As performance technologies have proliferated all levels of college sports, working groups within the NCAA realized that guidance to schools had been lacking, particularly around the responsible use of such devices and their impact on student athletes’ physical and mental health.
That led to the recent publication of new recommendations around policy, education, data management, technology selection and continuous improvement. It is not a new policy or enforceable set of rules, but rather a framework for the 1,100 member schools across the three divisions to consider while crafting their own protocols in accordance with school, conference and state mandates.
“At this stage, it really is about giving schools the road map to decide how they want to engage with these technologies,” said Dr. Deena Casiero, NCAA chief medical officer. “As we continue to see performance technology evolve and the use of it throughout the membership evolve, then that may change over time, but right now it’s about giving the schools what they need so that they can make the decisions that are best for them, given their current usage, their current budgets and resources.”
The NCAA Committee on Competitive Safeguards and Medical Aspects of Sports has made recommendations in this area since 2014, but following a summit held by the NCAA Sport Science Institute in 2025 — which included subject matter experts, student athletes and medical professionals — the decision was made to create this broader outlook.
Prior to joining the NCAA in August 2024, Casiero was the sports medicine director at UConn and a former team physician for Hofstra and the New York Islanders. She said the NBA was particularly helpful in crafting these recommendations, based on the league’s experience with its wearables validation program.
“Because these technologies and the performance questions they are addressing are complex, varied and ever-evolving, it may be more fruitful to focus on ways to improve the decision-making process itself, rather than just making recommendations about ‘good’ or ‘bad’ technology,” said Jessica Zendler, Rimkus sports science senior adviser and manager of the NBA/NBPA Wearables Validation Program.
Zendler said she hoped the NCAA guidance would prompt member schools “to reflect on their current use of performance technology and then conduct a deliberate and good faith effort to improve areas of use that need it” — including a written responsible use plan, varied stakeholder input and annual reevaluations.
Casiero emphasized that schools should follow the twin pillars of “only collecting what is necessary and doing so transparently,” as well as “always grounding everything you’re doing around supporting student-athlete health and well-being.”
Data management, she added, started the process, as the group asked a series of questions for which every athletic program should have a written plan: “How are we storing this? Where are we storing this? Who has access to it? Who owns it?”
Those fundamentals are applicable whether it’s a Division I school with a multimillion-dollar performance budget or a Division III school barely treading in these waters.
“With the complexity of it and, honestly, the wild, wild west nature of performance technology right now,” Casiero said, “this certainly seemed like the most feasible way to give guidance to the membership in a way that allowed for flexibility, but also brought awareness to the pieces that were of utmost importance.”
