InterCollegiate Sailing Association Background on CSA CSA is

Inter-Collegiate Sailing Association

Background on CSA ▰ CSA is a national executive search and consulting firm based in North Carolina ▰ CSA leaders have 90 years of combined on-campus experience, and each have served as Athletics Directors at various Division I FBS institutions. § § Founder and President Todd Turner Vice President Dr. Brad Bates Senior Associate Jim Miller Director of Operations Clay Pfeifler ▰ Have completed over 130 consulting and executive search projects more than 90 clients in 32 different states ▰ Founded with the mission of assisting NCAA Division I Presidents, Athletics Directors, and other leaders in the industry in preserving the alignment between athletics and the mission of the university or organization 2

CSA Process ▰ ▰ Attend Executive Committee Meeting – Spring 2018 Survey (297 Responses) – September 2018 Preliminary Findings presented to Executive Committee – November 2018 Draft of Observations and Recommendations presented to Executive Committee – December 2018 ▰ Presentation to Coaches – January 2019 ▰ Presentation to Board – January 2019 ▰ Submission of Final Report to ICSA – January 2019 3

Context ▰ ICSA trying to be everything to everyone ▰ Championships and competitions are administered very well ▰ Revenues § Dues will increase in 2020 (Full§ § Member; Provisional-Member; Associate-Member) Regatta costs for competitions Sponsorships ▰ Conference membership varies significantly (from 8 to 54 teams) ▰ Duration of Championships is a challenge ▰ The membership is divided on NCAA status but also needs clarification on implications ▰ No sailing scholarships but schools with large endowments have competitive advantage with financial aid resources 4

Moving Forward Observations and Recommendations 5

Leadership 6

PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT STATUS QUO MODEL Membership 2018 (Dues/Total) 2020 (Dues/Total) Associate (24) $70/$1, 680 (7%) $100/2, 400 (7%) Provisional (13) $130/$1, 690 (7%)$200/$2, 600 (7%) Regular (158) $130/20, 540 (86%) $200/$31, 600 (86%) TOTAL (195) $23, 910 $36, 600 7

PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT MODEL I Assumption I: All assumptions are made to cover the expressed costs associated with professional management and do not consider current ICSA budget allocations Assumption II: Executive Director ($130, 000 compensation and benefits) Assumption III: Executive Assistant ($50, 000 compensation and benefits) Assumption IV: Annual Budget ($50, 000 for travel, operations, communications, etc. ) Membership 2020 Associate $671/member ($230, 000 x. 07 = $16, 100/24 members) Provisional $1, 238/member ($230, 000 x. 07 =$16, 100/13 members) Regular TOTAL (195) $1, 252/member ($230, 000 x. 86 =$197, 800/158) $230, 000 ($193, 000 net increase) 8

PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT MODEL II Assumption I: Part-time Executive Director ($50, 000 compensation) Assumption II: Annual Budget ($20, 000 for travel, operations, communications, etc. ) Membership 2020 Associate $204/member ($70, 000 x. 07 = $4, 900/24 members) Provisional $377/member ($70, 000 x. 07 =$4, 900/13 members) Regular TOTAL (195) $381/member ($70, 000 x. 86 =$60, 200/158) $70, 000 ($33, 400 net increase) 9

PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT Comparative Funding Models Model 2018 2020/Future Assoc Member Dues (Status Quo Model) Assoc Member Dues (Pro Model II) $70 $100 $671 $204 Provisional Member Dues (Status Quo) Provisional Member Dues (Pro Model II) $130 $200 $1, 238 $377 Regular Member Dues (Status Quo) Regular Member Dues (Pro Model II) Regular Member Dues (Pro Model I) $130 $200 $1, 252 $381 10

Professional Management Recommendation: CSA recommends that ICSA consider evolving into funding a Professional Management Model with a part-time Executive Director by building the reserve to cover the increased expenses for a pre-determined number of years (i. e. 2 -5). ▰ Once professional management is hired and fully integrated, the Association can annually evaluate performance and new revenues thereby determining future decisions about expanding to full-time management and staff based on data. § Minimizes risk and the new model can be evaluated through an existing framework 11

Governance 12

Committee Profiles Recommendation: CSA recommends consideration of a profile for the Board, Executive Committee and Standing Committees. To further involve institutional leadership and broaden representation with an extended group of stakeholders, university athletics or club administrators should be included in management. Critical roles within the profile should include the following personnel: ▰ ▰ ▰ Varsity Head Coaches Club Head Coaches Varsity Athletics Administrators ▰ Conference and Geographic Representation currently built-in ▰ Outside Directors who are key stakeholders with specific expertise (internal or external) IM/Club/Recreation Administrators Undergraduate student-athletes 13

Term Limits Recommendation: CSA recommends the Association consider a rotation so a few volunteers are not overwhelmed with the ongoing responsibilities of long-term management as well as ensuring that leadership is perpetually providing a diversity of views and hybrid dialogue that can elevate the Association as a resource for the distinctive profiles of membership. ▰ The rotation should be allocated in multi-year variance so there are not multiple roles to fill in any given year. ▰ Individuals can rotate back after a clearly defined period off the Board, Executive Committee or Standing Committee 14

Eligibility and Rules Compliance Recommendation: CSA recommends the ICSA consider formally adopting eligibility rules that align with the NCAA academic requirements and formally adopting legislation that requires each institution to submit a “Declaration of Adherence” from the university President’s office. ▰ Any differences in rules explicitly defined 15

NCAA Membership 16

Application Process There are two primary processes to apply for NCAA membership: ▰ Through a program known as the Emerging Sport for Women § At least 40 institutions must properly sponsor women’s sailing as a varsity sport for one academic year for an NCAA Championship to be established. § Legislation to establish either a National Collegiate Championship or a divisional championship may be proposed during the year (maintaining 40+ institutions) ▰ Second process would be for co-ed or men’s sailing § At least 50 institutions must sponsor for two academic years § Legislation to establish a divisional or national championship may be proposed during the second year (maintaining 50+ institutions) 17

Scholarships There are no minimum athletic scholarship requirements for NCAA sports and currently there are conferences (i. e. the Ivy League) and Divisions (III) that do not permit athletic aid. 18

Varsity Sport (Clubs) In order to qualify for NCAA competition, a team must be considered a varsity intercollegiate sport “that has been accorded that status by the institution’s President or Chancellor or committee responsible for intercollegiate athletics policy. ” 19

Divisional Competition/Championship ▰ The NCAA currently hosts 11 non-divisional national championships. ▰ Teams from each NCAA division compete for championships regardless of their athletics department’s divisional classification. ▰ For co-ed or men’s sailing, at least 50 institutions must properly sponsor the sport as a varsity sport for two academic years. § Legislation to establish either a National Collegiate Championship or a divisional championship may be proposed during the second year in which the minimum sponsorship number exists. 20

Playing and Practice Season ▰ Organized playing and practice limitations for each sport are clearly defined for NCAA sports and include a variety of activities explicitly outlined to “minimize interference with the academic programs of its student-athletes. ” ▰ Through the legislative process, member representatives would determine precise details for playing and practice time demands and each member would be responsible for monitoring compliance with their programs. 21

Compliance Requirements ▰ “It is the responsibility of each member institution to control its intercollegiate athletics program in compliance with the rules and regulations of the Association. The institution’s president or chancellor is responsible for the administration of all aspects of the athletics program, including approval of the budget and audit of all expenditures. ” ▰ Including: § § § Academic Financial Aid Recruiting Playing and Practice Seasons Drug Testing 22

Other Potential Actions 23

New Revenue Opportunities ▰ Sponsorship activation throughout the year (in addition to championships) ▰ Subscription Live-streaming ▰ Conference networks where applicable (ACCN, BIG, SEC, PAC-12) – ▰ ▰ ▰ increased product Annual Coaches Conference sponsorships/vendors US Sailing Grants Fund-Raising: ICSA Advisory Board Membership dues Regatta Fees 24

Realignment Models and Implications: ▰ Divisional Competition: § Elite § Competitive § Developmental If not for the history of access for all as a core value in collegiate sailing and implications on the member teams, CSA’s recommendation would be for the ICSA to develop a strategic plan to support divisional competition. However, ICSA’s history and core values are obviously relevant and validate that a professional management model is necessary so an Executive Director can manage a thoughtful process for members to engage leading to educated, data-based decisions that best serve the sport of collegiate sailing. 25

THANK YOU tturner @collegiatesportsassociates. com bbates 26

Survey Details 27

Table 1 Survey Respondent Demographic Information ICSA Affiliation (Check all that apply) Former Athlete Coach Sponsor/Donor/Supporter ICSA Board Member Institutional Sport Administrator Other (Parents, Officials, Former Board Member/Coach) Total Gender Man Woman Gender Nonconforming Primary Conference Affiliation NEISA MAISA MCSA PCCSC SAISA NWICSA SEISA Length of Affiliation with ICSA Less than 1 year 1 -3 years 4 -10 years 11 -20 years 20+ years n % 141 81 79 47 28 8 48% 27% 16% 9% 3% 34 418 12% (of 297) 214 77 3 73% 26% 1% 92 81 40 29 28 14 11 31. 2% 27. 5% 13. 6% 9. 8% 9. 5% 4. 7% 3. 7% 12 66 104 50 61 4. 1% 22. 5% 35. 5% 17. 1% 20. 8% 28

Support for Various Actions by Affiliation Reminder: Respondents may be included within multiple affiliations 29

Breakdown of Answer Selections Support for Designating Women's Sailing as an NCAA Emerging Sport: (n = 286) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Support for Designating Men's and Women's Sailing as an NCAA Championship Sport: (n = 286) 90 0 Strongly Support (5) Support (4) Moderately Support (3) Don't Support (2) Strongly Don't Support (1) ▰ Respondents split on NCAA membership ▰ View Women Only and Co-ed similarly ▰ Although many support NCAA membership, most of those same respondents at least moderately support remaining independent as well 20 40 60 80 100 Support for ICSA Remaining Independent Support or Strongly Support 18% Moderately Support 24% 58% Don't Support or Strongly Don't Support 30

Should there be Competitive Divisions within ICSA? (n = 288) 0 20 40 60 80 100 Absolutely Yes (5) Yes (4) Maybe (3) No (2) Absolutely Not (1) Preference For Competitive Divisions within ICSA 26% 42% ▰ Slightly against ICSA divisions, but many aren’t sure Yes (4 -5) Maybe (3) 32% No (1 -2) 31

Would a full-time administrative team be worth pursuing even if it meant an increase in member fees? (n = 288) 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Absolutely Yes (5) Yes (4) Maybe (3) No (2) Absolutely Not (1) Worth pursuing a full-time administrative team? 12% Yes (4 -5) 50% ▰ ▰ Strong support for a full-time administration, but again, many aren’t sure Only 12% against Maybe (3) 38% No (1 -2) 32

Support for Various Actions by Subgroup All Respondents Support for various actions (1 -5) Cumulative Mean SD ICSA remaining an independent association not affiliated with the NCAA or NAIA Pursuing a full-time administrative team, even if it meant an increase in member duesb Designating men's and women's sailing as an NCAA Championship sport Designating women's sailing as an NCAA emerging sport ICSAb NEISA or Other MAISA Conferences (~167) (~119) Mean Male (~206) Mean Female (~75) Coaches and Administrators Only From DII From DI Varsity Club or DIII Institutions Programs (~43) (~36) (~51) (~28) Mean 3. 69 1. 26 3. 78 3. 56 3. 72 3. 57 3. 44 3. 37 3. 60 1. 07 3. 74 3. 40 3. 59 3. 65 4. 23 3. 73 4. 14 3. 82 3. 18 1. 51 2. 97 3. 47 3. 12 3. 36 3. 40 3. 18 3. 15 1. 48 2. 89 3. 51 3. 08 3. 37 3. 16 3. 06 3. 14 3. 11 3. 07 2. 57 2. 90 2. 89 Competitive divisions within 2. 78 1. 25 2. 69 2. 91 2. 76 2. 83 Scale: Strongly Support (5), Support (4), Moderately Support (3), Don't Support (2), Strongly Don't Support (1) Scaleb: Absolutely Yes (5), Yes (4), Maybe (3), No (2), Absolutely Not (1) No significant differences between demographic sub-categories n = 286 Minimal Meaningful differences by Conference and Institutional NCAA division. Minimal Differences in Gender and Program Status. 33