ly, with an independent decision reached for each one. Thus, even though a school might be in compliance with two of the three, it still is considered to be out of compliance. The Components are explained:Component I. Most lawsuits result from challenges to Component I, whereby an educational institution must meet the requirements in one of three different tests. Prong one, the proportionality test, indicates that athletic participation rates must be within five percent of the enrollment for that sex. Since most schools and universities do not meet that standard , they could satisfy Prong two, provided they can show a history and continued practiced of program for the underrepresented sex by adding teams within the past three years. Failing to meet one of the first two prongs, an institution may demonstrate compliance by showing that it fully and effectively has accommodated the interests of the underrepresented sex. This would require that every team be offered for which there is sufficient interest and ability, as long as there exists a reasonable expectation of competition within the institution's typical competitive region. Surveying students and the availability of feeder programs seen in community-based recreational leagues, intramural sports, and elective physical education offerings are used to assess interest. Male's and female's abilities are accommodated equitably when the percentage of appropriate level contests does not differ by more than five percent.Component II. Athletic scholarship dollars need to be proportional in relationship to the percentage of male and female athletes. Furthermore, no significant difference should exist in the amount of the average scholarship when comparing male and female athletes. Component III. The third component, Other Programs Areas, dubbed the "laundry list," is comprised of 11 separate treatment aspects. While parallel teams are compared (SB-vs-BB, etc.), the compliance dec...
