Athletics Integrity Report Praises Penn State, Ends Monitoring Early

Penn State’s mandated monitoring as part of its Athletics Integrity Agreement with the NCAA might come to an early end.

Independent monitor Charles P. Scheeler, who replaced Senator George Mitchell after he stepped down from the position in February, recommended the early termination of Penn State’s monitoring period in his most recent report.

The third annual assessment of Penn State’s ethics and compliance efforts was released today, and suggests that the monitoring stop two years shy of its intended 2017 finish.

“Given Penn State’s progress and the commitments made by (University) President Eric Barron, I recommended to the NCAA and Big Ten Conference the early conclusion of the monitorship at the end of the 2015 calendar year,” Scheeler said. “I am gratified to report that both the NCAA and the Big Ten Conference have accepted my recommendation.”

The Athletics Integrity Agreement is the only remaining part of the consent decree, which was essentially Penn State’s submission to the NCAA sanctions related to the Jerry Sandusky child sexual abuse scandal. The remainder of the sanctions, which included a bowl ban, scholarship reduction, and the forfeiture of wins, was overturned as part of the NCAA’s settlement with State Senator Jake Corman. 

“It feels good to know that all of those sanctions are now behind us, every single one of them,” Barron told StateCollege.com. “That definitely feels good. But the best part about this particular outcome is that the monitor described many of our programs as state of the art and even detailed 12 best practices where he felt we met and exceeded the requirements and noted that some of our best practices are even being replicated at other institutions.”

In his report, Scheeeler described how other universities — and even the Department of Defense — are taking note of Penn State’s work in this area. 

“Rutgers University recently created an athletics integrity position which resembles Penn State’s athletics integrity officer position,” Scheeler said. “And the Department of Defense has sought guidance from the University regarding programs to address violence against women.”

Barron expressed gratitude for the hard work of university employees to reach this milestone, including those within the newly created Office of Ethics and Compliance. He said that the overwhelmingly positive statements from Scheeler make a strong statement about the university’s athletics integrity program. 

“It is such a strong statement about what the university has done, including the board and President Erickson before me, to make sure that we’re doing it right and that we’ll continue to do it right for certainly as long as I’m here,” he said. “It gives me a lot of confidence that we will continue to do things the right way.”

Barron noted that the most telling part of the report came in the football section, where Scheeler described “evidence of increased tension and a mutual lack of trust between [James Franklin] and university athletics compliance staff.” He goes on to explain that all parties have acknowledged the problem and expressed commitment to improving communications, and that Penn State’s process — in which compliance personnel no longer report to the athletic director but to the ethics office — is a best practice that will help when these issues arise.

“The monitor even mentioned a little bit of conflict between the compliance officer and football and even noted that the process is very good and communication occurs and the issues get solved,” Barron said. “From a governance standpoint, that makes me feel very comfortable, because I know there are people making sure we’re doing this right and it helps me focus on other parts of the university’s mission.”