March Madness watchers may be familiar with the news that the FBI recently indicted numerous individuals affiliated with college basketball in a wide-ranging bribery scheme that continues to echo at universities across the country. In sum, colleges and universities should consider supervising employees’ communications as a preventative measure, to avoid becoming victims of schemes similar to those involved here. For those who don’t follow NCAA-sanctioned sports news closely, here’s a recap of the ongoing investigation.
The investigation started in 2015, when certain bribes came to light as part of an investigation into the activities of a financial advisor engaged in fraudulent schemes. In September 2017 and April 2018, the FBI indicted individuals ranging from a sports company executive to a financial advisor to assistant and associate coaches at NCAA Division I universities around the country. Much of the evidence leading to the indictments was gained through surveillance over time, including electronic communications. So far, the FBI has charged these defendants under Title 18 (the federal criminal code) including sections: 666 (theft or bribery concerning programs receiving Federal funds), 1343 (fraud by wire, radio, or television), 1349 (attempt and conspiracy), and 1952 (interstate and foreign travel or transportation in aid of racketeering enterprises).
The indictments relate to the offer and provision of bribes to top-rated high school players and their families, as well as to coaches. These bribes had a number of goals, including securing player attendance at certain schools, ensuring the engagement of specific agents and advisors at the advent of those players’ professional careers, securing attendance at Division I programs sponsored by a certain prominent sports company with the intent that such players would sign endorsement agreements with the company later in their career, and influencing coaches to steer players to certain advisors and agents. There were even efforts to push players to purchase suits from specific clothiers. NCAA rules prohibit these types of payments as “impermissible benefits” under their rules for amateur players. Some payments were concealed by the use of promissory notes, others were listed as unrelated charges on invoices for services or reimbursement requests made to universities and the sports company. The investigation is ongoing, and at least one of those implicated has already pled guilty.
Until the FBI investigation came to light, these universities were unaware of their bad actors’ activities. The complaints name the defrauded universities as the victims of these schemers, as their actions denied the universities the ability to control their financial assets and interfered with their ability to make decisions about player scholarships. While this type of fraud is something no school or business should have to experience, some of these financial losses may have been avoidable.
Universities are empowered to supervise their employees’ communications. An early warning system could be instituted to identify and remediate these bad actors before their schemes come to fruition. The criminal complaint shows that the indicted used various forms of communication to discuss their plans, including phones, text message, and email. At least some of these communications would likely have been tracked if these universities had a compliance plan that included supervision of employee emails, calls, and texts on employer-issued software and devices.
These types of news stories show the importance of supervising employee communications beyond highly-regulated industries, in areas like higher education. By implementing an archiving platform and using supervision tools, university personnel could develop and leverage policies based on questionable, unethical keywords, and potentially prevent schemes like these from gaining traction in the first place. Phrases to search for could include, “promissory note,” “no names need to be mentioned,” “scholarship promise,” “make it look clean,” and “done the right way”— exact terms used by the individuals the FBI indicted in the NCAA case. By identifying these types of high-risk terms, employees in compliance positions could take immediate remedial action. Utilizing policies in conjunction with supervision tools for employee communications is an effective way to reduce risk and avoid reputational damage by proactively recognizing and managing instances of misconduct.
A strong compliance program that incorporates The Archiving Platform from Smarsh together with relevant policies will help employers identify issues in real time, rather than after the FBI comes calling.
- XLoD Global – London 2024: Key Insights and Takeaways from Smarsh - November 22, 2024
- Georgia Public Records: A Guide to Meeting Open Records Requirements and Improving Transparency - November 4, 2024
- Navigating Illinois Public Records Laws: Meet Open Records Requirements and Build Trust - October 28, 2024