USADA: A Winning Model for Independence and Prevention in the Fight Against Doping in Sport? – Michael Pedersen

National anti-doping agencies are mostly known for detecting and sanctioning cases of doping in sport. While those are indeed important governance aspects of effectively fighting doping in sport, so are the independence of anti-doping agencies as well as their means of preventing doping in sport from happening in the first place.

With a focus on the case of United States Anti-Doping Agency, this 15th contribution of mine for iSportconnect’s expert column on sport governance offers perspectives on measures of independence and prevention in the fight against doping in sport. Based on publicly available information, additional information kindly provided by United States Anti-Doping Agency and an interview with Travis T. Tygart, CEO, the contribution explores the nature of an independent boardroom and preventive anti-doping measures to create cultural change. Last but not least, the contribution offers some critical questions for sport leaders to consider, as they start the process of modernizing their governance standards for the future.

My 16th contribution will be published in October. It is going to offer perspectives on governance education for sport leaders with a particular focus on the ‘Executive Master in European Sport Governance’ (MESGO).

A few facts about United States Anti-Doping Agency

United States Anti-Doping Agency is the national anti-doping organization in the United States for Olympic, Paralympic, Pan American, and Parapan American sport. The Agency began its operations on 1 October 2000. Today, it employs more than 70 employees, office staff as well as doping control officers. In 2013, the Agency’s revenue amounted to approx. USD 14 million (USD 8.5 million through federal grants and USD 3.6 million through United States Olympic Committee).

On its website, United States Anti-Doping Agency offers easy access to numerous education tools, guidance and other useful information for athletes and the people who support them. The Agency also transparently accounts for its activities and many of its governance related measures. For further information, including annual reports available for download, see www.usada.org.

Independence is a critical foundation for effectively fighting doping in sport

According to Travis T. Tygart, CEO at United States Anti-Doping Agency, an independent governance structure is a critical foundation for effectively fighting doping in sport:

“I think what we have seen is [that] the independent model is the most effective system. Sport administrators, federations, leagues and teams are focused on growing revenues and increasing popularity and as a result, there are inherent conflicts of interest in the responsibilities of boards and leaders of these entities. Unfortunately, it is not possible to both promote and police your own sport and profits always prevail over tough, but right decisions.”

An independent United States Anti-Doping Agency boardroom with no or few conflicts of interest

The United States Anti-Doping Agency has a Board of Directors, which is comprised of ten non-executive directors. All directors are eligible to serve two consecutive terms of four years (a total of eight years). The Board of Directors is independent, inasmuch as it is self-perpetuating. It is required to have the following composition:

– Two directors, who have been elite athletes, but are no longer competing

– Two directors, who have previously been engaged in a national sport governing body, but have no current ties to such a body

– One director, who has been a professional coach, but is currently not in such a capacity

– Five other board members with relevant experience, skills and expertise

The Board of Directors may create an executive committee and other committees, comprised of a select number of directors. Currently, one such committee is the Audit and Ethics Committee. Among other things, the Committee oversees the implementation of and compliance with key governance standards of United States Anti-Doping Agency such as its Code of Conduct and its Conflict of Interest Policy. These measures apply to all directors, staff and volunteers.

For an organization, which was founded on the concept of removing the conflicts of interest that are associated with managing anti-doping programs, the Conflict of Interest Policy of United States Anti-Doping Agency is particularly noteworthy. According to the Policy, a person is not eligible to serve in the Board of Directors, if (s)he or any of hers/his immediate family members are an:

– Employee of or serve in any governance or policy making capacity of a national sport governing body, United States Olympic Committee or any other sport organization, for which United States Anti-Doping Agency conducts doping controls

– Active athlete or a coach of an active athlete participating at the elite level of competition in an organization, for which United States Anti-Doping Agency conducts doping controls

Along the same lines, directors are not allowed to accept gifts, cash, travel, hotel accommodation, entertainment or favors from:

1) United States Olympic Committee, a national sport governing body or any other sport organization for which United States Anti-Doping Agency conducts doping controls or

2) Any athlete subject to testing by United States Anti-Doping Agency

Finally, directors’ expenses related to meetings and other business in support of the Agency are covered by United States Anti-Doping Agency. Such expenses include travel, food, accommodation and incidentals. Only economy class travel is permitted.