Upcoming Events: April 8th, Kill the Cuts (Nationwide), Protest at ASU+GSV (San Diego). April 17th Fight for Higher Education (Nationwide). Send tips to Glen McGhee at gmcghee@aya.yale.edu.
Search This Blog
Friday, December 20, 2024
DOD Continues Protecting Bad Actor Schools that Prey Upon Military Servicemembers
Monday, October 7, 2024
Trump's DOD Failed to Protect Servicemembers from Bad Actor Colleges, But We Demand More Evidence
The Higher Education Inquirer has been waiting since December 2017 for information from the US Department of Defense (DOD) about decades of predatory behavior by subprime colleges against military servicemembers, a disturbing pattern reduced by the Obama Administration and made worse again by the Trump Administration. We are still waiting for information, nearly seven years later and through multiple efforts, as Donald Trump runs again for President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces. And today, with yet another delay, DOD says they won't have the response until after the election.
In 2012, the Obama Administration, through Executive Order 13607, established policies for increased oversight of schools that received DOD Tuition Assistance (TA) funds. DOD TA is a program that pays schools for servicemembers going through college. For several decades before Obama was the President, subprime schools systematically exploited servicemembers, veterans, and their families, collaborating formally and informally with military officials and educators. They even held conferences at the national and state level through the Council of College and Military Educators (CCME).
In 2017, the Trump Administration began rolling back these protective measures and decided not to provide information to the media to avoid "a witch hunt." This action shielded bad actor schools from public scrutiny and sanctions that the schools could receive for abusing servicemembers.
In December 2017, we contacted a DOD VOL ED official who refused to answer us. But based on other bits of information, including data from the Department of Veterans Affairs, we believe we know many of these bad actor schools. Some of those schools, like the politically connected University of Phoenix, would be obvious to those who follow bad actors in higher education. But we wanted the DOD to publicly name them. That DOD official is now working as a special advisor to the Department of Education Federal Student Aid. Our intent was not to target that official, but to get to the bottom of the problem, which we believe to be at a higher level of management, and possibly to then-President Trump.
In May 2019, we filed a Freedom of Information request (DOD OIG-2019-000702) asking for a list of the 50 worst actor schools for 2017 and 2018. DOD denied that such a list existed despite evidence to the contrary. We filed another FOIA request in 2021, 21-F-0411 and even with more information that we provided, they denied that such a list existed.
Our last attempt for information, DOD FOIA 22-1203-F, was filed in July 2022 to obtain communications between the high-level DOD Voluntary Education official and others. DOD has given us a number of excuses for the delays, and we have modified the request to limit the search. In the meantime, we have contacted politicians and national media to help us with what's been going on. So far, nearly seven years later, no one has acted, as servicemembers continue to be ripped off by predatory subprime colleges.
Related links:
DoD review: 0% of schools following TA rules (Military Times, 2018)Friday, July 12, 2024
Pending HEI Investigations
The Higher Education Inquirer (HEI) is working on a number of investigative projects. They include:
(1) Maximus is the sole contractor for the US Department of Education's Default Resolution Group (DRG) and its "Fresh Start" program. The DRG contract is set to expire, and information about their contract appears to have been removed from public view. DRG is likely to face more problems as defaults are expected to rise dramatically in late 2024.
(2) Subprime scholarship at America's largest online robocolleges, including Liberty University's online doctoral degrees in history and philosophy. We are communicating with subject matter experts to determine the extent of the problem.
(3) Our 6 1/2 year battle to obtain information about bad actors receiving Department of Defense Tuition Assistance (TA).
Approximately $600 million in tuition assistance each year is managed by DOD VOL ED and its contractors. About 100,000 servicemembers each year use TA benefits to pay for continuing education, and a disproportionate amount goes to robocolleges.
In 2017, as a continuation of Obama-era policies, contractors PwC and Gatehouse compiled a list of the 50 worst offenders, schools that were violating DOD MOU and President Obama's Principles of Excellence (Executive Order 13607).
Under President Trump, DOD refused to name the bad actors and did not punish anyone for their violations. In 2018, DOD education program analyst Anthony Clarke said that DOD did not want to create a "witch hunt." After 2019, the oversight program fell under the radar.
The University of Phoenix was implicated in a number of violations, but there is no record that DOD did anything to correct the situation, other than to reprimand at least one base commander. DOD has had a long-term relationship with predatory subprime colleges for years through the Council of College and Military Educators (CCME).
DOD has a current contract with Purdue University Global offering degrees of questionable academic value.
HEI has spent a great effort communicating with DOD officials, whistleblowers, and political aides, and following up with information that first appeared in in the Military Times in 2018 and 2019, then reappeared in 2024. We are also awaiting a substantive response from DOD FOIA 22-1203-F submitted in July 2022 that has received multiple delays and is not expected to be answered until October 4, 2024, about 1 month before the US federal elections.
Related links:
Maximus, Student Loan Debt, and the Poverty Industrial Complex
Articles About DOD Tuition Assistance
Wednesday, July 12, 2023
University of Phoenix and the Ash Heap of Higher Ed History
(Updated September 14, 2023)
The University of Phoenix (or at least its name) may soon enter the ash heap of US higher education history--and rise again as a state-run robocollege. But it shouldn't--at least not yet. Once hailed as the leader in affordable adult education for workers entering middle management, it is a shell of its former self--in an economy less certain for workers and consumers.
With the school's wreckage are approximately one million people buried alive in an estimated $14B-$35B in student loan debt.
Pattern of Fraud
As of January 2023, more than 69,000 of these student loan debtors have filed Borrower Defense to Repayment fraud claims with the US Department of Education against the University of Phoenix (UoPX). Many more could file claims when they become aware of their rights to debt relief. In the partial FOIA response below, the US Department of Education reported that 69,180 Borrower Defense claims had been made against the school.
In a recent federal case, Sweet v Cardona, most if not all of the 19,860 "denied" cases were overturned in favor of the student loan debtors. We estimate the smaller number of fraud claims alone to amount to hundreds of millions of dollars.
Through a FOIA request, we also discovered 6,265 consumer complaints in the FTC database. In 2019, the FTC and the University of Phoenix settled a claim for $191M for deceptive employment claims. Based on the consumer complaints, we have no reason to believe that Phoenix has changed its behavior as a bad actor.
On May 3, 2023, six US Senators (Warren, Brown, Blumenthal, Durbin, Merkley, Hassan) called for the US Department of Education, Department of Veterans Affairs, and Department of Defense to investigate the University of Phoenix for launching a new program suggesting that it was a public university. The letter stated that the school "has long preyed on veterans, low-income students, and students of color."
Wolves in Sheep's Clothing
University of Phoenix's owners could potentially be liable for refunding the US government for the fraud. But as a state-related organization, it may be more politically difficult to claw back funds, no matter how predatory the school is.
Purdue University Global and University of Arizona Global set a precedence in state-related organizations acquiring subprime schools (Kaplan University and Ashford University) and rebranding them as something better. Whether they are better for consumers is questionable. Phoenix will have to cut costs, largely by reducing labor. Using Indian labor (like Purdue Global) and AI could be profitable strategies. It's likely that this deal, even if profitable, will add fuel to the growing skepticism of higher education in the US.
University of Phoenix's Finances
Apollo Global Management and Vistria Group currently own University of Phoenix but have been trying (unsuccessfully) to unload the subprime college for more than two years. Little is publicly known about the school's finances. What is known is that UoPX gets about $800M every year from the federal government, through federal student loans, Pell Grants, GI Bill funds, and DOD Tuition Assistance.
Despite this government funding, US Department of Education data show the school's equity value for the Arizona segment declined significantly, from $361M in FY 2018 to $187M in FY 2021.
$347M of the University of Phoenix's $518M in assets are intangible assets. Intangible assets typically include intellectual property and brand reputation. The school has $348M in liabilities.
The University of Phoenix has been reducing expenses by cutting instructional costs, from $70M in FY 2020 to $60M in FY 2021. UoPX spends about 8 percent of its revenues on instruction.
Attempts to Sell UoPX
There have been two known potential buyers for the University of Phoenix: the University of Arkansas System and the University of Idaho. In both cases, the owners required the potential buyers to keep the deal secret until the sale was imminent.
Fear of the impending higher education enrollment cliff appears to be an important pitch to potential buyers.
Arkansas, the first target, was in the process of making the deal, and it might have gone through if nit for the voice of one whistleblower and one outstanding investigative reporter, Debra Hale Shelton of the Arkansas Times.
In the case of Idaho, news of the potential deal was publicly noted just one day before the preliminary agreement was made with the Idaho Board of Education. Two other secret meetings were held before that.
A number of journalists including Kevin Richert (Idaho EdNews), Laura Guido (The Idaho Press), Troy Oppie (Boise State Public Radio), and Noble Brigham (Idaho Statesman) have exposed some of the problems and potential problems with the deal. In June, Idaho legislators began questioning the acquisition.
More recently, the opinion editor at the Idaho Statesman argued that the deal may actually be worthwhile.
Particulars about the finances are sketchy at best and misleading at worst. The University of Phoenix is said to include $200M in cash in the deal, but they have not said how much of that sum is required by law as "restricted cash"--money the school needs if the Department of Education needs to claw back funds. Phoenix also claims to be highly profitable, but without showing any evidence.
What is known about the deal is that the University of Idaho will have to borrow $685M and put its (bond) credit rating at risk. The school has not identified important information how the bonds would be sold (underwriters, bond raters, date to maturity, interest rate).
The University of Idaho has created an FAQ to answer questions about the sale, but HEI has identified a number of misleading statements about University of Phoenix's present finances (failure to report the school's equity), potential liability (cost of tens of thousands of Borrower Defense claims), and leadership (lack of background information about Chris Lynne, the President of the University of Phoenix). These deficiencies have been reported to the University of Idaho and to the Representative Horman.
On June 20, Idaho Attorney General Raul Labrador filed a lawsuit to halt, or at least slow down the deal.
The University of Idaho submitted a Pre-Acquisition Review from the US Department of Education, and it may take up to three months before the application is completed.
As of September 2023, the deal is far from done. Since this article was first published there have been a number of developments:
On September 11, US Senators Elizabeth Warren, Dick Durbin, and Richard Blumenthal called on University of Idaho President Green to abandon the sale. The Senators also asked Green if he had a plan to pay for the Borrower Defense claims, noting that University of Arizona may be on the hook for thousands of claims against Ashford University (aka University of Arizona Global campus).
In November, the Joint Finance-Appropriations Committee of the Idaho Legislature is expected to discuss the issue again.
*The Higher Education Inquirer has made a FOIA request for more up-to-date numbers from the US Department of Education. We have also filed FOIA requests with the FTC.
Related link:
The Growth of "RoboColleges" and "Robostudents"More Transparency About the Student Debt Portfolio Is Needed: Student Debt By Institution
Borrower Defense Claims Surpass 750,000. Consumers Empowered. Subprime Colleges and Programs Threatened.Monday, May 9, 2022
College Meltdown 2.2: Who’s Minding the Store?
The latest report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) about wrongdoing by higher education online program managers (OPMs) felt disappointing to social justice advocates who watch the space and know the bad actors who were unnamed in the GAO document.
US higher education has always been a racket, but its latest
pursuits have gone untouched and even unmentioned. GAO’s behavior, though, is no worse than the
many other corporate enablers who are supposed to be minding government funds wasted –or worse
yet—used to prey upon US working families.
The US Department of Education
has done little lately to safeguard consumers from predatory student loan
servicers like Maximus and Navient, or subprime
universities like Purdue University
Global and University of Arizona
Global, and hundreds of small players who offer marginal education leading
to less than gainful employment.
The Department of
Veterans Affairs has done little lately to protect veterans and their
families from being ripped off by subprime schools. At one time, VA was a leader in tracking GI Bill complaints and making them public, but transparency and accountability are far
from what they were.
The US Department of Defense (DOD) has
been asleep at the wheel with its distribution of DOD Tuition Assistance funds
to subprime colleges. Its complaint
system is close to nonexistent.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) and US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) have done little to rein in bad actors in higher education, leaving the work to states attorneys general. Hate crimes on campus have also been ignored. In other cases, elite university endowments have received little notice despite eyebrow raising profits. Student loan asset-backed securities are also below their radar.
During the pandemic, The Department of Treasury has failed to adequately oversee funds issued to the Federal Reserve and the Small Business Administration funneled to subprime schools.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which had done an adequate job investigating predatory lead generators and marketing and advertising false claims has been hamstrung by a recent court decision and can no longer fine higher ed wrongdoers. Predatory companies know this and will act accordingly—as criminals do when cops are not on the beat.
What lack of oversight have you seen with federal agencies
tasked to protect higher education consumers?
Related link: College Meltdown 2.0
Related link: Maximus, Student Loan Debt, and the Poverty Industrial Complex
Related link: 2U Virus Expands College Meltdown to Elite Universities
Related link: DOD, VA Get Low Grades for Helping Vets Make College Choices
Related link: The Colbeck Scandal (South University and the Art Institutes)
Related link: When does a New York college become an international EB-5 visa scam?
Related link: One Fascism or Two?: The Reemergence of "Fascism(s)" in US Higher Education
Wednesday, February 10, 2021
Buyer Beware: Servicemembers, Veterans, and Families Need to Be On Guard with College and Career Choices
Has anyone noticed that Harvard has the fourth highest number of GI Bill complaints? Harvard? Is this a typo?
While several of the schools on the current list of worst actors have bad reputations (e.g. University of Phoenix, Ashford University (aka University of Arizona Global), Colorado Tech, New Horizons, Keller (aka Devry, and Keiser University), Harvard seems to be one of those schools that's not like the other. At first I thought this might be an input error. But on closer look, it appears the complaints may be about Harvard extension and their certificate programs. Haven't been able to verify what these numbers mean. In any case though it illustrates a point: Just because a school has a good label doesn't mean you are getting a quality education or a fair deal.
This also goes to show that servicemembers, veterans, and their families--and all other consumers--must apply the maxim "buyer beware" to every school they consider. Be patient and do your homework. Ask questions and demand credible answers. Use your critical thinking skills. Don't merely rely on word of mouth, advertisements, and rankings.
I have more ideas about college and career choices posted at Military Times, called 8 tips to help vets pick the right college.
Sunday, January 12, 2020
Are “Best for Vets” and “Military Friendly Colleges” Rankings Believable?
GI Bill benefits are a well-deserved reward for your years of military service. They are also an important, but not endless asset for you and your family to transition back to civilian life and to have a good future. In a 2018 Military Times opinion piece, I suggested 8 tips for choosing a college. Those tips are an important primer, but even more education is necessary to spend your GI Bill funds wisely. Military Times, GI Jobs, and others have compiled “Best for Vets” and “Military Friendly School” lists for servicemembers and veterans, but are their lists credible?
Military Friendly?
Whether you are on post, off post, or surfing online, hucksters are trying to sell you their schools, calling them “military friendly.” Servicemembers, veterans, and their families are inundated with advertisements and recruiting for schools--and often these schools are what I call “subprime,” meaning they have questionable value and use questionable tactics to recruit. These messages appear on billboards, ads at the top of your Google or Bing search, on your feeds on Facebook, LinkedIn, and other social media, in ads embedded in internet articles, and in local newspapers, and magazines in unemployment offices and in grocery stores. And once they get your personal information, subprime schools may end up sending you a slew of texts and phone calls pitching their messages.
Military Times, GI Jobs, and other media produce college rankings specifically for servicemembers, veterans, and their families. This lists have some valuable information, but they should not be used exclusively for making the best college choice. You should be particularly skeptical of advertisements in these and other sources, which may or may not be helpful in making college choices. In some cases, websites posing as informational tools for veterans are actually internet predators.
Military Times’ “Best for Vet” Lists
Military Times (publisher of Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Times) produces a “Best for Vets” list that includes separate lists for 4-year colleges, two year colleges, online and non-traditional colleges and vocational colleges. The schools are ranked by factors such as: whether they have a veterans center, military retention rate, military graduation rate, and affordability for people using DOD Tuition Assistance and GI Bill funds.
The Best for Vets four-year college list has schools with value, with University of Texas, Arlington, Colorado State University, University of Nebraska, Omaha, and Syracuse University topping the list. But while these schools may be good for many veterans, high-performing veterans may be better served at highly selective schools like Columbia University, Cornell University, and Stanford. If you have done well on the SAT or ACT and shown promise in your educational work, Warrior-Scholar and Service2School may be important allies.
Military Times’ lists of 2-year schools and vocational schools includes community colleges that have reasonable value, but they may not be the best choice if a student doesn’t plan to stay in the area. The list of online schools does include, Excelsior College, New York state’s college for working adults completing their degrees. Other schools on the online list, however, are particularly troubling (Colorado Technical University and American Intercontinental University, for example). Rather than being best for veterans, some are considered bad actors by organizations looking out for veterans and other consumers. To muddy the waters even more, Military Times accepts advertisements from subprime schools that have the money to post half-page ads in the magazine.
Subprime Colleges
By subprime college, I am referring to schools that have:
- high tuition in relation to community colleges,
- low graduation rates, and
- low student loan repayment rates*
Sunken Investments
If you have found that the school you went to while in the military is a “bottom of the barrel” college, you have lots of research to do before using your GI Bill benefits. Think twice about investing your GI Bill money into a school that will not lead to gainful employment, even if that means starting over if you have to. You should also contact VA and Veterans Education Success to register any complaints about a school you have attended.
*Unfortunately for consumers, student loan repayment rate has been removed from the new College Scorecard.
Helpful Links
Warrior-Scholar (college preparatory boot camps)
Service2School (free application counseling)
Veteran Mentor Network on LinkedIn
Veterans Education Success (tips in enrolling for college)
8 tips to help vets pick the right college (Military Times)
Thursday, July 4, 2019
US Departments of Education, Defense, and Veterans Affairs Shirk Responsibilities to Servicemembers, Veterans, and Their Families
The US government has systematically shirked its oversight of subprime colleges that target servicemembers, veterans, and their families, especially during the Trump Administration.
I have to give some credit to President Obama for trying to do something against these schools, with Executive Order 13607, but much of that work has been undermined by DOD and VA officials.
- Instead of exposing poor performing schools that get DOD Tuition Assistance, officials in 2018 decided that protecting these schools from a "witch hunt" was more important.
- In 2019, DOD continued to protect even the worst 50-100 subprime schools from public scrutiny.
- VA Office of Inspector General reported that $474 million had been inappropriately allocated to subprime schools, but I have seen no attempt to claw back the money for US taxpayers.
- Purdue University Global, one of the worst schools for misleading consumers, has faced no consequences for their unethical behavior as they targeted servicemembers in the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Times, as well as social media.
Thursday, May 2, 2019
Purdue University Global Continues to Defraud Servicemembers, Veterans, and Working Families
- Purdue University and Its Subprime College Cousin Committing Fraud
- Higher Learning Commission: Accreditation Is No Sign Of Quality
- Lead Generator QuinStreet Preying on Veterans: "You are a liar on every call"
- DOD, VA Get Low Grades for Helping Vets Make College Choices
"The school that systematically misleads students or enrolls those who don't have the capability of succeeding is unlikely to last long. It will have a difficult time making money, and it will build problematic word of mouth in the community in which it operates."--Kaplan CEO Andrew S. Rosen (p. 169) in Change.eduIn August 2018, I posted a report about Purdue University and its new acquisition, Purdue University Global. The Big-10 school purchased the former Kaplan University from Graham Holdings Company for the sum of $1, while Kaplan Higher Education would be paid service fees for managing the business. The deal sounded like a windfall for Purdue University, but it really wasn’t. Purdue University Global is in deep financial trouble, and Purdue University is liable for any losses related to Purdue Global’s fraudulent business activities.
In truth, Purdue University Global’s educational quality is mediocre at best, and its student outcomes rival some of the worst actors in for-profit higher education. Global's numbers:
- 83 percent (320 of 1,910 instructors) are low-wage adjuncts
- spends only 18 cents for every dollar it receives in tuition
- 20 percent 6-year graduation rate
- 26 percent student loan repayment rate
- 53 percent student loan default rate over 5 years
In April 2019, little has changed in terms of Purdue Global’s fraudulent claims. And as Purdue loses more money (it had a $38 million net operating loss in FY 2018), it will have to make bold moves to survive. While little public information is available, we do know that Purdue Global continues to spend money on television and print ads.
Saturday, November 24, 2018
Ashford University Deceiving Consumers, Violating Department of Defense Regulations
Since its inception in 2005, Ashford University has been an overly priced, low value educational institution with questionable ethics and poor student outcomes. As a result, servicemembers and veterans have filed a disproportionate number of complaints about the school through the Department of Defense, Department of Veterans Affairs, and the non-profit Veterans Education Success.[i][ii][iii]
Recently, Ashford University and Bridgepoint have also been under scrutiny by VA for making false statements about the location of the school’s main business location. While this may not be a violation of the DOD MOU, it does exemplify the company’s repeated unscrupulous behavior[x]
Misleading and Deceptive Use of "Military Friendly" and "Best For Vets" Logos
Ashford University continues to use logos that are deceptive. Promotional materials show that Ashford University claims to be "Military Friendly" and "Best For Vets." But these designations are no longer valid.
https://www.classaction.