Statements from UCLA Athletics In Response to NCAA's Public Infractions Report
Dan Guerrero – UCLA Director of Athletics
"In August 2015, five months after self-reporting alleged NCAA rules violations involving a member of the UCLA Football coaching staff, UCLA completed its review of the matter and self-imposed sanctions on the football program and on the coach involved. Subsequently, following the NCAA's own review of the matter, the NCAA and institution agreed to use the summary disposition process – a process that culminated with the issuance of today's NCAA Public Infractions report. We would like to thank the NCAA for its due diligence and professionalism throughout this process. Ultimately, anything short of complete adherence to NCAA rules is unacceptable in both our football program and our athletic department."
Jim Mora – UCLA Head Football Coach
"This was a good lesson for all of our coaches and staff – we must know every single NCAA rule and adhere to them, period. Our compliance office is very thorough and has always worked closely with our coaches and staff, which I think the NCAA realized and appreciated as we went through this process. Without question, we are a stronger football program today."
Adrian Klemm – UCLA Associate Head Football Coach/Run Game Coordinator/Offensive Line
"While I certainly did not intentionally violate NCAA rules, the fact of the matter is that I did violate NCAA rules, and I accept full responsibility. I need to be aware of every rule, and I will be moving forward. I'm thankful that this process has concluded, and my focus remains squarely on our student-athletes and helping them achieve their goals."
Summary
In March 2015, UCLA self-reported alleged NCAA rules violations involving a member of the UCLA Football coaching staff and began an internal review of the matter. As a result of the internal review, later supported by the NCAA's own review of the matter, it was determined that a member of the UCLA Football coaching staff provided two prospective student-athletes with housing and training services at an out of state private workout facility. While both student-athletes were committed to UCLA at the time, neither student-athlete had yet to enroll. At the time of the violation, the coach did not understand that he was violating NCAA guidelines, but he was deemed to have committed an unethical conduct violation because he knowingly provided the benefits. In addition, during a visit to campus prior to enrollment, one of the prospective student-athletes received benefits that included housing, local transportation and meal expenses from the institution in violation of NCAA bylaws.
In the course of the review, it was also determined that the football program committed unrelated Level III violations when it had impermissible contact with prospective student-athletes. These unplanned contacts occurred with two prospective student-athletes at their high school, and the third contact occurred when a coach and prospective student-athlete were dining separately at the same restaurant.
Upon concluding its internal review of the matter, UCLA self-imposed sanctions on the coach involved in the Level II infractions and on the football program. The institution suspended the coach from all institutional activity during the 2015 spring practice and recruiting seasons, suspended the coach for the first two games of the 2015 season and imposed a fine on the coach. In addition, UCLA Football reduced its recruiting days in Spring 2015 by 10 percent and reduced official visits by two during the 2015-16 academic year. To maintain eligibility, one of the involved student-athletes who received benefits was required to repay the value of the benefits received to charity. All of the institution's self-imposed sanctions were accepted by the NCAA.
The NCAA's Committee on Infractions imposed additional penalties: a $5,000 fine and a public reprimand of the university along with a two-year show-cause penalty against the coach found to have committed the violations.