Trustees hear athletics compliance review; campuses report level-3 violations and UT Martin reports level-2 resolutions

Trustees on the University of Tennessee System Audit and Compliance Committee received the system's annual athletics compliance summary and copies of detailed campus reports required by board policy.

Ryan Stinnett summarized the required four components of the policy and assessed that the compliance reporting structures at UT Knoxville, UT Chattanooga and UT Martin are appropriate and consistent with NCAA best practices. "It is my assessment that at each of those 3 campuses, the compliance reporting structure is appropriate and consistent with best practices," Stinnett said.

Stinnett told trustees that each campus's compliance officer has a dotted-line reporting relationship external to the athletics director so concerns can be raised directly to the campus faculty athletics representative or the chancellor. He also said the campuses maintain written processes and training for reporting and investigating NCAA rules matters, and noted cooperation between athletics compliance offices and the Office of General Counsel.

Campus staffing and violations noted in the presentation included: - UT Chattanooga: two full-time athletics compliance employees (above the conference average); five level-3 violations reported for the calendar year. - UT Knoxville: seven full-time athletics compliance employees (compared with a high of 10 in the Southeastern Conference); four level-3 violations reported for the calendar year. - UT Martin: one full-time athletics compliance employee (below peer average); three level-3 violations reported and multiple level-2 violations arising from an NCAA investigation of the softball and women's soccer programs that resulted in a negotiated resolution.

Chancellor Freeman told trustees UT Martin added a graduate assistant in response to the investigation and is searching for a full-time compliance hire to reach peer levels. "We are right now, in search of a full time person for the role and hope to have them hired and, within the next year or so," Freeman said.

Stinnett emphasized that level-3 violations are typically technical, isolated and provide minimal advantage and that self-reporting and self-investigation demonstrate a functioning compliance operation. He also warned the committee the college-athletics landscape is changing: litigation settlements and new oversight and rules for name, image and likeness (NIL) compensation are creating a different compliance environment that will require continued attention and potential adjustments.

No formal votes on athletics policy were taken at the meeting. Trustees were provided the full campus reports in their committee materials and Stinnett invited questions about the materials.