Intercollegiate Athletics: Four-Year Colleges' Experiences Adding and
Discontinuing Teams (Letter Report, 03/08/2001, GAO/GAO-01-297).

The number of women participating in intercollegiate athletics at 4-year
colleges and universities increased substantially between school years
1981-82 and 1998-99, while the number of men participating increased
more modestly. The total number of women's teams increased by 3,784
teams, compared to an increase of 36 men's teams. In all, 963 schools
added teams and 307 discontinued teams since 1992-93. The two factors
cited most often as greatly influencing the decision to add or
discontinue teams were the need to address student interest in
particular sports and the need to meet gender equity goals and
requirements. Schools that discontinued men's teams also found the need
to reallocate the athletic budget to other sports. Colleges and
universities that discontinued a team typically took three months or
less between originating the proposal and making the final decision.
Most schools informed members of the campus community of the possibility
that the team would be discontinued, and most held meetings with campus
groups before making the final decision. Most schools offered to help
affected athletes transfer to other schools, and students receiving
athletics-related financial aid continued to receive financial aid for
at least some period after the team was disbanded. Schools that were
able to add one or more teams without discontinuing others used a
variety of strategies to increase athletic program revenue and contain
costs. Some schools relied on the institution's general fund, while
others used private sources and athletic facility rental fees.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  GAO-01-297
     TITLE:  Intercollegiate Athletics: Four-Year Colleges' Experiences
	     Adding and Discontinuing Teams
      DATE:  03/08/2001
   SUBJECT:  Sports
	     Statistical data
	     Women
	     Decision making
	     College students
	     Colleges and universities

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Testimony.                                               **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-01-297

Report to Congressional Requesters

March 2001 INTERCOLLEGIATE ATHLETICS

Four- Year Colleges' Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

GAO- 01- 297

Letter 3 Appendixes Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 32

Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments 35 Related GAO Products
36 Tables Table 1: Change in Number of Women Participants for NAIA and

NCAA Schools 9 Table 2: Change in Number of Men Participants for NAIA and
NCAA

Schools 10 Table 3: Change in Number of Women's Teams for NAIA and

NCAA Schools 12 Table 4: Change in Number of Men's Teams for NAIA and NCAA
Schools 13

Table 5: Percentage of 4- Year Schools Adding and Discontinuing
Intercollegiate Sports Teams, School Years 1992– 93 to 1999–
2000 16 Table 6: Per- School Average Estimated Percentage Change in Total

Intercollegiate Athletic Expenditures From the Most Recent Addition or
Discontinuation of a Team 21 Table 7: Average Estimated Percentage Change in
Total

Intercollegiate Athletic Expenditures From Recent Additions or
Discontinuations of Selected Teams 22 Table 8: Funding Sources Used by
Schools That Added Teams Without Discontinuing Others 26 Table 9: Selected
Characteristics of Schools Visited 27 Table 10: Factors Facilitating
Athletic Program Expansion at the Schools Visited 28

Figures Figure 1: Estimated Numbers of Participants in Intercollegiate
Athletics at 4- Year Colleges and Universities, School Years 1981– 82
Through 1998– 99 8

Figure 2: Number of Schools Adding and Discontinuing Men's and Women's
Intercollegiate Sports Teams, School Years 1992– 93 to 1999–
2000 15

Figure 3: Factors Reported by Schools That Greatly or Very Greatly Affected
the Decision to Add Teams 17

Figure 4: Factors Reported by Schools That Greatly or Very Greatly Affected
the Decision to Discontinue Teams 19

Abbreviations

NAIA National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics NCAA National
Collegiate Athletic Association

Lett er

March 8, 2001 The Honorable James Jeffords Chairman Committee on Health,
Education, Labor and Pensions United States Senate

The Honorable Edward Kennedy Ranking Member Committee on Health, Education,
Labor and Pensions United States Senate

The Honorable John Boehner Chairman Committee on Education and the Workforce
House of Representatives

The Honorable George Miller Ranking Democratic Member Committee on Education
and the Workforce House of Representatives

About 400, 000 American undergraduate college and university students
participate in intercollegiate athletics each year. During the last 2
decades, the number of college athletes and the sports in which they
participate have changed markedly. Colleges and universities across the
country have added many sports teams and discontinued others. In response to
these changes, the Congress included provisions in the Higher Education

Amendments of 1998 that require GAO to study participation in athletics,
including schools' decisions to add or discontinue sports teams. While the
mandate also required information on high school and 2- year college
athletics, because of limited readily available information and the
difficulty of collecting comparable information from these schools, as
agreed with your offices, we focused only on 4- year intercollegiate
athletics. This report answers the following questions:

? How did the number of men's and women's intercollegiate sports
participants and teams at 4- year colleges and universities change in the 2
decades since the1981– 82 school year?

? How many colleges and universities added and discontinued teams since the
1992– 93 school year, and what influenced their most recent decisions
to add and discontinue teams?

? How did colleges and universities make and implement decisions to
discontinue intercollegiate sports teams?

? When colleges and universities added teams, what types of strategies did
they use to avoid discontinuing sports teams or severely reducing their
funding?

To determine changes in the numbers of participants and teams at 4- year
colleges and universities, we obtained statistics from the two largest
national intercollegiate sports associations for 4- year colleges and
universities- the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) and the
National Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA). Information for
these schools covered 18 years- school years 1981– 82 through
1998– 99.

Although these data are unverified, they are widely used by researchers to
study this topic. To gather information to respond to the other questions,
we sent a questionnaire covering the 1992– 93 to 1999– 2000
school years to athletic directors at all 1, 310 4- year schools that belong
to one of these two associations. We received responses from 91 percent of
these schools. For detailed information on schools' experiences in
attempting to add sports teams without substantially reducing opportunities
for other athletes, we also visited four colleges and universities. For
details about our scope and

methodology, see appendix I. Our work was done between February and December
2000 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Results in Brief The number of women participating in intercollegiate
athletics at 4- year colleges and universities increased substantially- from
90,000 to 163,000-

between school years 1981– 82 and 1998– 99, while the number of
men participating increased more modestly- from 220,000 to 232, 000. Women's
athletic participation grew at more than twice the rate of their growth in
undergraduate enrollment, while men's participation more closely matched

their growth in undergraduate enrollment. The total number of women's teams
increased from 5,695 to 9, 479, a gain of 3,784 teams, compared to an
increase from 9,113 to 9,149 teams for men, a gain of 36 teams. By
1998– 99, women had 330 more teams than men. For both men and women,
soccer had the largest net gain in the number of teams. Not all sports saw
net gains. Several women's sports and more than a dozen men's sports
experienced net decreases in the number of teams. For women, the largest

net decreases in number of teams occurred in gymnastics; for men, the
largest decreases were in wrestling.

In all, 963 schools added teams and 307 discontinued teams since 1992–
93. Most were able to add teams- usually women's teams- without
discontinuing any teams. Among the colleges and universities that added a
women's team, the two factors cited most often as greatly influencing the

decision were the need to address student interest in particular sports and
the need to meet gender equity goals or requirements. Similarly, schools
that discontinued a men's team cited a lack of student interest in the sport

and gender equity concerns as the factors greatly influencing their
decision, as well as the need to reallocate the athletic budget to other
sports. The relative importance of these factors varied by size of the
athletic program. For example, in schools with large intercollegiate sports
programs, meeting gender equity goals and requirements was the factor

most often cited as influencing decisions to discontinue men's teams, while
in schools with small programs, lack of student interest was cited most
often.

Colleges and universities that discontinued a team typically took 3 months
or less between originating the proposal and making the final decision. Most
schools informed the members of the campus community of the possibility that
the team would be discontinued, and most held meetings with campus groups
before making the final decision. Schools with large athletic programs were
more likely to include groups such as alumni. Most schools offered to help
affected athletes transfer to other schools, and

students receiving athletics- related financial aid- particularly students
at larger schools- continued to receive financial aid for at least some
period after the team was disbanded. Schools that were able to add one or
more teams without discontinuing others used a variety of strategies to
increase athletic program revenue and contain costs. Schools with smaller
athletic programs typically relied on additional support from the
institution's general fund, while those with larger programs more often used
revenue from other sources, such as donations from private sources and
athletic facility rental fees. Schools we

visited also sought to contain costs by, for example, hiring a coach who
assumed teaching responsibilities to replace a full- time faculty member.

We provided the Department of Education a draft of this report for comment,
and it did not provide comments.

Background Although intercollegiate sports may bring to mind nationally
televised football and basketball games, 4- year schools' intercollegiate
sports

programs vary widely, from small programs involving fewer than 10 teams with
expenditures of less than $1 million to large programs with more than 900
student- athletes and expenditures in excess of $50 million. At many
schools, intercollegiate athletic competition serves primarily to meet the
needs of student- athletes- to give them opportunities to develop their
athletic ability as they pursue their courses of study. Schools also view
intercollegiate athletics as a means of recruiting prospective students. At
schools with large athletic programs, sports serve as an important focal

point for students, faculty and staff, alumni, surrounding communities, and
the national television audience.

Typically, schools with the largest number of athletic programs and
facilities belong to Division I- A of the NCAA, and those with smaller
programs are members of NCAA Divisions II or III or the second major
national collegiate association, NAIA. Most 4- year postsecondary
institutions with intercollegiate athletic programs participate in one of
these two associations. NCAA, the larger, administers intercollegiate

athletics for over 1,000 4- year (baccalaureate degree- granting) schools.
Division I member schools are further divided into three categories- I- A,
IAA, and I- AAA- with those that have larger football programs generally
placed in I- A and those without football programs in I- AAA. Division I- AA
schools sponsor football but are not subject to the spectator attendance
requirements that apply to Division I- A schools. In April 2000, NAIA
consisted of 330 member institutions. The NAIA does not have divisions
except for basketball and football, which each have Divisions I and II.

Although no federal monies fund intercollegiate sports programs, federal
involvement has arisen in part as a result of civil rights legislation. For
example, at schools receiving federal financial assistance, all education

programs and activities- including intercollegiate athletic programs- are
subject to title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, which prohibits
discrimination on the basis of sex. 1 Federal regulations implementing title
IX require that men and women be provided equitable opportunities to
participate in intercollegiate athletics, and equitable scholarships,
facilities,

equipment, supplies, and other benefits. 2 The Department of Education's 1
20 U. S. C. 1681- 1688. 2 For details, see 34 CFR 106.41; Department of
Education, Office for Civil Rights, Clarification of Intercollegiate
Athletics Policy Guidance: The Three- Part Test (Jan. 16, 1996); and
Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, Dear Colleague letter from
Norma Cantu regarding athletic scholarships (Jul. 23, 1998).

Office for Civil Rights assesses schools' compliance with these
requirements. To comply with requirements concerning equitable opportunities
to participate in intercollegiate sports, schools must meet any one of the
three following criteria, which Education refers to as parts of a three-
part test: (1) intercollegiate- level participation opportunities for male
and female students are provided in numbers substantially proportionate to
their respective enrollments, or (2) the institution can show a history and
continuing practice of program expansion that is

demonstrably responsive to the developing interests and abilities of the
members of the underrepresented gender, or (3) it can be demonstrated that
the interests and abilities of the members of the underrepresented gender
have been fully and effectively accommodated by the present program. 3

Women Made Since the early 1980s, the number of women participating in
intercollegiate

Substantial Gains in sports has increased substantially. Although male
athletes still outnumber

their female counterparts, the growth in their programs has been much
Intercollegiate Sports

smaller and the number of women's teams now exceeds the number of
Participation

men's teams. The percentage of male undergraduates who participate in
intercollegiate athletics is essentially the same as it was in 1981–
82, while the percentage of women has increased considerably.

Gap Between Female and The rapid growth in women's participation in
intercollegiate sports since Male Participants Has

1981– 82 has narrowed the gap between genders (see fig. 1). The number
of Narrowed

women in intercollegiate sports increased by 81 percent (from 90,000 to
163,000 participants) and the number of men increased by 5 percent (from
220,000 to 232,000 participants) between 1981– 82 and 1998– 99.
The growth in women's participation was fastest during the early 1980s and
in the 1990s. Men's participation also grew in the early 1980s, but peaked
in 1985– 86. Since then, it decreased modestly, then fluctuated within
a narrow range. 3 The term “participation opportunities” in part
one of the three- part test refers to the number of athletes on each team,
not numbers of teams. For more information concerning the three- part test
and Office for Civil Rights enforcement of title IX, see Gender Equity:
Men's and Women's Participation in Higher Education (GAO- 01- 128, Dec. 15,
2000).

Figure 1: Estimated Numbers of Participants in Intercollegiate Athletics at
4- Year Colleges and Universities, School Years 1981– 82 Through
1998– 99

Thousands

300 Men Women

250 200 150 100

50 0

82 83

84 85

86 87

88 89

90 91

92 93

94 95

96 97

98 99

1981- 1982- 1983- 1984- 1985- 1986- 1987- 1988- 1989- 1990- 1991- 1992-
1993- 1994- 1995- 1996- 1997- 1998- Note: Intercollegiate athletic
participants represent the sum of the number of athletes on each team at
each school. The number of participants is overstated to the extent that
some athletes participate on more than one team and some schools are members
of both NAIA and NCAA. Source: GAO analysis of NCAA and NAIA participation
statistics. The growth in the number of women athletes may reflect, in part,
the rapid

increase in women's undergraduate enrollment. From 1981– 82 to
1998– 99 women's undergraduate enrollment grew by 30 percent, compared
to 6 percent for men. However, women's participation also grew as an overall

percentage of women undergraduates. Women athletes made up 3.9 percent of
women undergraduates in 1981– 82 and 5.5 percent in 1998– 99. In

contrast, the portion of undergraduate men participating in athletics
remained relatively steady, starting and ending the period at 9. 3 percent.
4 The trends in the number of women participants varied by sport. For
example, table 1 shows that the biggest increase in the number of women
participants- about 18,000- was in soccer. Though participation increased in
most sports, five sports reported decreases in participation. The biggest
decline occurred in gymnastics, with nearly 700 fewer women gymnasts in
1998– 99 than in 1981– 82.

Table 1: Change in Number of Women Participants for NAIA and NCAA Schools
Change in number of

Percentage Sport 1981– 82 1998– 99

participants change

Soccer 1, 855 19,987 18, 132 977% Indoor track 6, 026 15,927 9, 901 164
Outdoor track 11, 933 19,611 7, 678 64 Cross- country 5, 560 13,048 7, 488
135 Softball 10, 816 17, 320 6, 504 60 Rowing 1, 187 5,628 4, 441 374
Basketball 12, 699 17, 118 4, 419 35 Volleyball 11, 762 15,603 3, 841 33
Swimming 6,570 10, 086 3, 516 54 Golf 1, 060 3, 140 2, 080 196 Lacrosse
2,648 4, 749 2,101 79 Tennis 7,849 9, 319 1, 470 19 Water polo 19 746 727 3,
826 Ice hockey 336 900 564 168 Equestrian 101 633 532 527 Skiing 359 535 176
49 Squash 238 365 127 53 Rifle 90 184 94 104 Synchronized swimming 49 108 59
120

4 These participation rates were calculated using full- time undergraduate
enrollment figures for fall 1998 at all 4- year colleges and universities
whether or not they were members of NCAA or NAIA.

(Continued From Previous Page)

Change in number of

Percentage Sport 1981– 82 1998– 99

participants change

Archery 75 106 31 41 Badminton 141 94 -47 -33 Bowling 88 20 -68 -77 Fencing
765 594 -171 -22 Field hockey 5, 701 5,472 -229 -4 Gymnastics 2,173 1, 490
-683 -31

Total 90,100 162, 783 72,683 81%

Note: Athletes who participate in more than one intercollegiate sport are
counted as participants in each sport. Information for schools that were
members of both NAIA and NCAA was counted only once to avoid overstating the
number of participants at these schools. This table excludes sports that
were neither championship nor emerging NCAA sports in 1998– 99. In
1981– 82, this represented 222 participants in six sports- cricket,
judo, pistol, polo, rugby, and sailing. Source: GAO analysis of NCAA and
NAIA participation statistics.

In men's sports, increases and decreases were more evenly balanced, with
increases in the number of participants in 14 sports and decreases in 12. As
shown in table 2, the greatest increase in numbers of participants occurred
in football, with about 7,200 more players. Football also had the greatest
number of participants- approximately 60,000, or about twice as many as

the next largest sport. Wrestling experienced the largest decrease in
participation- a drop of more than 2,600 participants.

Table 2: Change in Number of Men Participants for NAIA and NCAA Schools
Change in number of

Percentage Sport 1981– 82 1998– 99

participants change

Football 53, 213 60, 412 7,199 14% Baseball 24, 329 29, 781 5,452 22 Indoor
track 15, 568 17, 605 2,037 13 Lacrosse 4, 193 6, 193 2, 000 48 Soccer 19,
647 21, 579 1,932 10 Basketball 17, 368 18, 920 1,552 9 Rowing 2,053 2,444
391 19 Equestrian 20 371 351 1, 755 Volleyball 878 1,124 246 28 Sailing 243
288 45 19

(Continued From Previous Page)

Change in number of

Percentage Sport 1981– 82 1998– 99

participants change

Bowling 103 142 39 38 Golf 8,935 8,977 42 Less than 1 Archery 60 63 3 5
Squash 346 347 1 Less than 1 Badminton 38 26 -12 -32 Water polo 1,002 907
-95 -9 Ice hockey 3,831 3,702 -129 -3 Cross- country 12, 158 12, 007 -151 -1
Skiing 856 574 -282 -33 Rifle 779 343 -436 -56 Fencing 1,419 646 -773 -54
Swimming 8,582 7,639 -943 -11 Gymnastics 1,397 375 -1,022 -73 Tennis 9,960
8,555 -1,405 -14 Outdoor track 23, 986 22, 280 -1,706 -7 Wrestling 9,214
6,566 -2,648 -29

Total 220,178 231,866 11,688 5%

Note: Athletes who participate in more than one intercollegiate sport are
counted as participants in each sport. Information for schools that were
members of both NAIA and NCAA was counted only once to avoid overstating the
number of participants at these schools. This table excludes sports that
were neither championship nor emerging NCAA sports in 1998– 99. In
1981– 82, this represented 836 participants in 11 sports- boxing,
cricket, 150- pound football, judo, pistol, polo, rugby, softball, trap/
skeet, ultimate Frisbee , and weightlifting.

Source: GAO analysis of NCAA and NAIA participation statistics.

Women's Teams Outnumber Though the number of male participants was greater
than the number of

Men's Teams female participants in 1998– 99, there were 330 more
women's teams than

men's teams. The average women's team had fewer athletes than the average
men's team. From 1981– 82 to 1998– 99, the number of women's
intercollegiate sports teams increased by 66 percent (from 5,695 to 9,479
teams). Most sports saw an increase in the number of teams, with the largest
increase occurring in women's soccer, where the number of teams rose from 80
to 926. The greatest decrease occurred in gymnastics, where the number of
teams fell from 190 to 90 (see table 3).

Table 3: Change in Number of Women's Teams for NAIA and NCAA Schools Change
in number of

Percentage Sport 1981– 82 1998– 99

teams change

Soccer 80 926 846 1,058% Cross- country 496 1,012 516 104 Softball 555 987
432 78 Volleyball 812 1,162 350 43 Indoor track 288 592 304 106 Basketball
910 1, 212 302 33 Golf 125 402 277 222 Tennis 735 983 248 34 Outdoor track
524 767 243 46 Lacrosse 105 213 108 103 Swimming 364 465 101 28 Rowing 43
122 79 184 Water polo 1 37 36 3, 600 Equestrian 7 41 34 486 Rifle 16 44 28
175 Ice hockey 17 40 23 135 Skiing 33 44 11 33 Squash 16 27 11 69
Synchronized swimming 3 7 4 133 Badminton 11 10 -1 -9 Archery 9 6 -3 -33
Bowling 11 5 -6 -55 Field hockey 268 240 -28 -10 Fencing 76 45 -31 -41
Gymnastics 190 90 -100 -53

Total 5, 695 9, 479 3, 784 66%

Note: Information about participants at schools that were members of both
NAIA and NCAA was counted only once to avoid overstating the number of teams
sponsored by these schools. This table excludes sports that were neither
championship nor emerging NCAA sports in 1998– 99. In 1981– 82,
this represented 18 teams in six sports- cricket, judo, pistol, polo, rugby,
and sailing.

Source: GAO analysis of NCAA and NAIA participation statistics.

Half of men's sports saw a decline in the number of teams. Two sports had no
change and the remaining sports (nearly half) had an increase in the number
of teams. As with women's sports, the largest increase came in

soccer (135 new teams). Football, the sport that saw the largest increase in
the number of participants, saw a decrease of 37 teams, mainly from NAIA
schools. Gymnastics, fencing, and rifle saw the largest percentage decline

in the number of teams. The largest decrease in the number of teams was in
wrestling (171 teams) (see table 4).

Table 4: Change in Number of Men's Teams for NAIA and NCAA Schools Change in
number of

Percentage Sport 1981– 82 1998– 99

teams change

Soccer 744 879 135 18% Baseball 926 1,011 85 9 Basketball 1,127 1, 209 82 7
Golf 805 867 62 8 Lacrosse 138 197 59 43 Cross- country 916 947 31 3
Equestrian 2 33 31 1, 550 Indoor track 533 558 25 5 Rowing 48 70 22 46
Volleyball 63 79 16 25 Sailing 15 22 7 47 Squash 21 21 0 0 Badminton 4 4 0 0
Archery 7 6 -1 -14 Bowling 13 10 -3 -23 Water polo 49 43 -6 -12 Ice hockey
141 131 -10 -7 Skiing 55 40 -15 -27 Swimming 415 390 -25 -6 Outdoor track
762 735 -27 -4 Football a 705 668 -37 -5 Fencing 79 37 -42 -53 Rifle 83 41
-42 -51 Gymnastics 82 26 -56 -68 Tennis 952 868 -84 -9 Wrestling 428 257
-171 -40

Total 9, 113 9,149 36 0. 4%

Note: Information for schools that were members of both NAIA and NCAA was
counted only once to avoid overstating the number of teams sponsored by
these schools. This table excludes sports that were neither championship nor
emerging NCAA sports in 1998– 99. In 1981– 82, this represented
30 teams in 11 sports- boxing, cricket, 150- pound football, judo, pistol,
polo, rugby, softball, trap/ skeet, ultimate Frisbee , and weightlifting. a
Excludes 150- pound football. Source: GAO analysis of NCAA and NAIA
participation statistics.

Experiences Adding About 80 percent of schools added one or more women's
sports teams and Discontinuing during the 1992– 93 to 1999– 2000
period, and more than two- thirds did so

without discontinuing any teams. Student interest in a particular sport was
Teams Varied Among

often cited as an influence behind many of these decisions. Gender equity
Schools With DifferentSized considerations also often influenced decisions
to add women's teams and Athletic discontinue men's teams, particularly at
schools with large athletic programs. The financial impact of adding or
discontinuing teams varied

Programs widely by size of program and by sport. Most Schools Added Overall,
among the 1,191 college and universities responding to the Women's Teams
Without

questionnaire, 963 added at least one team and 307 discontinued at least
Discontinuing Teams one (see fig. 2). However, of the 948 schools that added
one or more women's teams, 72 percent did so without discontinuing any
teams. Only

about 16 percent of all respondents neither added nor discontinued a team
from 1992– 93 through 1999– 2000. In total, schools added nearly
three times as many women's teams as men's teams during this period- 1,919
teams for women, compared with 702 for men. They discontinued more than
twice as many men's teams- 386 teams for men, 150 for women.

Figure 2: Number of Schools Adding and Discontinuing Men's and Women's
Intercollegiate Sports Teams, School Years 1992– 93 to 1999–
2000

1,200 Men Only Both 1,000

Women Only

15

800

391

600 400

557

200

184 88

0

35

Add Discontinue Note: Some schools both added and discontinued teams. Those
schools are represented in both columns. Source: GAO survey of collegiate
athletic directors. Schools with smaller programs were more likely to add
men's teams. Only about 3 percent of the schools with the largest
intercollegiate athletic programs (NCAA Division I- A) added one or more
men's teams, compared

with 39 percent for NCAA Division III schools and 54 percent of NAIA schools
(see table 5).

Table 5: Percentage of 4- Year Schools Adding and Discontinuing
Intercollegiate Sports Teams, School Years 1992– 93 to 1999–
2000 NCAA division

All Activity

I- A I- AA I- AAA II III NAIA respondents Add men's team 3% 17% 29% 32% 39%
54% 34% Add women's team 88 93 81 72 79 80 80 Discontinue men's team 32 25
35 27 18 19 23

Discontinue women's team 6 6 5 13 9 15 10

Note: A total of 1,191 schools responded to the questionnaire, including 110
in NCAA Division I- A, 109 in I- AA, 79 in I- AAA, 275 in II, 388 in III,
and 281 in NAIA. The table includes data from 51 respondents whose schools
were members of both NCAA and NAIA. Their responses are reflected both in
the NAIA and applicable NCAA columns. Source: GAO survey of collegiate
athletic directors.

Addition of Teams Often The level of student interest was the factor schools
cited most often as

Influenced by Student greatly or very greatly influencing their most recent
decision to add both men's and women's teams (see fig. 3). 5 Overall, 52
percent of the Interest, Among Other

respondents that had added a women's sports team indicated that student
Factors interest was a great or very great influence in the decision, and
nearly as many schools (47 percent) cited the need to meet gender equity
goals or requirements. Other factors cited less frequently when adding a
women's

team included the availability of adequate facilities and sufficient
equipment, the growth in the number of teams to compete against, community
interest, and enough improvement in a club team's skill to compete at the
varsity intercollegiate level. 6 5 Schools nearly always cited multiple
factors as affecting their decision. Less than 5 percent cited only one
factor; two- thirds of respondents cited four or more. 6 Club teams may
compete with teams from other schools, but are not designated as varsity
intercollegiate teams by the college or athletic association.

Figure 3: Factors Reported by Schools That Greatly or Very Greatly Affected
the Decision to Add Teams

Sufficient 49

Student Interest 52

Gender Equity 4

Goals/ Requirements 47

32 Adequate Facilities

30 Other Schools

11 Added Sport

21 Sufficient

23 Community Interest

19 Club Team's

11 Skill Improved

12 Nongender Equity

6 Goals/ Requirments

12 Conference

15 Requirement

10 12 Budget Increased

9 Opportunity to

0 Reallocate Budget

7 to New Sport

Men 17 Other

Women 10

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Percentage Source: GAO survey of collegiate athletic directors.

The factors that most influenced recent decisions to add women's teams
varied by the size of a school's intercollegiate athletic programs. For
example, respondents from NCAA Division I- A schools compared to Division
III schools more often cited gender equity considerations (82 percent versus
35 percent) and community interest (35 percent versus 12 percent) as a great
or very great influence. Division III schools cited the availability of
adequate facilities and sufficient equipment (30 percent, compared with 24
percent in Division I- A.) Both types of schools cited

student interest about as often (60 percent versus 55 percent). For men's
sports, the pattern of which factors most influenced schools' decisions to
add a team was somewhat different, particularly with regard to gender equity
goals or requirements. As was the case for the addition of women's teams,
student interest was the factor cited most often (49 percent) as influencing
the addition of men's teams. After student interest, the factor cited most
often was the availability of sufficient facilities and adequate equipment
(32 percent), followed by community interest (23 percent). Gender equity
considerations, an influential factor for adding a women's team, was cited
by only 4 percent of schools that had added a men's team.

Student Interest Also The level of student interest was the most often cited
factor in schools' Among Factors That most recent decisions to discontinue
men's and women's teams (see fig. 4). Influenced Decisions to Among the 272
responding schools that discontinued a men's team, 91 (33 Discontinue Teams
percent) cited lack of student interest as a great or very great influence,
83 (31 percent) cited the need to meet gender equity goals or requirements,
and 82 (30 percent) cited the need to reallocate budget resources to other
sports.

Figure 4: Factors Reported by Schools That Greatly or Very Greatly Affected
the Decision to Discontinue Teams

Insufficient 33

Student Interest 58

Gender Equity 31

Goals/ Requirements 6

17 Inadequate Facilities

24 Other Schools

11 Discontinued Sport

11 Insufficient

14 Community Interest

16 Team Not Competitive

19 30

Nongender Equity 9

Goals/ Requirments 2

Joined Conference That 7

Did Not Sponsor Sport 11

19 Budget Decreased

18 30 Resources Needed

16 for Other Sports

Men 15 Other

Women 15

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Percentage

Source: GAO survey of collegiate athletic directors.

Factors affecting decisions to discontinue men's teams varied with the size
of a school's program. Among schools with large intercollegiate athletic
programs, gender equity considerations more often figured as a great or very
great influence. At NCAA Division I- A schools, for example, a majority

(54 percent) of the respondents discontinuing a men's team cited gender
equity considerations as a great or very great influence. Insufficient
student interest in the sport was not often cited; only 6 percent of
respondents cited it as a great or very great influence. In contrast, among
NCAA Division III respondents, the absence of sufficient student interest in
the sport was the most often- cited factor (44 percent cited it as a great
or very great influence). The need to reallocate resources to other sports
was the next most often- cited factor (cited by 26 percent), followed by
decreases in the budget and gender equity considerations (each cited by 21
percent). 7

Decisions to discontinue a women's team were generally most often driven by
the level of student interest. Of the 123 schools that discontinued one or
more women's teams, 58 percent cited the lack of student interest as a great
or very great influence. The next most often- cited influences were the
team's inability to compete at the desired level and the absence of adequate
facilities and sufficient equipment.

Adding and Discontinuing The most recent addition of an intercollegiate team
increased the average

Teams Had Wi del y Var i ed school's total intercollegiate expenditures by
an estimated 6 percent, and Impact on Athletic Program

the most recent discontinuation of a team reduced expenditures by 4 percent.
8 In general, schools with larger intercollegiate programs Expenditures
experienced smaller percentage changes in their expenditures, as shown in
table 6. For example, adding a women's team at the NCAA Division I- A level

increased costs an average of 3 percent, compared to 5 percent for NCAA
Division III and 9 percent for NAIA. The comparable averages for recent
additions of men's teams were 2, 8, and 13 percent. 7 The proportion of
schools citing gender equity goals and requirements as greatly or very
greatly influencing the decision was 82, 81, 52, 49, 33, and 27 percent
respectively for NCAA Division I- A, I- AA, I- AAA, II, III, and NAIA
members that were not also members of NCAA. 8 The median values for schools'
estimates were a 3- percent increase in expenditures by adding teams and a
1- percent decrease by discontinuing teams.

Table 6: Per- School Average Estimated Percentage Change in Total
Intercollegiate Athletic Expenditures From the Most Recent Addition or
Discontinuation of a Team

Percentage increase (decrease) in expenditures Most recent team Most recent
team added discontinued

Average expenditures (in College's affiliation Men Women Men Women
thousands) a

NCAA Division I- A 2 b 3 (1)( 1) b $14, 266 Division I- AA 6 3 (1) (0) b
4,371 Division I- AAA 2 5 (4) (0) b 3,013 Division II 7 4 (3) (5) 1, 192
Division III 8 5 (3) (3) 529 NAIA 13 9 (7) (6) 460

Tot al (all schools) 8 5 (4) (4) $2, 712

a These are the average of schools' total intercollegiate expenditures in
the prior year. In some cases respondents indicated that their estimates
applied to some expenditures but not to others. For example, some
respondents provided figures for operating expenditures only. Figures do not
include capital expenditures or debt service. In about 15 percent of cases
respondents did not provide an estimate. In some cases schools begin
incurring expenses, such as coaches' salaries, for the new sport during the
year proceeding the first year of intercollegiate competition. b The
calculation is based on estimates from fewer than 10 respondents. Source:
GAO survey of collegiate athletic directors.

The effect of adding or discontinuing a team also varied by sport (see table
7). For example, schools estimated that adding women's soccer typically
increased expenditures by 6 percent, while adding football teams increased
expenditures by an average of 31 percent. Discontinuing men's tennis
decreased expenditures by an average of 2 percent, while discontinuing
football decreased expenditures an average of 24 percent.

Table 7: Average Estimated Percentage Change in Total Intercollegiate
Athletic Expenditures From Recent Additions or Discontinuations of Selected
Teams

Average of percentage increase (decrease) in

Number of Action taken

expenditures a respondents

Added women's soccer 6 228 Added women's golf 2 116 Added women's softball 7
101 Added women's lacrosse 6 45 Added men's golf 3 50 Added football 31 14
Discontinued men's tennis (2) 39 Discontinued men's wrestling (2) 38
Discontinued women's tennis (7) 25 Discontinued men's golf (2) 22
Discontinued men's outdoor track (2) 21 Discontinued football (24) 11 a
These are the average of schools' estimated percentage increase or decrease
in total intercollegiate expenditures. Source: GAO survey of collegiate
athletic directors.

Schools Typically The 307 responding schools that discontinued a team during
the 1992– 93 to Discontinued Teams

1999– 2000 period typically spent 3 months or less between making the
proposal to discontinue a team and making a final decision. Most schools
Quickly and Assisted informed the campus community of the proposed
discontinuation before Athletes in the the decision was final. Once the
decision was made to discontinue a team,

Transition however, most did not provide a written explanation for their
decision.

Most schools held meetings to discuss the proposal with groups in the campus
community. Schools with larger athletic programs more often included other
interested parties, such as alumni or members of booster clubs. Affected
athletes usually continued to receive athletic financial aid after the sport
was discontinued.

Time Spent Making the Most decisions to discontinue a team were considered
and implemented

Decision Was Generally within a few months following the initial proposal,
according to the

Less Than 3 Months responses from the colleges and universities concerning
the team they

most recently discontinued during the 1992– 93 to 1999– 2000
period. 9 The median of the reported amount of time between making such a
proposal to reaching a final decision was 2 months. In 38 percent of cases,
both the

proposal and the final decision came in the same month. In about 5 percent
of cases, the schools took more than a year to reach a final decision. 10
The amount of time before the team stopped participating was also brief. For
about one- third of the schools, the team had already stopped participating
before the final decision to discontinue the sport was made. For another 26
percent, participation stopped during the month the final decision was made.
For another 17 percent of the respondents, participation ended by the third
month following the final decision. Only about 5 percent allowed sports
teams to continue to play for a year or more

past the time when a final decision was made. In most cases the proposal to
discontinue the team came from within the athletic department, although
college administrations were a common source at schools with smaller
athletic programs. About 60 percent said the proposal originated with the
athletic department. At NCAA Division I- A schools, the figure was 83
percent. For NAIA and NCAA Division I- AAA schools, about one- third of the
proposals originated from the school administration. For example, at NAIA
schools that discontinued a sport, the athletic department initiated 46
percent of the proposals and school administration initiated 38 percent.
Similarly, at NCAA Division I- AAA

schools that discontinued a sport, athletic departments initiated 50 percent
of the proposals and the school administration initiated another 36 percent.
Members of Campus Most colleges and universities (186 of the 307 schools
discontinuing a Community Were Usually

team) informed the campus community of the possibility of discontinuing
Involved Before the Final the team before the decision was final. Large
schools, such as those in Decision Was Made

NCAA Division I- A, were most likely to use a press release to inform the
campus community of the possibility of discontinuing the sport. NCAA
Division III schools more often provided the information by mail to
individuals or used other means such as meetings with athletes and staff.

9 Of the 307 cases in which a school discontinued a team, 84 discontinued
both a men's and a women's team in the same month. We randomly selected
either the men's or the women's team for analysis. In most cases these were
men's and women's teams in the same sport.

10 These calculations are based on usable responses from 243 of the 307
schools that discontinued a team during this period.

Most of the schools discontinuing a team (64 percent) informed affected
athletes of the decision in the month it was finalized. About 20 percent of
these schools indicated that they informed the affected athletes of the
decision during the 3 months preceding the final decision. About 10 percent
of these schools indicated that they informed the affected student athletes
of a decision in the months following a final decision. Typically these
schools informed the athletes within a month or two. 11 Overall, less than
half (41 percent) of schools that discontinued a sports team provided a
written explanation. This varied somewhat by the size of schools' athletic
programs. NCAA Division I- A and I- AA schools were least

likely to provide a written explanation to affected athletes; about
onequarter of them did so. Members of NCAA Divisions II and III and NAIA
were more likely to provide a written explanation; about half did so.

More than two- thirds of the schools that discontinued intercollegiate
athletic teams did so without allowing an appeal of the decision. The
proportion of schools allowing an appeal varied little by size of schools'
athletic programs- from a low of 25 percent among Division I- AA schools to
a high of 36 percent among Division I- AAA schools. 12 Several schools

described their appeals process as a meeting with the athletic director.
Most schools, however, described appeals as meetings with school
administrators or organizational units outside the athletics department. For
example, schools allowed student- athletes to appeal to the dean of
students, athletic council, the school's president, or the board of
trustees.

One respondent described an appeal involving an open forum at which all
interested parties could speak; others provided opportunities for a written
appeal.

Assistance to Athletes Often About 80 percent of the schools (170 of the 212
responding schools that Included Continued

discontinued a team)- aside from Division III schools which are prohibited
Financial Aid and Help in from providing athletic financial aid- indicated
that they allowed their Transferring to Another

student- athletes to continue receiving aid even though the team was being
discontinued. This was most often the case at NCAA Division I schools;
School continued aid was available at 90 percent of these schools. This was
less 11 These calculations are based on responses from 167 schools that
informed the campus community of the possibility of the discontinuation of
the team in advance of a final

decision. 12 These calculations are based on responses from 291 schools.

often the case at Division II schools, where 72 percent of schools indicated
that student athletes could continue to receive aid. For about 86 percent of
the schools that continued to provide assistance, the aid was available
until the athlete graduated. At most of the rest, the aid was made available
for up

to 1 year. Among all NCAA and NAIA schools discontinuing a team, 86 percent
assisted affected athletes in transferring to another institution's
intercollegiate athletics program. However, affected athletes who remained
enrolled at the school did not necessarily have the opportunity to compete
in that sport at the club level. Only 41 percent gave the affected athletes
that opportunity. 13 Schools Pursued

A majority of the 1,191 school officials reported that they have been able
to Creative Strategies to

add one or more teams without discontinuing others. They used a variety of
strategies to do so, including obtaining funding from nonschool sources
Build Athletic and finding ways to contain costs. The four schools we
reviewed in depth Programs Without

used strategies that ranged from fundraising to awarding fewer Discontinuing
Teams

scholarships. Schools Relied More on The 693 schools that added one or more
intercollegiate athletic teams over Raising Revenue Than

the 1992– 93 to 1999– 2000 period without discontinuing a team
did so more Cutting Costs often by obtaining additional revenue than by
containing costs and reallocating revenue. Sources of funds tended to vary
with the size of the intercollegiate athletic program. As shown in table 8,
NCAA Division I- A

schools tended to rely on revenue from other sports and from outside
sources. Schools with smaller programs, particularly those in NCAA Division
III and NAIA, most often used additional funds from the institution's
general fund. In some cases, they reallocated existing resources by, for
example, trimming travel expenses for all teams and using the savings to
help fund the new team.

13 These calculations are based on responses from 280 schools.

Table 8: Funding Sources Used by Schools That Added Teams Without
Discontinuing Others

Percentage of schools obtaining funds through selected sources NCAA division
NAIA All Source I- A I- AA I- AAA II III General fund 37% 67% 63% 78% 83%
89% 77% Other outside sources 62 50 46 45 14 30 33 Reducing expenses/
reallocating funds 35 40 37 24 23 16 25

Revenue from other sports 71 36 27 18 2 10 18 Student activity fees 17 24 17
22 13 10 15 Endowment 14 625 4 55 Tuition waivers 19 4 10 2 0 2 4 State
legislature 10 6 2 6 0 1 3 Other 31155 5 76 Source: GAO survey responses
from 693 colleges and universities that added teams without discontinuing
others. This included 63 in NCAA Division I- A, 72 in I- AA, 41 in I- AAA,
130 in Division II, 243 in Division III, and 144 in NAIA.

Selected Schools Used a For more detailed information concerning how schools
added teams

Range of Creative Strategies without discontinuing opportunities for
athletes on other teams, we visited to Avoid Discontinuing

four colleges and universities to learn how they enhanced their athletic
Teams

programs. We selected these four because they represented various sizes of
schools and athletic programs, and different regions of the country (see
table 9). 14 They used combinations of innovative strategies that, as the
survey reported, placed greater emphasis on increasing athletic revenue than
on cutting costs in other programs. Fundraising strategies included renting
out athletic facilities, and cost- containment approaches included trimming
administrative expenditures. 14 One of the four schools had discontinued one
team, an indoor track team whose members all competed on other teams- cross-
country or outdoor track.

Table 9: Selected Characteristics of Schools Visited NCAA Division I- A I- A
I- AAA III Location Midwest Southeast Mid- Atlantic Pacific Northwest Type
of school Public Public Public Private

Number of teams added from school year 1992– 93 to 1999– 2000 4
3 4 3 Fall full- time undergraduate enrollment a 42, 000 15, 000 10, 000
2,000

Number of athletes b 932 374 363 238 Athletic department total expenditures
$73 million $33 million $8 million $1 million

Athletically related student aid awarded Yes Yes Yes No

Athletic program generated net revenue Yes Yes No No Football is part of the
program Yes Yes No Yes

a Undergraduate enrollment is for the fall 1998 semester and includes full-
time, baccalaureate degreeseeking students. b The number of athletes is an
unduplicated count in that athletes were counted only once, regardless

of the number of sports teams in which they participated. Source: Equity in
Athletic Disclosure Act Reports for school year1998– 99 (maintained by
each school) and responses from the four schools to GAO's survey of
collegiate athletic directors.

Though all four schools have unique characteristics, directors from each
athletic program articulated factors that were key to facilitating
successful program expansion without discontinuing teams. Table 10 lists
these factors. All four schools cited the first three factors and two of the
four schools cited the last factor. One of the athletic directors
acknowledged, however, that a “one size fits all” approach may
not be feasible and that these approaches may not apply to other schools.

Table 10: Factors Facilitating Athletic Program Expansion at the Schools
Visited Facilitating factor Example

President of institution or governing board is The Division III school
president takes an supportive of expanding athletic program interest in
gender equity in athletics. When without discontinuing sports teams.

the school planned to add women's rowing, the president requested the
addition of a men's rowing team as well. Athletic director's philosophy
emphasizes Adding women's teams at the Division IAAA increasing
participation opportunities for

school resulted in increased support both men and women, and believing that
services, such as athletic trainers, that what benefits one gender also
benefits the

benefit men and women athletes alike. other. Officials are able to identify
new funding

The smaller Division I- A school financed the sources. addition of three new
teams and upgrades

to the other 19 teams in part by employing innovative strategies such as
placing a portion of athletic department funds in investments that earned
better rates of return. Athletic program enjoys support of fans and

The single largest source of revenue at the community. larger Division I- A
school is ticket sales from its football program. Football is considered an
integral part of the university and the

local community.

Athletic directors also identified several specific revenue- generating
approaches for adding teams without discontinuing others.

Donations. The smaller Division I- A school revitalized a business
relationship with the chief executive officer of a local private firm. This
individual's prominence, in turn, encouraged financial support from the

rest of the business community. Substantial donations from fans and locally
based corporations also enabled the school to add new teams and build
facilities such as a new football stadium, a sports complex with a softball
field, a track, a soccer field, and a planned Olympic- sized pool.
Similarly, at the larger Division I- A school, large donations helped the
school to add

teams and increase the capacity of its football stadium, build a new
basketball and ice hockey arena, and upgrade locker facilities. Rental fees.
Another revenue- generating strategy was to rent out athletic facilities for
other purposes and use the fees to expand the athletic program. For example,
the football stadiums or basketball arenas at the Division I- A schools were
used to host cultural and entertainment events such as concerts, or to serve
as venues for prominent athletic events such

as a World Cup soccer match. In addition, the smaller Division I- A school
took advantage of its proximity to a prominent venue by letting the public
use the football stadium parking lot to accommodate overflow event parking;
the annual proceeds of $200, 000 were all allocated to the women's program.
At the Division III school, local high school teams rented the football
field for practice and special athletic events. In addition to focusing on
raising revenue, one athletic director told us that it was important to
maintain flexibility in the use of funds available to the athletic
department. For example, the larger Division I- A school's athletic
department requires that any earnings in excess of a specified rate of
return on endowment funds designated for specific teams be available for
general intercollegiate athletic department uses. This gives the athletic
director

greater flexibility in allocating resources. All four schools we visited
also took various steps to reduce current or avoid incurring additional
expenditures. These included the following strategies:

? Recruiting most prospective student- athletes via telephone rather than in
person,

? Denying requests for some teams to be elevated from club to varsity
status,

? Replacing a retiring full- time faculty member with a coach who also
assumed other administrative duties,

? Limiting the size of the football team roster,

? Trimming administrative costs, ? Not awarding the maximum number of
scholarships allowed, and

? Limiting team travel outside the region to one trip every 2 to 3 years to
minimize travel expenses. Another cost- containment strategy involved
establishing partnerships between the school and the local community. Such
partnerships reflected the schools' ability to capitalize on the unique
characteristics of their geographic location. For example, the larger
Division I- A school planned to undertake a cost- sharing project with the
city and local school district to build a boathouse on a local river that
would accommodate rowing teams

from the university, high school, and general public. The smaller Division
IA school teamed with a local hospital offering a nationally recognized
sports medicine program. Through the arrangement, the hospital provides free
services, including a portable medical facility at sports events and
physical screenings for each athlete. The Division III school formed a

partnership with a locally based professional men's basketball team. Under
the agreement, the team was able to practice at the school's basketball
courts in exchange for funding a new hardwood floor for the courts and
renovations to the men's and women's locker rooms.

Agency Comments We provided a draft of this report to the Department of
Education for comment, and it did not provide comments. We are sending
copies of this report to the Honorable Roderick R. Paige, Secretary of
Education; appropriate congressional committees; representatives of NCAA and
NAIA; and other interested parties. Please call me at (202) 512- 7215 if you
or your staff have any questions about this report. Key contacts and staff
acknowledgments for this report are listed in appendix II.

Marnie S. Shaul Director, Education, Workforce,

and Income Security

Appendi Appendi xes x I

Scope and Methodology As agreed with your offices, we focused our review of
intercollegiate athletics on addressing the following questions: ? How did
the number of men's and women's intercollegiate sports participants and
teams at 4- year colleges and universities change in the 2 decades since
the1981– 82 school year?

? How many colleges and universities added and discontinued teams since the
1992– 93 school year, and what influenced their most recent decisions
to add and discontinue teams?

? How did colleges and universities make and implement decisions to
discontinue intercollegiate sports?

? When colleges and universities added teams, what types of strategies did
they use to avoid discontinuing sports teams or severely reducing their
funding?

To determine the number of men's and women's intercollegiate sports
participants and teams, we gathered participation statistics from the two
largest 4- year intercollegiate athletic associations- the National
Association of Intercollegiate Athletics (NAIA) and the National Collegiate
Athletic Association (NCAA). Some schools were members of both

associations. For example, of the 787 NCAA members and 515 NAIA members in
1981– 82, 117 were dual- membership schools. By 1998– 99, NCAA
had 1,041 members and NAIA had 339 members, 61 of which were dual members as
of April 1999, according to the NCAA. Based on the number of teams and
average team sizes, we estimated that these schools accounted for about 3
percent of male and 2 percent of female participants in 1997– 98.
Because dual- membership schools report their participation

statistics to both associations, we counted their statistics only once to
avoid double- counting the numbers of teams and participants. The adjusted
participation statistics were used to calculate net change in number of
teams, number of participants, and participation rates between 1981–
82 and 1998– 99. To estimate rates of participation, we divided the
total estimated number of participants for both associations by the
estimated total number of full- time undergraduates enrolled at all 4- year
institutions.

To the extent that an individual student participated in more than one
sport, our calculation of the number of participants may be overstated
because these individuals are counted more than once in the statistics. In
addition, some 4- year institutions are not members of either NAIA or NCAA,
and they were excluded from our analyses. Although we did not

verify the accuracy of the statistics provided by the NCAA and NAIA, they
are the best available data and are widely used by researchers to study
intercollegiate athletic participation.

To respond to the other three questions, we developed and administered a
questionnaire to gather information from athletic directors at all 4- year
colleges and universities that were members of either the NAIA or NCAA. We
pretested a draft questionnaire at six schools and subsequently revised it
based on their comments. In May 2000, we mailed the final questionnaire to
1,310 institutions including 326 NAIA members and 1, 040 NCAA members (both
active and provisional members.) This included 56 4- year colleges and
universities that were members of both NCAA and NAIA. By October 2000, we
had received 1,191 usable questionnaire responses for an overall response
rate of 91 percent. In some cases, however, respondents did not respond to
all applicable questions. The questionnaire asked athletic directors for the
total number of women's

and men's intercollegiate sports teams added and discontinued during the
1992– 93 to 1999– 2000 school- year period. When calculating the
number of new teams added, we excluded teams that had not yet begun
participating in intercollegiate competition by the end of the 1999–
2000 school year. Similarly, when calculating the number of teams
discontinued, we excluded teams whose last day of intercollegiate
competition was after the end of the 1999– 2000 school year. We asked
each school that added or discontinued a team to respond to additional
questions concerning only the most recently

added and most recently discontinued men's and women's sports teams. We
reviewed athletic directors' questionnaire responses for consistency and in
many cases contacted them or their staff to resolve inconsistencies, but we
did not otherwise verify the information provided in the questionnaire
responses. To identify types of strategies that colleges and universities
used to avoid discontinuing sports teams or severely reducing their funding,
we used the questionnaire to collect information on how schools paid for new
teams. We analyzed these responses for schools that had added some teams

without discontinuing others. To get some specific examples of how schools
augmented their athletic program without eliminating teams or severely
reducing their funding, we visited four selected colleges and universities
that were NCAA member schools. We chose these schools in order to achieve
variation in a number of characteristics, including geographic diversity,
whether the school was public or private, size of the athletic department
budget, whether the school awarded athletic scholarships, whether sports
were profitable, and whether the school sponsored football. At each school,
we interviewed the athletic director

and other staff involved in administering the athletic program and toured
the athletic facilities.

Appendi x II

GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments GAO Contacts David D. Bellis, (415)
904- 2272 Benjamin P. Pfeiffer, (206) 287- 4832 Staff

In addition to the individuals named above, Joel I. Grossman, Elsie M.
Acknowledgments Picyk, Meeta Sharma, Sharon M. Silas, Stanley G. Stenersen,
Jason M. Suzaka, and James P. Wright made key contributions to this report.

Related GAO Products Gender Equity: Men's and Women's Participation in
Higher Education (GAO- 01- 128, Dec. 15, 2000). Interscholastic Athletics:
School District Provide Some Assistance to Uninsured Student Athletes (GAO/
HEHS- 00- 148, Sep. 12, 2000). Intercollegiate Athletics: Comparison of
Selected Characteristics of Men's and Women's Programs (GAO/ HEHS- 99- 3R,
June 18, 1999). Intercollegiate Athletics: Status of Efforts to Promote
Gender Equity (GAO/ HEHS- 97- 10, Oct. 25, 1996). Intercollegiate Athletics:
Compensation Varies for Selected Personnel in Athletic Departments (GAO/
HRD- 92- 121, Aug. 19, 1992).

(104992) Lett er

GAO United States General Accounting Office

Page 1 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Contents

Contents Page 2 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 3 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams United States
General Accounting Office

Washington, D. C. 20548 Page 3 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and
Discontinuing Teams

Page 4 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 5 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 6 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 7 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 8 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 9 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 10 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 11 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 12 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 13 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 14 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 15 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 16 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 17 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 18 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 19 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 20 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 21 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 22 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 23 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 24 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 25 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 26 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 27 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 28 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 29 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 30 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 31 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 32 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Appendix I

Appendix I Scope and Methodology

Page 33 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Appendix I Scope and Methodology

Page 34 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Page 35 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

Appendix II

Page 36 GAO- 01- 297 Experiences Adding and Discontinuing Teams

United States General Accounting Office Washington, D. C. 20548- 0001

Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested Presorted Standard

Postage & Fees Paid GAO Permit No. GI00
*** End of document. ***