Archive for: University Highlights

A recent report, from Veterans Education Success indicates that for-profit institutions are using a federal loophole to increase revenue and disproportionally target veterans and service members. From 2011 to 2014, tuition payments to for-profit schools from the Department of Veterans Affairs and the Department of Defense increased by 60 percent—to the tune of $1.1 billion—and according to researchers, the number is an understatement since the Department of Education data doesn’t include all G.I. Bill benefit programs. The now closed Corinthian Colleges and ITT Technical Institutes alone, are estimated to have received over $1 billion in G.I. Bill benefits prior to suddenly shutting down in the last year.

The increase is likely due to declining enrollment at for-profit colleges, universities and trade schools as a result of decreased Title IV funding. To offset this loss in revenue, for-profits are using the 90-10 loophole to fill their financial voids. The 90-10 rule was passed in 1992 and bars for-profit institutions from receiving more than 90 percent of revenues from Title IV federal student funds. However, the law excludes GI bill benefits and the DOD’s tuition assistance funds from its figuring. Congressional staff said that GI Bill and DOD funds were not included in the 1992 cap on Title IV revenue because the GI Bill was not generous enough at the time. In 2008, a new Post 9/11 G.I. bill was passed allowing veterans and service members the ability to receive tens of thousands of dollars towards higher education.

This oversight has become known as the 90/10 loophole, and as a result, for-profit schools have been aggressively recruiting and enrolling veterans and service members ever since. According to Holly Petraeus, of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, this loophole “gives for-profit colleges the incentive to see service members as nothing more than dollar signs in a uniform, and to use aggressive marketing to draw them in.” According to Time magazine, a civil complaint filed by the state of California expressed concern over Corinthian College’s unauthorized use of the official seals of the United States Navy, Army, Air Force, and Coast Guard in its effort to boost recruitment of discharged servicemen and women. Other for-profits have been accused of similar recruitment tactics—inflated graduate salaries, false job prospects, and misleading graduation rates.

Concerned with the exploitation of veterans, Senators have reintroduced legislation to tighten VA and DOD educational funds to for-profit schools. Introduced last week, the Military and Veterans Education Protection Act, would close the 90/10 loophole in hopes of protecting veterans. According to Senator Tom Carper (D-DE), “Closing the 90/10 loophole and counting G.I. Bill dollars as federal dollars, which they are, is a commonsense fix that will help us improve educational outcomes for veterans and protect taxpayers.” The bipartisan bill is supported by more than 25 senators and endorsed by over two dozen groups and organizations including: Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America (IAVA), Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW), and the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (NAICU). Currently, the bill is awaiting the Senate’s Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions for review.

 

** Looking for higher education contact or accreditation info? Try our complete HigherEd Direct database free for two weeks here!

Students enrolled in Tennessee’s free community college scholarship, the Tennessee Promise, are showing more signs of success in higher education than their peers not using the program. According to data released by the Tennessee State Board of Regents, 56% of students who started in the Promise program’s first year (2015) remained in school two years later. Only 39% of high school graduates not in the program were still in school during the same time frame.

The program was introduced in 2014 and gives students up to five semesters of tuition-free attendance at any of the state’s 13 community colleges, 27 colleges of applied technology, or eligible 4-year institutions offering associate’s degrees. Beyond removing the financial burden, Tennessee Promise offers individual guidance to each participant from a mentor. Mentors help students maneuver through application and financial aid processes, and are mandatory for students to remain eligible for the program. Tennessee Promise scholarship recipients must also complete 8 hours of community service per semester enrolled and keep a GPA above a 2.0.

Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam said, “When we launched Tennessee Promise, one of the legitimate questions was, … ‘Can theses Students succeed?’ I think the results show that these students are succeeding at a decidedly better rate.”  Though drop-out rates are lower for Tennessee Promise students, the data also shows that 44 percent of the program’s first classmore than 5,500 studentshad dropped out of college without a degree by 2017. Officials argue that the number is a sign of progress with over 60 percent of non-Promise students dropping out in the same timeframe, a 17 percent difference. Tennessee’s Promise program also continues to grow, and according to The Nashville Tennessean is up four percentage points from last year with nearly 85 percent of high school seniors applying.

According to Governor Haslam, “A lot of our efforts in the remaining year and a half that we have in office will be around how do we dramatically increase the percentage of students who complete.” As an educated workforce becomes critical to ensuring economic prosperity in one’s local, state, and national communities, it seems that Tennessee’s Promise program—with its positive application, retention and graduation rates—is setting up its students for a more certain future.

 

Stay current with all the changes in higher education with HigherEd Direct! Click here for a free trial.

The U.S. Department of Education has “preliminarily concluded” that it will allow two controversial for-profit institutions to become nonprofits. Purdue University announced its intention to acquire the for-profit Kaplan University system back in April. The acquisition has since been approved by the state of Indiana, but still needed backing from the Department of Education and the Higher Learning Commission, its accreditor. Now, with federal approval, all that is needed to finalize the acquisition is authorization from the Higher Learning Commission. The move has set a major precedent in the integration of for-profits with traditional colleges and universities.

The second deal, that seems to have jumped another regulatory hurdle on its way to becoming a non-profit, is the acquisition of Education Management Corp (EDMC)—parent company of Argosy University, South University, and the Art Institutes—by The Dream Center Foundation, a non-profit created to fund philanthropic programs across the country. The Education Department said “it does not see any impediment to EDMC’s request for approval of the change in ownership or its request for approval of nonprofit institution status.” Many are concerned that the Dream Center, which has no experience running higher education institutions, will continue to operate the schools in the same manner as before. If approved by its accreditors, the move would be one of the largest for-profit to nonprofit changeovers on record.

Critics of the acquisitions cite that nonprofit conversions are being used to skirt regulations and mask hidden financial incentives. Unlike for-profits, nonprofit schools are tax exempt. Nonprofit colleges are also excluded from the 90/10 rule, which prohibits schools from earning more than 90 percent of their revenue from federal student loans. Bob Shireman of the Century Foundation—a think tank that investigates for-profit institutions—told the USA Today that the deals are like a bad restaurant being able to claim new ownership in order to improve its reputation without making any additional changes, and cites that Kaplan has been the focal point of past government investigations and lawsuits.

According to a Department of Education spokeswoman, “the department has preliminarily concluded that, based on the information provided to the department, there are no current impediments to the requests for approval of change of ownership.” For the deals to be finalized, both must be approved by their accreditors. The Dream Center-EDMC deal is a more complicated because it requires the approval of two different accrediting agencies. Argosy University is accredited by the Western Association of Colleges and Schools, while South University is accredited by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. The Purdue-Kaplan deal relies on approval from the Higher Learning Commission only. The HLC is reviewing the plan now and is expected to make a decision by November 2017.

 

To stay up-to-date with changing accreditation listings and college administrators with HigherEd Direct– Try it Free for two weeks HERE!

The Senate Committee on Appropriations has approved the Fiscal Year 2018 Labor, HHS, and Education Appropriations Bill, which as part of its overall package, will dedicate $68.3 billion in funding to the U.S. Department of Education. A previous proposal by President Trump, to cut spending from the Education Department, was denied when the Senate Subcommittee voted unanimously to increase overall education spending to the tune of $29 million.

More specifically, the bill promotes higher education affordability with a discretionary increase in Pell grants, from $5,920 to $6,020—the first in over 10 years. According to the Senate Committee, “This discretionary increase ensures the maximum award will continue to increase next school year to help students keep up with rising costs and reduce the need for student loans.”

The proposed bill also adds funding to the Year-Round Pell Program, which allows students to receive up to 150 percent of grants over a whole year, not just the fall and spring semesters. The new grant is designed to add $1,600 annually to allow students to pursue higher education year-round, in hopes of finishing up degree programs faster. The bill also outlines a plan to restore Pell aid for defrauded students and those attending colleges or universities that have closed.

Also, as reported by Inside Higher Ed, the 269 institutions accredited by the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools have been granted an additional 18-month extension to find new accreditors. ACICS is an accrediting agency that mostly recognizes for-profit schools. In December of 2016, the U.S. Department of Education announced that it would no longer recognize ACICS, and gave schools 18 months to find valid accreditation. Under the new funding bill, schools recognized by ACICS now have 36 months, from December of 2016, to find new accreditation.

Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee, Senator Roy Blunt said, “The bill also continues building on our efforts to combat the opioid epidemic and make college more affordable. I urge all of my Senate colleagues to support this measure when it reaches the floor.” The bill awaits a final vote from the entire U.S. Senate.

 

Find Who’s Who in higher education with the HigherEd Direct Database. Try it completely free by clicking hepinc.com/free-trial .

New research from Higher Education Publications, Inc., indicates that the number of women in presidential positions at the major research universities is decreasing. The analysis tracked presidents of the 115 colleges and universities in the United States that are Carnegie classified as doctoral research, highest activity institutions. Carnegie classified doctoral institutions include schools that award at least 20 research/doctoral degrees during a given year, such as Princeton, Stanford and Michigan.

The report, based on information from the HigherEd Direct Database, examined Carnegie classified doctoral universities from 1988 to the present. Currently, 16 of the 115, or just under 14% of institutions listed, have female presidents. The number of women in chief executive positions peaked from 2009 through 2012, when 23 of the 115 schools had women as presidents. The lowest year for female presidents was in 1994, with only 4 female and 111 male presidents.

Data from the study shows significant growth in the number of female presidents from 1988 to 2012, when it topped out at 20%. Since then, the percentage of females in presidential positions at doctoral universities has trended downward, to under 14%.

Conversely, according to a report by the American Council on Education, 30% of all colleges and universities in the U.S. have female presidents, with the most (36%) at associate institutions. The ACE Report also shows continuous growth in the percentage of female presidents in the last 30 years, from 9.5 % in 1986 to 30% in 2016.

HEP’s Research shows that the average tenure of male presidents is longer than that of female presidents. On average, male presidents serve for 5.96 years at doctoral research institutions, while females serve for an average of 4.87 years. The longest serving tenure for a female president in the study was a 15-year tenure by Dr. Shirly Kenny, of SUNY Stony Brook. The longest serving male is Dr. John Hitt, who has been at the University of Central Florida for the past 25 years.

While the percentage of women in presidential positions at colleges and universities has grown in the last thirty years, research from Higher Education Publications, Inc. indicates a major disparity between top research institutions and other higher education institutions. While the Ivy league has made progress in gender diversity—four out of the eight schools are run by females—overall, just under 14% of college presidents are female at top doctoral research institutions, while the rest of the country is at 30%.

 

 

ACE’s “American College President Study 2017”: http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Pages/American-College-President-Study.aspx

The HigherEd Direct Database was used to compile information in this research article: for a free trial click here .

The Washington Post reports that the Department of Homeland Security has drafted a preliminary proposal that would require international students to reapply annually for permission to study in the United States. The proposal could hamper the admission of foreign students to colleges and universities by adding additional costs, paperwork and an annual refiling of status to those seeking education in America.

In a letter to the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 12 higher education associations and organizations noted “serious concern” with the proposed changes. “When faced with up to a 400 percent increase in fees, redundant forms, and restrictive validity periods, an applicant will likely opt to pursue their studies elsewhere,” the letter reads.

It also points to the fact that global competition is increasing for international students with “countries like Canada and Germany publicly advertising their welcoming policies in an attempt to become a destination of choice. It is imperative that our country’s visa issuance procedures and duration of stay policies are efficient and streamlined, not burdensome and prohibitive.”

Across the country, international students add to a university’s global experience, but they also pay more expensive out-of-state tuition, providing considerable financial incentives to U.S. colleges and universities by helping those institutions struggling with overall funding. The letter points out that “though international students make up only five percent of postsecondary students in the country, they contributed $32 billion to the U.S. economy and supported more than 400,000 jobs just in the last academic year alone.”

Department of Homeland Security officials say the proposal seeks to enhance national security by closely monitoring foreign students. According to The Washington Post, some at DHS believe that student visas are too open-ended in how they allow students to transfer from one program to another. Officials say the plan is still in its initial stages and could require regulatory changes that would take a minimum of 18 months. DHS spokesman David Lapan said, “DHS is exploring a variety of measures that would ensure that our immigration programs—including programs for international students studying in the United States—operate in a manner that promotes the national interest, enhances national security and public safety and ensures the integrity of our immigration system.”