For many years, organizations external to a college or university have been allowed to use an institution's athletics facilities for summer basketball camps. These "nonscholastic" camps typically attract hundreds to thousands of young men and women between 14 and 18 years old. A small number of the participants of the summer camps are elite athletes and may eventually compete as varsity scholarship athletes at the nation's highest competitive collegiate athletic level, National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) Division I. This document concerns an NCAA Proposal directed at young male basketball players who participate in these camps. While these camps have provided important skill training to participants, they have also become important sources of revenue for institutions. Increasingly, the camps are directed by coaches external to the hosting institution, and those coaches typically do not receive training in developmental issues. The location of some of the more high-profile camps provides a recruiting advantage for the sponsoring institution because it allows these elite male basketball players to play against other elite athletes at some of the best facilities in the nation. In Spring 2010, the Task Force for Recreation and Athletics (TFRA) was approached by leadership in the American College Personnel Association (ACPA) and the National Intramural Recreation Sports Association (NIRSA) about the potential impact on college campuses from NCAA Proposal 2009-100. Members of the TFRA directorate were asked to provide knowledge from the perspective of student development and how the NCAA Proposal may affect different aspects of the lives of camp participants and college students. As a result, this document seeks to create a more holistic understanding of the Proposal's potential impact on higher education. It is intended to provide a body of knowledge for all TFRA members, ACPA members, and for all involved in American higher education. Appended are: (1) NCAA Proposal 2009-100; (2) Candidate Data Capture System; and (3) Potential impact on individual campuses (source: NIRSA). (Contains 2 footnotes.)