On an internal spreadsheet marked “special interest,” University of Southern California officials cataloged in exhaustive detail the fundraising possibilities associated with certain well-connected applicants for admission.

One candidate promoted by USC athletics officials was linked to a “250,000 signed pledge,” newly disclosed court records show, while the file for another listed a “25,000 check and more later.” A third was connected to a larger sum: “$3 mil to Men’s Golf.”

The spreadsheet and other documents illuminating the intersection of fundraising, athletics and admissions at USC were filed in federal court this week by defense attorneys for a parent accused in a college admissions bribery scandal. The records confirm anew an open secret of admissions: Colleges and universities track with zealous care the applications of children of donors and potential donors.

Prominent schools, including Harvard University and the University of Virginia, in recent years have been forced to acknowledge the practice, following the disclosure of internal records about “watch lists.” The disclosures have proved awkward for schools that want to expand outreach to students from poor and middle-class families whose parents did not go to college and are not in a position to donate.

Universities insist that the prospect of donations does not wield undue influence and that admissions officers have the final word on who gets in.

The USC records made public Tuesday show that the admissions office at the private research university in Los Angeles rejected a fair number of special-handling applications backed by USC athletics officials. The emails in the filing “demonstrate that no Athletic Department official has the authority to compel admissions decisions,” USC said in a statement.

The records were filed in U.S. District Court in Boston by attorneys for Robert Zangrillo, a Miami businessman who has pleaded not guilty to fraud conspiracy and money-laundering conspiracy. He is one of 34 parents charged in the sprawling “Varsity Blues” scandal, which centers on a scheme orchestrated by admitted mastermind Rick Singer, a California admissions consultant. He helped children of clients obtain fraudulent SAT and ACT scores and use fake athletic credentials in applications to selective universities.

Prosecutors say Zangrillo conspired with Singer to help one of his daughters transfer to USC as a purported recruit for the rowing team. According to an indictment, Zangrillo paid $250,000 in the alleged scheme, which included a $50,000 check to “USC Women’s Athletics” in September 2018 — after USC admitted her.

In the court filing Tuesday, Zangrillo’s attorneys argued their client had done nothing wrong, or even all that unusual.

“The notion that Robert Zangrillo’s $50,000 check to USC, made after his daughter’s admission, was a ‘bribe’ is legally wrong — there was no quid pro quo corrupt agreement between Mr. Zangrillo and USC that brought this relatively ordinary gift to a university into the orbit of the federal criminal law,” the attorneys wrote. “It was a donation indistinguishable from the vast numbers of other donations by parents of students made to USC and apparently to other universities and colleges nationwide.”

Zangrillo’s attorneys obtained the USC records through pretrial discovery and are seeking further documents. USC is fighting that.

“Mr. Zangrillo’s filing appears to be part of a legal and public relations strategy to divert attention from the criminal fraud for which he has been indicted by a federal grand jury,” the university said. No trial date has been set for Zangrillo.

The court records depict a relationship between admissions and athletics at USC that is sometimes cozy, sometimes arms-length. In 2014, a senior USC athletic official named Donna Heinel emailed the admissions dean, Timothy Brunold, to promote an applicant whose family was on the radar of university officials. “Appreciate it … they came through Athletics due to father endowing our community service position for 5 mil,” Heinel wrote.

Hours later, according to the records, Brunold replied: “I have just been directed to admit this student to the spring semester. Someone on my team will put that decision on today and the ball will get rolling for her.”

Heinel, whom USC fired in March, has pleaded not guilty to conspiracy to commit racketeering. Brunold has not been charged.

Also in 2014, records show, Heinel emailed Brunold a “VIP list from Athletics” that included notations of “long time donors.” One VIP was so plugged in that the application received special handling, the list said, through “every code known to man.” Brunold replied: “Thank you Donna — we’ll be sure to track these and handle them with care.”