Department of Education Guidance: NIL Payouts Must Adhere to Title IX

The case settlement for House v. NCAA is due in two weeks, and the DOE has given their guidelines for moving forward.

Andy Feliciotti on Unsplash

The official fact sheet that has recently been released by the Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights outlines that schools must follow standard Title IX practices when distributing NIL funds. This guideline is being presented to the public just two weeks before House v. NCAA settlement objections are due.

Title IX laws prevent any discrimination based on sex, especially in an educational setting. As student-athletes begin receiving payments from their universities, Title IX has extended its reach to include NIL deals among college athletes. Both male and female student-athletes are entitled to equal shares of NIL money, regardless of the donor.

Preventing any sort of inequality is one of the next steps that has come about due to the lawsuit placed against the NCAA.

The OCR's official word on the matter is the first formal guidance that is said to have no impact on the settlement. A bit of rewording has also come from the OCR's statement; in states that allow schools to make direct NIL deals, the agreements will be seen as a form of athletic financial assistance.

Marking the deals as a form of "athletic financial assistance" will make it easier for schools to calculate and track revenue sharing in order to provide equal opportunities for both men and women student-athletes.

It is unclear whether the OCR could provide guidance regarding third-party donations, such as those provided by booster collectives that are closely associated with the school. The only clarity provided in the fact sheet is as follows: as long as private donations do not create sex-based disparities, schools are not obligated to comply with Title IX law.

Many athletic programs have been vocal about their intentions for the upcoming revenue-sharing opportunities, with many of them sharing that about 75% of the money would be going to university football players.

The current antitrust lawsuit could potentially be derailed by the OCR's latest memo, and attorney Arthur Bryant has commented on the usefulness of the memo and its language to strengthen his current case against the University of Oregon.

With the presidential administration facing changes soon, many things are up in the air concerning the pending lawsuits and settlements throughout the world of collegiate sports.