-eligibility certification;

(5) Academic Performance Program;

(6) Financial aid administration, including individual and team limits;

(7) Recruiting (e.g., contacts and evaluations, official and unofficial visits);

(8) Camps and clinics;

(9) Investigations and self-reporting of rules violations;

(10) Rules education;

(11) Extra benefits;

(12) Playing and practice seasons;

(13) Student-athlete employment;

(14) Amateurism; and

(15) Commitment of personnel to rules-compliance activities.

22.2.2 Academic Integrity.

22.2.2.1 Academic Standards. The Association's fundamental principles indicate that an intercollegiate athletics program shall be designed and maintained as a vital component of the institution's educational system, and student-athletes shall be treated consistently with the student body. Consistent with this philosophy, the institution shall demonstrate that:

(a) The institution admits all student-athletes as regularly enrolled, degree-seeking students in accordance with the regular, published entrance requirements that apply to all applicants;

(b) The institution admits only student-athletes who have reasonable expectations of obtaining academic degrees;

(1) If the academic profile of entering student-athletes, as a whole or for any student-athlete subgroup, is lower than that of other student-athletes or comparable student-body groups or subgroups, the contrast shall be analyzed and explained by appropriate institutional authorities.

(2) If the measures of academic performance of student-athletes, as a whole or for any student-athlete subgroup, are lower than that of other student-athletes or comparable student-body groups or subgroups, this disparity shall be analyzed, explained and, if necessary, addressed (through specific plans for improvement) by appropriate institutional authorities.

(c) Academic standards and policies applicable to student-athletes are consistent with those adopted by the institution for the student body in general or conference or Association standards, whichever are higher;

(d) Written policies related to scheduling are established in all sports to minimize student-athletes' conflicts with class time and/or final examination periods due to participation in intercollegiate athletics, consistent with the provisions of Constitution 3.2.4.14; and

(e) Assessment, evaluation and plans for improvement exist to ensure acclimation, retention and academic success for student-athletes with special academic needs and student-athletes who are admitted through the institution's special-admission process or, for those institutions without a special-admission process, student-athletes in the lower quartile of the institution's student academic profile.

22.2.2.2 Academic Support. Members of the Association have the responsibility to conduct intercollegiate athletics programs in a manner designed to protect and enhance the educational experience of student-athletes and to assure proper emphasis on educational objectives. Consistent with this responsibility, the institution shall demonstrate that:

(a) Adequate academic support services are available for student-athletes;

(b) Student-athletes are encouraged and assisted in reaching attainable academic goals of their own choosing;

(c) When it is determined that individual student-athletes have special academic needs, these needs are addressed either through institutional programming or through student-athlete support services;

(d) The support services are evaluated and approved at least once every four years by appropriate academic authorities outside the department of intercollegiate athletics (e.g., faculty members or academic administrators of the institution);

(e) There is a commitment to the fair and equitable treatment of student-athletes, in support of their academic endeavors; and

(f) Academic improvement plans developed during the previous self-study have been implemented. Following initial campus approval of an academic-improvement plan, if the plan is modified or not fully implemented, the institution shall provide a written explanation prepared and approved by appropriate institutional authorities.

22.2.3 Gender, Diversity and Student-Athlete Well-Being.

22.2.3.1 Gender Issues. It is a principle of the Association to conduct and promote its athletics programs free from gender bias. In accordance with this fundamental principle, the institution shall:

(a) Have implemented its approved gender-equity plan from the previous self-study. If the plan was modified or not fully implemented, provide an acceptable explanation from appropriate institutional authorities;

(b) Demonstrate that it is committed to, and has progressed toward, fair and equitable treatment of both male and female student-athletes and athletics department personnel; and

(c) Formally adopt a written plan for the future of the intercollegiate athletics program that ensures the institution maintains, or continues progress toward, a program that is equitable for both genders. The plan shall include measurable goals the institution intends to achieve, steps the institution will take to achieve those goals, persons responsible and timetables.

22.2.3.2 Diversity Issues. It is a principle of the Association to promote respect for and sensitivity to the dignity of every person and to refrain from discrimination. In accordance with this fundamental principle, the institution shall:

(a) Have implemented its approved minority issues plan from the previous self-study. If the plan was modified or not fully implemented, provide an acceptable explanation from appropriate institutional authorities;

(b) Demonstrate that it is committed to, and has progressed toward, fair and equitable treatment of all student-athletes and athletics department personnel with diverse racial, ethnic and other backgrounds; and

(c) Formally adopt a written plan for the future of the intercollegiate athletics program that ensures the institution maintains, or continues progress toward, a program that expands equitable opportunities and support for student-athletes and athletics personnel with diverse racial, ethnic and other backgrounds. The plan shall include measurable goals the institution intends to achieve, steps the institution will take to achieve those goals, persons responsible and timetables.

22.2.3.3 Student-Athlete Well-Being. Conducting the intercollegiate athletics program in a manner designed to protect and enhance the physical and educational well-being of student-athletes is a basic principle of the Association. In accordance with this fundamental principle, the institution shall;

(a) Provide evidence that the well-being of student-athletes and the fairness of their treatment is monitored, evaluated and addressed on a continuing basis;

(b) Have established grievance or appeal procedures available to student-athletes in appropriate areas; and

(c) Provide evidence that the institution has in place programs that protect the health of and provide a safe and inclusive environment for each of its student-athletes.

22.3 Institutional Performance Program Decisions. The Committee on Institutional Performance shall base its decisions regarding the status of an institution's athletics program on information contained in the institution's self-study report, the peer-review team's written report, the institution's written response to the review team's report and evidence presented at hearings or in-person appearances before the committee. Actions of the Committee on Institutional Performance regarding an institution's certification status shall be announced publicly.

22.3.1 Categories of Institutional Performance. Based on the information presented, the Committee on Institutional Performance shall determine an institution's institutional performance program status consistent with the following three categories:

22.3.1.1 Certified. A certified institution shall have been deemed to be in substantial conformity with the operating principles in Bylaw 22.2.

22.3.1.2 Certified with Conditions. An institution that is certified with conditions shall have been deemed to be in substantial conformity with the operating principles in Bylaw 22.2, subject to the institution's fulfillment of certain corrective actions in a reasonable, specified period of time. An institution may evidence fulfillment of these corrective actions prior to the time specified by the committee.

22.3.1.3 Not Certified. An institution that is not certified shall have been deemed to be not in substantial conformity with the operating principles in Bylaw 22.2 and shall be subject to the fulfillment of certain corrective actions in a reasonable, specified period of time. An institution may evidence fulfillment of these corrective actions prior to the time specified by the committee.

22.3.2 Postponement of Institutional Performance Program Decision. The committee reserves the right to postpone the institutional performance program decision of an institution under either of the following conditions:

(a) When its self-study is deemed to be inadequate (e.g., lacking accuracy, openness or campus-wide participation). If the institution does not respond to the committee's concerns in a period of time specified by the committee, it may be placed in restricted-membership status. Such an institution shall not be eligible for an institutional performance program decision until an appropriate self-study is completed; or

(b) In instances in which the committee, during its deliberations, concludes that the institution has not received adequate notice from the peer-review team of a problem significant enough to affect the institution's institutional performance program status. The postponement allows the committee to seek written clarification from the institution and the peer-review team chair prior to rendering a decision as to the institutional performance program status of the institution.

22.3.3 Corrective Action. When problems are identified pursuant to the institutional performance program process, a member institution shall take corrective action. Requirements for taking corrective action, and a record of such action, shall be a routine aspect of the institutional performance program process and shall be available for review during later institutional performance program decisions.

22.3.3.1 Demonstration of Fulfillment of Corrective Action. The Committee on Institutional Performance shall require institutions to demonstrate that corrective actions identified by the committee have been taken in the specified period of time and, upon such a showing, shall grant the institution full institutional performance status.

22.3.3.2 Failure to Take Corrective Actions. An institution that fails to conduct an appropriate self-study or to make an effective effort to correct problems in its athletics program may be denied an institutional performance program decision following the expiration of a reasonable, specified period of time during which the institution may rectify its deficiencies.

22.3.3.2.1 Not Certified -- Restricted Membership. If, following the expiration of the time period specified in Bylaw 22.3.3.2, the Committee on Institutional Performance determines that serious problems remain in the institution's athletics program, the institution shall be placed in a restricted-membership category, consistent with the provisions of Bylaw 20.2.5.1.

22.3.3.2.2 Not Certified -- Loss of Membership. If, at the end of the restricted-membership year specified in Bylaw 22.3.3.2.1, the Committee on Institutional Performance concludes that the concerns cited previously related to the institution's athletics department still are not being addressed properly, the institution shall forfeit its membership in the Association.

22.3.4 Action on Referrals from Committee on Infractions. The Committee on Institutional Performance may review and alter an institution's status upon referral from the Committee on Infractions.

22.3.5 Appeals. Following a hearing before the Committee on Institutional Performance, an institution may appeal the decision of the Committee on Institutional Performance pursuant to this section to the Legislative Council (see Bylaw 33 for hearing procedures).

22.4 Conference Assistance. Conference offices may assist member institutions in the regular review of the institution's commitment to compliance with the rules of the Association and in the development and maintenance of institutional compliance objectives and strategies. Conference records of ongoing institutional compliance efforts shall be subject to review by the peer-review team. Conferences also may serve as facilitators in the institutional performance program process, linking participating institutions and external review teams as follows:

(a) Participating in the orientation process for institutions scheduled for review;

(b) Accompanying peer-review teams on campus visits of conference members; and

(c) Ensuring that conference members develop, implement and report corrective actions identified as a normal part of the institutional performance program process.

22.5 Other Assistance. An institution may obtain other assistance in carrying out the responsibilities specific to the institutional performance program set forth in Bylaw 22.4, subject to the prior approval of the Committee on Institutional Performance.

33 Institutional Performance Program Policies and Procedures

33.1 Self-Study and External Peer Review. The requirements and procedures set forth in this bylaw apply to the institutional self-study and institutional performance program process specified in Constitution 3 and 6 and Bylaw 22.

33.2 External Peer-Review Teams.

33.2.1 Function. External peer-review teams shall be responsible for reviewing the institution's self-study report, conducting campus visits and offering comments to the review team's chair. The peer-review team shall approach the institution's self-study report and the campus visit with two objectives:

(a) To verify that the self-study process involved campus-wide participation, and that the self-study report reflects accurately the operation of the institution's athletics program; and

(b) To evaluate the institution's performance in relation to the fundamental operating principles specified in Bylaw 22.2.

33.2.2 Composition. External peer-review teams shall be established to ensure that participating member institutions are evaluated by broadly representative teams composed of experienced educational and athletics personnel with substantial campus experience. Peer-review teams shall consist of two to four peer reviewers. Peer-review team members shall be appointed by the Committee on Institutional Performance and represent institutions in Division I. One NCAA staff member shall accompany and support each team on evaluation site visits. Any NCAA staff member with a personal relationship or institutional affiliation that reasonably would result in the appearance of prejudice shall refrain from participating in any manner in the involved institution's activities related to the institutional performance program.

33.2.3 Selection and Assignment of Peer-Review Teams.

33.2.3.1 Opportunity of Institution to Review List of Potential Peer Reviewers. Prior to the establishment of a peer-review team and the appointment of its chair, an institution shall be given the opportunity to review a list of potential peer reviewers and chairs for purposes of suggesting removal of those who seem inappropriate or unacceptable to the institution. The authority for establishing the composition of peer-review teams shall rest with the Committee on Institutional Performance.

33.2.3.2 Establishment of Team. As a general rule, peer-review teams shall be established according to the needs, size and subdivision of the institution to be reviewed, and the coverage of topic areas, without regard to the specific constituent groups with which individual peer reviewers are identified.

33.2.3.2.1 Pool of Peer Reviewers.

33.2.3.2.1.1 Basic Qualifications. To be included in the pool of peer reviewers, an individual shall be from a Division I institution or conference and shall have a general knowledge of intercollegiate athletics (as evidenced by positions held, committee service, etc.), and:

(a) Hold the position of president or chancellor, faculty athletics representative, director of athletics or senior woman administrator at a member institution (although recent retirees may be included in the pool under special circumstances); or

(b) Have recognized expertise, skills or experience in particular areas addressed in the institutional performance program (e.g., senior compliance administrator, business manager, admissions officer, registrar, financial aid administrator, vice president for fiscal or academic affairs, vice president overseeing athletics).

33.2.3.2.1.2 Women and Ethnic Minorities. The pool of peer reviewers shall include sufficient numbers of women and members of ethnic groups to ensure their frequent assignment to peer-review teams.

33.2.3.3 Modification of Composition of Team by Chair of Team. The chair of the peer-review team, in consultation with the NCAA staff and the institution, shall have the authority to modify the composition of the team on the basis of the preliminary analysis of the self-study report.

33.2.3.4 Conflict of Interest. Former and current employees, consultants or alumni shall not be assigned as peer reviewers to an institution with which they are so affiliated. Further, an individual shall not be allowed to serve as a peer reviewer of an institution that is in the same conference as the individual's conference.

33.2.3.5 Peer-Review Team Chair. The review team's chair shall be one of the peer reviewers. The chair shall be responsible for preparing the team's written recommendation(s) regarding institutional performance. The recommendation(s) shall be based upon the breadth of institutional participation and the depth of discussion at the institutional level, and adherence to the program's broad operating principles. The review team's chair also shall represent the team before the Committee on Institutional Performance and during appeals hearings.

33.2.4 Techniques and Documentation Used by Peer-Review Team. The review team shall employ traditional evaluative techniques (e.g., review existing records, conduct in-person interviews of key personnel) to determine whether the institution's stated policies and procedures are engaged and functioning. Three documents also shall be of primary importance in this process:

(a) The self-study instrument itself, which shall be completed by the institution for review by the external peer-review team;

(b) A user's guide, which shall assist the institution through the self-study process, with specific attention to appropriate campus involvement and particular topics on which the institution shall focus; and

(c) Instructions for peer-review teams, to orient team members in their work, including the review of written documents and appropriate topics for discussion in campus interviews.

33.3 Institutional Performance Program Schedule of Participating Institutions.

33.3.1 Determination of Schedule. The Committee on Institutional Performance shall determine the institutional performance program schedule, which shall be based on the following principles, insofar as is practicable:

(a) Institutions from the same conference should be evenly scheduled throughout the institutional performance program cycle so as to reduce the burden on the conference office.

(b) Conferences may suggest a schedule for their member institutions.

(c) The institutional performance program should be scheduled in conjunction with the institution's regional accreditation insofar as is possible for those institutions that so desire.

(d) When the above principles are not operative, procedures of random selection will be used.

33.3.1.1 Institutional Performance Program Schedule for New Division I Members. New Division I members shall be scheduled as soon as practicable after the effective date of their active membership.

33.3.1.2 Modification of Schedule. An institution may apply to the Committee on Institutional Performance for modification of its place in the schedule upon a showing of special need. The committee shall, at its discretion, revise the schedule if practicable, provided the modification does not extend beyond the 10-year self-study period.

33.3.1.3 Postponement of Institutional Performance Decision for Restricted Members or Those Involved in NCAA Investigations. The Committee on Institutional Performance may, at its discretion, delay or postpone the participation of an institution classified in a restricted-membership status or of an institution that is subject to the discontinuation of a sport(s) program(s) as a result of NCAA repeat-violator penalties, when the committee determines it is in the best interests of the Association to do so.

33.4 Self-Study Process and Report Procedures.

33.4.1 Time Period for Beginning and Completing Self-Study. Institutions shall be permitted eight to 10 months to complete their institutional performance program self-studies and shall be permitted to begin their self-studies at any time.

33.4.2 Use of Outside Consultants. Institutions shall not be prohibited from using outside consultants in conducting self-studies (e.g., organizing or facilitating an institution's self-study process). However, the institution's own personnel shall be responsible for generating the substance of the self-study report. Peer-review teams shall evaluate institutions on their role in the development of the content of self-study reports.

33.4.3 Submission of Self-Study Report. Institutions shall be required to submit self-study reports and any supporting documentation to the NCAA staff sufficiently in advance of the evaluation visit. The Committee on Institutional Performance shall perform a preliminary analysis of the report based upon directives or criteria established by the Committee on Institutional Performance. Any decisions to delay the processing of a report shall be made only after consulting with NCAA staff members and with the chair of the Committee on Institutional Performance.

33.4.4 Confidentiality of Report. Institutional self-study reports shall be treated as confidential by the NCAA, peer-review teams and the Committee on Institutional Performance. Institutions, however, shall be permitted to distribute reports and supporting documentation at their discretion.

33.5 Orientation.

33.5.1 Timing and Purpose of Orientation. An NCAA staff member shall conduct an orientation for each institution at least one year in advance of the institution's initial-scheduled evaluation site visit. The primary purpose of the orientation visit shall be to discuss with institutional and conference personnel the purpose, process, implications and expectations of the institutional performance program.

33.5.2 Conference Role. Conference staff representatives may participate during an orientation at the conference's expense.

33.6 Peer-Review Evaluation Visit.

33.6.1 Purpose of Visit. The primary purpose of the evaluation visit shall be to verify and evaluate the institution's self-study report and self-study process.

33.6.2 Notice of Visit. An institution shall receive notice at least one year in advance of its evaluation visit.

33.6.3 Duties of Chair of Peer-Review Team. The chair of the peer-review team shall be responsible for at least the following duties in conjunction with evaluation visits:

(a) Consulting with NCAA staff on arrangements and preparations for evaluation visits;

(b) Delegating tasks to be performed during the visit among team members and staff, in accordance with their areas of expertise;

(c) Conducting meetings of the visiting team at the end of each day of the visit to summarize findings and to identify remaining tasks to be performed;

(d) Meeting with an institution's president or chancellor to discuss informally the nature of the information to be presented in the exit interview;

(e) Coordinating and leading the exit interview at the completion of the visit;

(f) Ensuring that the peer-review team's report is reflective of the visit's findings;

(g) Communicating with the Committee on Institutional Performance regarding the evaluation visit and peer-review team report, including appearing in person, if necessary, before the committee regarding an institution's institutional performance program status;

(h) Evaluating the performance of the peer reviewers serving on the teams; and

(i) Otherwise ensuring that the team fulfills its responsibilities and the objectives specified for evaluation visits.

33.6.4 Conference Role. Conference staff representatives may accompany peer-review teams on evaluation visits at the conference's expense. The role of the conference during the visit shall be determined on a case-by-case basis by the chair of the peer-review team in consultation with the conference.

33.6.5 Exit Interviews. The entire peer-review team shall participate in an exit interview with the president or chancellor and other individuals invited by the president or chancellor.

33.6.6 Rules Violations Discovered during Evaluation Visit. Possible violations of NCAA rules discovered during evaluation visits that relate to specific operating principles (per Bylaw 22.2) shall be communicated to the committee, the institution and the conference in the peer-review team's report. The institution shall be reminded of its obligation to self-report violations per Constitution 2.8.1. The institution's response to these findings shall be a factor in the institutional performance program decision.

33.6.7 Release of Information Regarding Evaluation Visit. Until the Committee on Institutional Performance renders its decision, information released regarding evaluation visits shall be limited to statements of the visit's status (whether the visit has not been made, is in progress or has been completed) and the identities of peer-review team members assigned to the institution. Before the formal assessment, the NCAA, peer-review team and the institution shall not publicize information regarding the visit and shall respond only to inquiries with the public information just described. Following release of the committee's decision, the institution is at liberty to release any information regarding the visit.

33.7 Report of Peer-Review Team.

33.7.1 Submission of Report. Following the evaluation visit, a draft of the peer-review team's report shall be provided to the president or chancellor of the institution. The president or chancellor shall have two weeks from the date that the draft is received to correct any factual errors contained in the team's report. A copy of the report then will be submitted to the Committee on Institutional Performance as soon as practicable following the president or chancellor's review. A copy of the report also will be provided to the president or chancellor and to the institution's conference.

33.7.2 Content of Report. The peer-review team's report shall include the following:

(a) An evaluation of the institution's self-study process as to openness, thoroughness and breadth of participation; and

(b) An evaluation of the institution's adherence to the institutional performance program's operating principles.

33.7.3 Institutional Reaction to Report. The institution may submit a written reaction to the peer-review report. It shall be sent to the Committee on Institutional Performance and shall be limited to correction of factual errors; the presentation of new, relevant information not considered by the team; and proposed corrective actions for remedying deficiencies.

33.8 Institutional Performance Program Decision.

33.8.1 Basis of Institutional Performance Program Decision. The institutional performance program decisions of the Committee on Institutional Performance shall be based upon the criteria set forth in Bylaw 22.3.

33.8.2 Conflict of Interest -- Committee Members. Committee members shall recuse themselves from institutional performance program decisions in which they may have potential conflicts of interest. Former and current employees, consultants or alumni shall not take part in certification decisions regarding an institution with which they are so affiliated. Further, an individual shall not take part in decisions regarding an institution that is in the same conference as the individual's conference.

33.8.3 Appearance by Institutional Representatives. At the request of the committee, institutional representatives may be asked to appear in person to clarify factual discrepancies and other matters at the time the committee is rendering its institutional performance program decision.

33.8.4 Request for Hearing. The committee shall be obligated to honor an institution's request for a hearing related to a decision by the committee regarding the institution's institutional performance program status.

33.8.5 Announcement of Institutional Performance Program Decision. The committee, after notifying the institution of its institutional performance program decision (and before final appeals are heard), will publicize the institution's name and the committee's decision regarding the institution's institutional performance program status through a standard press-release-type report. While other information related to the peer-review team's report or the actions of the Committee on Institutional Performance shall be considered confidential between the institution and the NCAA, the institution may release information regarding the committee's decision at its own discretion.