 Montana State University-Bozeman
NCAA Athletics Certification Self-Study 2001-2002 Equity, Welfare and Sportsmanship 
Operating Principle
4.1 Gender Issues Consistent with NCAA Constitution 2.3, it is the responsibility of each institution to implement the Association’s principle of gender equity. In accordance with this fundamental principle, the institution shall: Self-Study Items
1. Explain how the institution is organized to further its efforts related to the gender issues operating principle above for both staff and students, and provide evidence that matters concerning gender equity are monitored, evaluated and addressed on a continuing basis.
The Affirmative Action Director reports directly to the president and is advised by the Affirmative Action Committee, a committee comprised of faculty, staff, and students. The Affirmative Action Director works with the staff of the Department of Intercollegiate Athletics to prepare the annual EADA reports and monitors gender issues as a part of the ongoing compliance effort. The Athletics Committee met throughout May 1999 to review the Equity Plan and make recommendations for continued compliance.
2. For the three most recent academic years for which the information is available, provide a copy of the institution's completed Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act survey form and worksheets. Analyze, explain and address (if necessary, through specific plans for improvement) discrepancies in the data between male and female student-athletes. Comment on any trends or significant changes.
The EADA reports and the worksheets for the years 1998-1999, 1999-2000, and 2000-2001 are provided as Appendices IV-C, IV-D, and IV-E. Tables and figures presenting comparative data relating to proportionality and athletic participation, scholarships, coaching salaries and opportunities, travel and equipment expenditures, and recruiting expenditures are provided in Appendix IV-F. A review of the comparative data in these areas indicates that MSU has met gender equity in most of these areas. The University is to be commended on these achievements since the last NCAA review.
Proportionality and Female Participation:
98–99 99–00 00–01 -------------- percent -------------- Male undergraduates 55.6 54.9 54.4 Female undergraduates 44.4 45.1 45.6 Male participants, all sports 54.8 55.7 55.2 Female participants, all sports 45.2 44.3 44.8 Athletically-Related Student Aid:
The University has progressed toward gender equity in the areas of athletically-related student aid using two measures: scholarship dollars awarded to female student-athletes and number of full-time grant equivalencies awarded to female student-athletes (Table IV-4). These two measures differ in terms of percentages awarded to female and male athletes due to the proportion of the scholarships that reflect in state versus out-of-state tuition awards. In 98-99, the proportion of FGEs awarded to women was 37.3 percent. By 00-01, that proportion had increased to 40.9 percent. This increase is due primarily to an effort by the University to fund the scholarships for women’s sports to the maximum allowed by the NCAA especially for women’s basketball, and to the complete phasing-in of the women’s skiing and golf programs.
98–99 99–00 00–01 Actual Dollars: Dollars % Dollars % Dollars % Awarded to male athletes 1,020,539 63.1 1,069,348 59.6 1,122,609 58.5 Awarded to female athletes 597,163 36.9 726,171 40.4 795,958 41.5 Total 1,617,702 100.0 1,795,519 100.0 1,918,567 100.0 Full-Time Grant Equivalencies (FGE)*: Number % Number % Number % Awarded to male athletes 91.08 62.7 91.86 60.4 92.21 59.1 Awarded to females athletes 54.24 37.3 60.35 39.6 63.92 40.9 Total awarded 145.32 100.0 152.21 100.0 156.13 100.0 Recruiting Expenses:
Recruiting expenses at MSU have fluctuated over the past three years; however, the proportion of these expenses attributable to women’s teams steadily declined from 35.9 percent in 98-99 to 31 percent in 00-01. While there is a natural tendency for variability in recruiting expenses due to student-athlete attrition and team composition, a steady decline in the proportion of recruiting expenses attributable to the women’s sports is worth noting. Both women’s and men’s teams recruit regionally as well as nationally, and in some limited cases, internationally in order to be competitive. However, recruiting budgets for women’s programs should be further addressed by the Director of Intercollegiate Athletics to determine whether this is a factor limiting the success of the women’s sports programs. (See Table IV-5)
98–99 99–00 00–01 Dollars % Dollars % Dollars % Men’s teams 129,523 64.1 192,003 66.9 170,978 69.0 Women’s teams 72,470 35.9 95,142 33.1 76,657 31.0 Total 201,993 100.0 287,145 100.0 247,635 100.0
Discussions with head coaches for men’s and women’s sports did not indicate that the recruiting budgets were inequitable; year-to-year variations in the recruiting needs are to be expected. Achieving proportionality in the recruiting expenses for the sake of gender equity only, rather than being needs-based, should not be a specific objective of the University. The subcommittee concluded that head coaches should have the discretion to utilize all expenses, including recruitment, travel, and equipment, to best meet the needs of the team to be competitive at the NCAA level.
Operating Expenses: A comparison of travel and equipment expenses only is provided in Table IV-6. In 00-01, the proportions spent by men’s and women’s sports were in close proportion to the athletic participation. In 99-00 men’s sports accounted for a much higher percentage. The subcommittee felt that while the year-to-year variations in the proportions spent by women’s and men’s sports are worth noting, travel and equipment needs differ by year and a better indicator may be the average over the three-year period. From 98-01, the total expenses for travel and equipment averaged 55 percent for men’s sports and 45 percent for women’s sports.
Table IV-6 98–99 99–00 00–01 Dollars % Dollars % Dollars % All men’s sports 379,731 52.1 $418,484 58.3 436,763 54.6 All women’s sports 348,573 47.9 $299,924 41.7 363,302 45.4 Total 728,304 100.0 $718,408 100.0 800,065 100.0 Coaching Salaries and Opportunities: For assistant coaches, the total dollars for women’s teams accounted for only 31 percent of the assistant coach salaries in 00-01, down from 44 percent in 98-99. This low proportion for women’s teams is due to both a lower average salary per FTE and fewer FTEs. Assistant coaches of women’s teams received on average 80-85% of the salary per FTE of their counterparts for the men’s teams. Thus, in the area of head coach and assistant coach salaries the record on gender equity is mixed. While the total dollars allocated for head coach salaries has increased to be in proportion to the gender equity percentages, the total dollars for salaries for assistant coaches are not in proportion to student-athlete participation rates. Furthermore, the average salaries for both head coaches and assistant coaches for women’s teams lags behind the comparable salaries for men’s sports.
98–99 99–00 00–01 Dollars per FTE FTE Dollars per FTE FTE Dollars per FTE FTE Head Coaches: Men’s teams 55,583 3.79 62,709 3.25 61,603 3.50 Women’s teams 41,006 4.80 42,541 5.09 39,845 4.84 Assistant Coaches: Men’s teams 31,046 11.27 31,647 12.00 31,662 13.25 Women’s teams 25,765 5.94 25,673 6.00 26,145 7.50 In the area of coaching opportunities, in 2000-01 the University employed nine male head coaches and one female head coach. In 1998-99, eight of the head coaches were male and two head coaches were females. The University is committed to increasing this number further; the number of female head coaches has returned to two in 2001-02 for women’s basketball and women’s tennis.
For assistant coaches of men’s teams, one of the sixteen coaches was female in 2000-01, compared to none in 1998-99 and 1999-00. For the women’s teams, three of the eight assistant coaches were female in 1998-99; this increased to five, out of a total of ten, in 2000-01. Thus, the University has increased both the number of assistant coaches for women’s sports and the number of female assistant coaching opportunities in 2000-01.
3. Using the program area checklist for gender issues provided, please: (a) describe how the institution has ensured a complete study of each of these areas, (b) provide data demonstrating the institution's status/commitment, including resource allocation, across each of the areas, and (c) explain how the institution's future plan for gender issues addresses each of the areas. [Note: The institution may want to refer to the equitable medical care section of the NCAA Sports Medicine Guideline No. 1-A as a guide in responding to Item No. 9 of the program area checklist.]
Please refer to Attachment No. 2, Program Areas to Be Reviewed for Gender Issues, at the end of this section. The University’s new Equity Plan for Athletics in conjunction with the University’s Athletics Committee is providing the oversight for continued compliance with the gender issues discussed in this appendix.
4.Please provide a written, stand-alone institutional plan for addressing gender equity for the future in the intercollegiate athletics program. The plan shall include measurable goals the institution intends to achieve, steps the institution will take to achieve those goals, persons responsible, timetables, and means for funding implementation of the plan. [Note: Please see Appendix B, Page 52 for an example format outlining all required elements of a plan.]
Please refer to Appendix IV-B for the Equity Plan for Intercollegiate Athletics 2002-2007.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||