XML 47 R31.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.24.0.1
Regulation
 12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2023
Regulation [Abstract]  
Regulation Regulation
United States Regulation
As institutionally accredited institutions of higher education operating in multiple jurisdictions, Capella University and Strayer University are subject to accreditation rules and varying state licensing and regulatory requirements. In addition, the Higher Education Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder require all higher education institutions that participate in the various Title IV programs, including Capella University and Strayer University, to comply with detailed substantive and reporting requirements and to undergo periodic regulatory scrutiny. The Higher Education Act mandates specific regulatory responsibility for each of the following components of the higher education regulatory triad: (1) the institutional accrediting agencies recognized by the U.S. Secretary of Education; (2) state education regulatory bodies; and (3) the federal government through the Department of Education. Our business activities are planned and implemented to achieve compliance with the rules and regulations of the state, regional and federal agencies that regulate our activities. The regulations, standards, and policies of these regulatory agencies are subject to frequent change.
Students finance their education at Capella University and Strayer University in a variety of ways, and historically about 75% of students participated in one or more Title IV programs.
Title IV Programs
Capella University and Strayer University maintain eligibility for their students to participate in the following Title IV programs:
•Federal Grants. Grants under the Federal Pell Grant program are available to eligible students based on financial need and other factors.
•Campus-Based Programs. The campus-based Title IV programs include the Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant program, the Federal Perkins Loan, and the Federal Work-Study Program. Neither Capella University nor Strayer University actively participates in the Federal Perkins Loan program, which expired on September 30, 2017. In addition, Strayer University does not actively participate in the Federal Work-Study Program.
•Federal Direct Student Loans. Under the William D. Ford Federal Direct Loan Program, the Department of Education makes loans directly to students and their parents. Undergraduate students who demonstrate financial need may qualify for a subsidized loan. The federal government pays the interest on a subsidized loan while the student is in school and during any approved periods of deferment, after which the student’s obligation to repay the loan begins. Unsubsidized loans are available to students who do not qualify for a subsidized loan or, in some cases, in addition to a subsidized loan. PLUS loans, including Graduate PLUS loans, are unsubsidized loans available in amounts up to the total cost of attendance less any other financial aid.
Federal Financial Aid Regulation
To be eligible to participate in Title IV programs, Capella University and Strayer University must comply with specific standards and procedures set forth in the Higher Education Act and the regulations issued thereunder by the Department of Education. As part of those participation standards, the Department of Education determines whether, among other things, the institution meets certain standards of administrative capability and financial responsibility. The institutions must also follow extensive Department of Education rules regarding the awarding and processing of funds issued under Title IV programs. Some of the key provisions regarding institutional eligibility and processing federal financial aid are described below.
Financial Responsibility
The Higher Education Act and Department of Education regulations establish extensive standards of financial responsibility that institutions such as Capella University and Strayer University must satisfy in order to participate in Title IV programs. These standards generally require that an institution provide the services described in its official publications and statements, properly administer Title IV programs in which it participates, and meet all of its financial obligations, including required refunds and any repayments to the Department of Education for debts and liabilities incurred in programs administered by the Department of Education.
Department of Education standards utilize a complex formula to assess financial responsibility. The standards focus on three financial ratios: (1) equity ratio (which measures the institution’s capital resources and ability to borrow); (2) primary reserve ratio (which measures the institution’s financial viability and liquidity); and (3) net income ratio (which measures the institution’s ability to operate at a profit or within its means). An institution’s financial ratios must yield a composite score of at least 1.5 for the institution to be deemed financially responsible without alternative measures and further federal oversight. For Capella University and Strayer University, the Department evaluates financial responsibility at the parent level, based on review of SEI’s financial statements. The Company has applied the financial responsibility standards to it’s financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2023, and based on it’s calculated composite score and other relevant factors, it believes the Company met the Department of Education’s financial responsibility standards.
On November 1, 2016, the Department of Education released a new regulation, which after a series of delays became effective as of October 16, 2018, under which an institution may no longer be considered financially responsible if one or more of a list of triggering events occurs. The Department of Education will automatically determine that an institution is not financially responsible if a “mandatory” triggering event occurs, which includes, among other things, the institution receives certain warnings from the SEC, fails to file required reports in a timely manner, or has a cohort default rate of 30% or greater for each of the two most recent official calculations. The Department of Education will also determine that an institution is not financially responsible if certain triggering events, such as a lawsuit against the institution, an accrediting agency’s requirement that the institution submit a teach-out plan, or potential loss of Title IV eligibility for gainful employment programs, result in the institution’s recalculated composite score to be less than 1.0. The Department of Education may also invoke certain “discretionary” triggering events, such as citation by a state agency or accrediting agency for failure to satisfy the agency’s standards, to determine that an institution is not financially responsible. An institution determined not to be financially responsible because of one or more triggering events may be required to issue an irrevocable letter of credit for not less than 10% of the Title IV funds received by the school for the most recently completed fiscal year and/or will be issued a Provisional Program Participation Agreement.
On August 30, 2019, as part of the final BDTR regulations, the Department of Education made changes to the financial responsibility requirements, including establishing a more limited set, as compared to the 2016 rule, of mandatory and discretionary triggering events that have, or could have, a materially adverse impact on the institution’s financial condition and therefore warrant financial protection. The 2019 rule left intact the consequences of the triggering events under the 2016 rule. The 2019 rule further updates the definitions of terms used to calculate an institution’s composite score and otherwise amends the composite score methodology to reflect changes in FASB accounting standards pertaining to new leases. The financial responsibility changes became effective July 1, 2020.
In 2022, the Department of Education considered as part of the Institutional and Programmatic Eligibility negotiated rulemaking new regulations regarding, among other things, financial responsibility. Negotiated rulemaking committee meetings completed in March 2022 with no consensus reached on the topic. On October 23, 2023, the Department released final rules on financial responsibility. Pursuant to new regulations effective July 1, 2024, the Department adopted new mandatory and discretionary triggers and new reporting requirements. New mandatory triggers include but are not limited to failing the 90/10 Rule; receiving at least 50% of Title IV funds from programs that fail gainful employment requirements; certain SEC or exchange actions; and certain actions that result in an institution’s recalculated composite score to fall below 1.0, including being subject to a Department action to recover losses from approved Borrower Defense to Repayment claims. All of the mandatory triggers constitute an automatic failure of the financial responsibility requirements and would enable the Department to seek financial protection. The rules also establish new discretionary triggers that permit the Department to conduct a case-by-case analysis to determine if additional financial protection is needed. Such discretionary triggers include accrediting agency and government agency actions; certain defaults or creditor events; high annual dropout rates; elimination of programs or locations that enroll more than 25% of the institution’s Title IV students; and pending Borrower Defense to Repayment claims, among other things. In general, institutions will be required to report triggering events within 21 days of occurrence. According to the regulation, such triggering events may result in a financial protection requirement that would most likely take the form of a letter of credit or cash escrow and provisional certification to participate in Title IV. The amount of financial protection can range from 10% up to 50% of Title IV funds per triggering event, and the Department may “stack” financial protection requirements if more than one mandatory or discretionary trigger is present.
Student Loan Defaults
The Department of Education calculates a rate of student defaults (known as a cohort default rate) for each institution with 30 or more borrowers entering repayment in a given federal fiscal year. The Department of Education includes in the cohort all student borrowers at the institution who entered repayment on any Direct or Federal Family Education Loan Program loan during that fiscal year. The cohort default rate is the percentage of those borrowers who become subject to their repayment obligation in the relevant federal fiscal year and default by the end of the second federal fiscal year following that fiscal year, resulting in a three-year cohort default rate. Because of the need to collect data on defaults, the Department of Education publishes cohort default rates three years in arrears; for example, in the fall of 2023, the Department of Education issued cohort default rates for federal fiscal year 2020.
The Department of Education may take adverse action against an institution if it has excessive cohort default rates, including without limitation the following:
•If an institution’s cohort default rate is 30% or more in a given fiscal year, the institution will be required to assemble a “default prevention task force” and submit to the Department of Education a default improvement plan.
•If an institution’s cohort default rate exceeds 30% for two consecutive years, the institution will be required to review, revise, and resubmit its default improvement plan.
•If an institution’s cohort default rate exceeds 30% for two out of three consecutive years, the Department of Education may subject the institution to provisional certification.
•If an institution’s cohort default rate is equal to or greater than 30% for each of the three most recent federal fiscal years for which data are available, the institution will be ineligible to participate in the Direct Loan Program and Federal Pell Grant Program.
An institution generally loses eligibility to participate in Title IV programs if its most recent cohort default rate is greater than 40%. Institutions with a cohort default rate equal to or greater than 15% for any of the three most recent fiscal years for which data are available are subject to a 30-day delayed disbursement period for first-year, first-time undergraduate borrowers.
National and institutional cohort default rates for cohort years 2018, 2019, and 2020 have been impacted by the COVID-19 repayment pause. Capella University’s and Strayer University’s official three-year cohort default rates for 2018, 2019, and 2020, as well as the average official three-year cohort default rates for proprietary institutions nationally, were as follows:
Capella 
University		Strayer 
University		National Average
Proprietary
 Institutions
20185.2 %8.6 %11.2 %
20191.1 %2.2 %3.1 %
20200.0 %0.0 %0.0 %
As part of the compliance programs related to the cohort default rate, Capella University and Strayer University provide entrance and exit counseling to their students and engage the services of third parties to counsel students once they are in repayment status regarding their repayment obligations.
On March 27, 2020, Congress passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”), which included a provision that established a federal student loan administrative forbearance period, pause in interest accrual, and suspension of collections activity. In June 2023, the Department of Education announced that student loan interest would begin to accrue on September 1, 2023, and student loan repayment resumed in October 2023. As part of the return to repayment, the Department has also announced a 12 month “on-ramp” during which time delinquent borrowers will not be reported to credit bureaus or be counted as in default for the purpose of cohort default rate calculations.
On January 10, 2023, the Department proposed regulations to create a new income-driven repayment plan to reduce future monthly payments for lower- and middle-income borrowers. Among other things, the proposed regulation would revise the Revised Pay As You Earn (REPAYE) regulations, eliminate negative amortization, and offer $0 monthly payments for any individual borrower who makes less than roughly $30,600 annually and any borrower in a family of four who makes less than about $62,400. While it is too early to know the entirety of the impact that COVID and COVID-related repayment flexibility will have on the cohort default rate, the Company expects that the next one or more cohort years will be affected.
The 90/10 Rule
A requirement of the Higher Education Act, commonly referred to as the 90/10 Rule, applies only to proprietary institutions of higher education, which include Capella University and Strayer University. Under this rule, a proprietary institution is prohibited from deriving more than 90% of its revenues (as revenues are computed under the Department of Education’s methodology) from federal funds on a cash accounting basis (except for certain institutional loans) for any fiscal year. Historically, by statute, only Title IV funds have been considered within the 90% metric; however as described below, that will change for fiscal years beginning on or after January 1, 2023.
A proprietary institution of higher education that violates the 90/10 Rule for any fiscal year will be placed on provisional certification for up to two fiscal years. Proprietary institutions of higher education that violate the 90/10 Rule for two consecutive fiscal years will become ineligible to participate in Title IV programs for at least two fiscal years and will be required to demonstrate compliance with Title IV eligibility and certification requirements for at least two fiscal years prior to resuming Title IV program participation. In addition, the Department of Education discloses on its website any proprietary institution of higher education that fails to meet the 90/10 requirement, and reports annually to Congress the relevant ratios for each proprietary institution of higher education.
Using the statutory formula under the definition of federal funds included within the 90% metric then in effect, Capella University derived approximately 65.30% of its cash-basis revenues from Title IV program funds in fiscal year 2022. Strayer University derived approximately 80.57% of its cash-basis revenues from Title IV program funds in fiscal year 2022. Our computation for 2023, which will be the first year under the new 90/10 requirements, has not yet been finalized and audited; however, we believe we will remain in compliance with the 90/10 Rule requirement.
The key components of non-Title IV revenue for Capella University and Strayer University are individual student payments, employer tuition reimbursement payments, veterans’ education benefits, military tuition assistance, vocational rehabilitation funds, private loans, state grants, and scholarships.
On March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, which included a change to the 90/10 methodology to include all federal funding. The Department of Education promulgated new regulations regarding, among other things, the 90/10 rule as part of the Institutional and Programmatic Eligibility negotiated rulemaking and the committee reached consensus on the topic in March 2022. The Department released final regulations on October 27, 2022. The regulatory changes require proprietary institutions to count all “federal education assistance funds” as federal revenue in the 90/10 calculation for fiscal years beginning on or after January 1, 2023. The preamble to the final rule and subsequent sub-regulatory guidance further prohibit inclusion of non-Title IV eligible programs offered in part or in full through distance education in the 10% calculation. On December 21, 2022, the Department released a list of federal agencies and federal education assistance programs that must be included as federal revenue in the 90/10 calculation. Such agencies include the U.S. Department of Defense (military tuition assistance) and the Department of Veterans Affairs (veterans education benefits). The Department indicated that it will publish periodic updates to the list as needed.
In addition, certain members of Congress have proposed to revise the 90/10 Rule to reduce the limit on federal funding to 85% of total revenue. In the context of Higher Education Act reauthorization, defense bills and appropriations bills, other
members of Congress have proposed legislation that would eliminate the 90/10 Rule. The Company cannot predict whether or how legislative or regulatory changes will affect the 90/10 Rule.
Gainful Employment
Under the Higher Education Act, a proprietary institution offering programs of study other than a baccalaureate degree in liberal arts (for which there is a limited statutory exception) must prepare students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation. On October 31, 2014, the Department of Education published final regulations related to gainful employment. The regulation went into effect on July 1, 2015 (“2015 Regulations”), with the exception of new disclosure requirements, which generally went into effect January 1, 2017, although some portions of those requirements were delayed until July 1, 2019.
The 2015 Regulations included two debt-to-earnings measures, consisting of an annual income rate and a discretionary income rate. The annual income rate measured student debt in relation to earnings, and the discretionary income rate measured student debt in relation to discretionary income. A program passed if the program’s graduates:
•have an annual income rate ratio that does not exceed 8%; or
•have a discretionary income rate that does not exceed 20%.
In addition, a program that did not pass either of the debt-to-earnings metrics and had an annual income rate between 8% and 12% or a discretionary income rate between 20% and 30% was considered to be in a warning zone. A program failed if the program’s graduates had an annual income rate of 12% or greater and a discretionary income rate of 30% or greater. A program became Title IV-ineligible for three years if it failed both metrics for two out of three consecutive years or failed to pass at least one metric for four consecutive award years.
On January 8, 2017, Capella University and Strayer University received their final 2015 debt-to-earnings measures. None of their programs failed the debt-to-earnings metrics. One active Capella University program, the Masters of Science in Marriage and Family Counseling/Therapy, was “in the zone” and two active Strayer University programs, the Associate in Arts in Accounting and Associate in Arts in Business Administration, were “in the zone.” Each of those three programs remained fully eligible. The Department has not released any subsequent debt-to-earnings measures under the 2015 Regulations.
On July 1, 2019, the Department of Education released final gainful employment regulations, which contain a full repeal of the 2015 Regulations, including all debt measures, reporting, disclosure, and certification requirements, effective July 1, 2020.
On December 8, 2021, the Department of Education announced its intention to establish a negotiated rulemaking committee to prepare proposed regulations for, among other topics, gainful employment, via the Institutional and Programmatic Eligibility rulemaking. Meetings of the negotiated rulemaking committee occurred in spring 2022 with the committee failing to reach consensus. On May 17, 2023, the Department released proposed rules on financial value transparency and gainful employment, financial responsibility, administrative capability, certification procedures, and ability to benefit. On September 27, 2023, the Department released final regulations on financial value transparency and gainful employment, which are largely consistent with the proposed rule. The gainful employment final rule establishes two independent metrics, both of which must be passed by a gainful employment program subject to the rule in order to maintain Title IV eligibility. Any gainful employment program that fails either or both metrics in a single year would be required to provide a disclosure to current and prospective students, and any such program that fails the same metric in two out of three consecutive years for which the program’s metrics are calculated would lose its access to federal financial aid. The two metrics are 1) a debt-to-earnings ratio that compares the median earnings of graduates who received federal financial aid to the median annual payments on loan debt borrowed for the program, which must be less than or equal to 8% of annual earnings or 20% of discretionary earnings, and 2) an earnings premium test that measures whether the typical graduates from a program that received federal financial aid earn more than a typical high school graduate in their state (or, in some cases, nationally) and within a certain age range in the labor force. A program that fails in two out of three consecutive years, or is voluntarily discontinued by the institution, would not be eligible to have Title IV reinstated for the program or launch and receive Title IV for a “substantially similar program” (generally defined as a program with the same four-digit CIP code) for a minimum of three years. The final rule describes that the Department will now measure earnings six years after graduation (instead of the proposed rule’s three years after graduation) for certain qualifying graduate programs such as clinical psychology, marriage and family therapy, clinical social work, and clinical counseling. The final rule also includes the requirement that, beginning July 1, 2026, all schools provide a link to a Department of Education-hosted website that includes information on cost, earnings, and licensure information, and the gainful employment metrics. The final gainful employment regulations will take effect July 1, 2024. The Department has indicated that it will release metrics beginning in the 2025 financial aid award year. Beginning July 1, 2026, if a program fails a metric, an institution must provide warnings to students and prospective students meeting certain minimum requirements to be specified by the Department; programs that fail the same metric in the first two years the rates are issued will lose eligibility in 2026. On December 22, 2023, a lawsuit was filed against the Department in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas alleging that the rulemaking process and final rule were based on arbitrary and capricious decisions made by the Department, and that the rule violates constitutional rights related to speech, equal protection, and due process. Capella University and Strayer University are not parties to the lawsuit. The Company is unable to predict the ultimate outcome of the litigation.
Misrepresentation
Under the Higher Education Act, the Department of Education may impose various sanctions, including a fine or suspension or termination of an institution’s participation in Title IV programs, if it engages in substantial misrepresentation of the nature of its educational program, its financial charges, or the employability of its graduates. The Department’s related regulations, which took effect July 1, 2011, set forth the types of activities that constitute misrepresentation and describe the adverse actions that the Department of Education may take if it finds that an institution or a third party that provides educational programs, marketing, advertising, recruiting, or admissions services to the institution engaged in substantial misrepresentation. The rule specifies the types of statements that can subject the institution to liability for misrepresentation, as well as the nature and form of misleading statements.
As part of the Department’s 2016 promulgation of the Borrower Defenses to Repayment regulation, the Department changed the definition of misrepresentation for Title IV regulations to include any statement that “has the likelihood or tendency to mislead under the circumstances.” The expanded definition included “any statement that omits information in such a way as to make the statement false, erroneous, or misleading.” This regulation was published on November 1, 2016 and, after a series of delays, went into effect as of October 16, 2018.
On August 30, 2019, the Department released final Borrower Defense to Repayment regulations that included a new definition of “misrepresentation,” which became effective July 1, 2020. The final rule defines a “misrepresentation” as: a statement, act, or omission by an eligible school to a borrower (a) that is false, misleading, or deceptive, (b) that was made with knowledge of its false, misleading, or deceptive nature or with a reckless disregard for the truth, and (c) that directly and clearly relates to either (1) enrollment or continuing enrollment at the institution, or (2) the provision of educational services for which the loan was made.
On August 10, 2021, the Department of Education announced its intention to establish a rulemaking committee to prepare proposed regulations on, among other things, Borrower Defense to Repayment, including a new definition of misrepresentation. Negotiated rulemaking committee meetings completed in December 2021 with no consensus reached on the topic. On October 31, 2022, the Department released final Borrower Defense to Repayment regulations, which include among other defenses to repayment substantial misrepresentation, with a significantly expanded definition of misrepresentation. The final rule’s definition of misrepresentation includes any false, erroneous or misleading statement made by the institution or its representatives, or its marketing, advertising, recruiting or admissions agents, as well as any omission of fact that a reasonable person would have considered in deciding to enroll in or continue attendance at the institution. A statement is deemed misleading if it has the likelihood or tendency to mislead under the circumstances. A misrepresentation includes statements and omissions made in any medium, whether directly or indirectly, to a student, prospective student or any member of the public, or to an accrediting agency, to a State agency, or to the Secretary of Education. Misrepresentation also includes the dissemination of a student endorsement or testimonial that a student gives either under duress or because the institution required such an endorsement or testimonial to participate in a program.
Borrower Defenses to Repayment
Pursuant to the Higher Education Act and following negotiated rulemaking, on November 1, 2016, the Department of Education released a final regulation specifying the acts or omissions of an institution that a borrower may assert as a defense to repayment of a loan made under the Direct Loan Program and the consequences of such borrower defenses for borrowers, institutions, and the Secretary of Education (the “2016 BDTR Rule”). Under the 2016 BDTR Rule, for Direct Loans disbursed after July 1, 2017, a student borrower may assert a defense to repayment if: (1) the student borrower obtained a state or federal court judgment against the institution; (2) the institution failed to perform on a contract with the student; and/or (3) the institution committed a “substantial misrepresentation” on which the borrower reasonably relied to his or her detriment.
These defenses are asserted through claims submitted to the Department of Education, and the Department has the authority to issue a final decision. In addition, the regulation permits the Department to grant relief to an individual or group of individuals, including individuals who have not applied to the Department seeking relief. If a defense is successfully raised, the Department has discretion to initiate action to collect from an institution the amount of losses incurred based on the borrower defense. The 2016 BDTR Rule also amends the rules concerning discharge of federal student loans when a school or campus closes and prohibits pre-dispute arbitration agreements and class action waivers for borrower defense-type claims. On January 19, 2017, the Department of Education issued a final rule, updating the hearing procedures for actions to establish liability
against an institution of higher education and establishing procedures for recovery proceedings under the borrower defense regulations. Several times between June 2017 and February 2018, the Department of Education announced delays until July 1, 2019 of implementation of certain portions of the 2016 BDTR Rule, including those portions of the regulations that establish a new federal standard and a process for determining whether a Direct Loan borrower has a defense to repayment of a Direct Loan based on an act or omission of an institution. However, in October 2018, a judge denied a request to delay implementation of portions of the regulations, and as a result the 2016 BDTR Rule went into effect as of October 16, 2018.
On September 23, 2019, the Department published final Borrower Defense to Repayment regulations (the “2019 BDTR Rule”), which governs borrower defense to repayment claims in connection with loans first disbursed on or after July 1, 2020. Under the 2019 BDTR Rule, an individual borrower can assert a defense to repayment and be eligible for relief if she or he establishes, by a preponderance of the evidence, that (1) the institution at which the borrower enrolled made a misrepresentation of material fact upon which the borrower reasonably relied in deciding to obtain a Direct Loan or a loan repaid by a Direct Consolidation Loan; (2) the misrepresentation directly and clearly related to the borrower’s enrollment or continuing enrollment at the institution or the institution’s provision of education services for which the loan was made; and (3) the borrower was financially harmed by the misrepresentation. The Department will grant forbearance on all loans related to a claim at the time the claim is made.
The 2019 BDTR Rule defines “financial harm” as the amount of monetary loss that a borrower incurs as a consequence of a misrepresentation. The Department will determine financial harm based upon individual earnings and circumstances, which must include consideration of the individual borrower’s career experience subsequent to enrollment and may include, among other factors, evidence of program-level median or mean earnings. “Financial harm” does not include damages for nonmonetary loss, and the act of taking out a Direct Loan, alone, does not constitute evidence of financial harm. Financial harm also cannot be predominantly due to intervening local, regional, national economic or labor market conditions, nor can it arise from the borrower’s voluntary change in occupation or decision to pursue less than full-time work or decision not to work. The 2019 BDTR Rule contains certain limitations and procedural protections. Among the most prominent of these restrictions, the regulation contains a three-year limitation period of claims, measured from the student’s separation from the institution, does not permit claims to be filed on behalf of groups, and requires that institutions receive access to any evidence in the Department’s possession to inform its response. The 2019 BDTR Rule permits the usage of pre-dispute arbitration agreements as a condition of enrollment, so long as the institution provides plain-language disclosures to students and the disclosure is placed on the institution’s website. The regulations also allow for a borrower to choose whether to apply for a closed school loan discharge or accept a teach-out opportunity. In addition, the closed school discharge window is expanded from 120 days to 180 days prior to the school’s closure, though the final rule does not allow for an automatic closed school loan discharge.
Institutions are required to accept responsibility for the repayment of amounts discharged by the Secretary pursuant to the borrower defense to repayment, closed school discharge (associated with closure of a school or an additional location or branch campus), false certification discharge, and unpaid refund discharge regulations. If the Secretary discharges a loan in whole or in part, the Department of Education may require the school to repay the amount of the discharged loan.
On August 10, 2021, the Department of Education announced its intention to establish a rulemaking committee to develop proposed regulations on, among other things, Borrower Defense to Repayment. Negotiated rulemaking committee meetings completed in December 2021 with no consensus reached on the topic. On July 6, 2022, the Department released proposed Borrower Defense to Repayment regulations for public comment and subsequently published a final rule on October 31, 2022. Among other things, the final rule sets a single standard and streamlined process for relief that will apply to all future and pending Borrower Defense to Repayment claims as of July 1, 2023, regardless of the date of a borrower’s loan disbursement; defines the types of misconduct that could lead to borrower defense discharges, including substantial misrepresentations, substantial omissions of fact, breaches of contract, aggressive and deceptive recruitment, and state or federal judgments or final Department of Education actions that could give rise to a Borrower Defense to Repayment claim; establishes a presumption that borrowers reasonably relied upon misrepresentations or omissions; establishes a reconsideration process for borrowers whose claims are not approved for a full discharge, including based on a state law standard; and creates a process for the adjudication of group claims based on common facts. The final rule permits nonprofit legal assistance organizations to request group claims. The final rule also establishes a recoupment process separate from the approval of Borrower Defense to Repayment claims. In addition, the final rule prohibits institutions from requiring borrowers to sign mandatory pre-dispute arbitration agreements or class action waivers for claims related to the making of a Federal Direct Loan or the provision of educational services for which the loan was obtained. The rule also modified the closed school discharge rule to provide an automatic discharge one year after an institution or location’s closure date for borrowers who were enrolled at the time of closure or left 180 days before closure and who do not accept an approved teach-out agreement or continuation of the program at another location of the school; those who accept but do not complete a teach-out agreement or program continuation will receive a discharge one year after their last date of attendance. The final rule became effective July 1, 2023. On August 7, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted a nationwide emergency injunction preventing the Department of Education’s enforcement of the final BDTR
and closed school discharge rules. The matter was heard by the Fifth Circuit panel on November 6, 2023, and the previous versions of the BDTR and closed school discharge rules remain in effect until further determination. The Department has stated that it will not adjudicate any borrower defense applications under the latest rule unless and until the effective date is reinstated; the Department will continue to adjudicate borrower defense applications using an earlier version of the regulations where required under a court settlement (the Sweet case discussed above). The Company is unable to predict the ultimate outcome of the litigation.
Australian and New Zealand Regulation
The Company operates two post-secondary educational institutions in Australia, Torrens University Australia Limited (“Torrens”) and Think: Colleges Pty Ltd (“Think”). In Australia, a distinction is made between higher education and vocational education organizations.
Higher education providers consist of public and private universities, Australian branches of overseas universities and other higher education providers. Higher education qualifications consist of undergraduate awards (bachelor’s degrees, associate degrees and diplomas) and postgraduate awards (graduate certificates and diplomas, master’s degrees and doctoral degrees). The regulation of higher education providers is undertaken at a national level by the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (“TEQSA”). All organizations that offer higher education qualifications in or from Australia must be registered by TEQSA. Higher education providers that have not been granted self-accrediting status must also have their courses of study accredited by TEQSA. Registration as a higher education provider is for a fixed period of up to seven years. TEQSA regularly reviews the conduct and operation of accredited higher education providers.
The vocational education and training (“VET”) sector consists of technical and further education institutes, agricultural colleges, adult and community education providers, community organizations, industry skill centers and private providers. VET qualifications include certificates, diplomas and advanced diplomas. The regulation of VET providers is undertaken at a national level by the Australian Skills Quality Authority (“ASQA”). Organizations providing VET courses in Australia must be registered by ASQA as a Registered Training Organisation (“RTO”). Courses offered by RTOs need to be accredited by ASQA. Registration as an RTO is for a fixed period of up to seven years. ASQA regularly reviews the conduct and operations of RTOs.
Torrens is one of 43 universities in Australia. It is a private, for-profit entity and is registered with TEQSA. As a self-accrediting university, it is not required to have its individual courses of study accredited by TEQSA. Torrens is also registered with ASQA as an RTO and is thus entitled to offer vocational and training courses. Torrens is currently undergoing an ordinary course re-registration process with TEQSA.
Think is one of approximately 5,000 RTOs in Australia and in that capacity is regulated by ASQA. It is also registered as a higher education provider with TEQSA. Its higher education courses require, and have received, accreditation by TEQSA.
Australia also maintains a Commonwealth Register of Institutions and Courses for Overseas Students (“CRICOS”) for Australian education providers that recruit, enroll and teach overseas students. Registration on CRICOS allows providers to offer courses to overseas students studying on Australian student visas. Both Torrens and Think are so registered.
The Commonwealth government has established income-contingent loan schemes that assist eligible fee-paying students to pay all or part of their tuition fees (separate but similar schemes exist for higher education and vocational courses). Under the schemes, the relevant fees are paid directly to the institutions by the Commonwealth government on behalf of the student. A corresponding obligation then exists from the participating student to the Commonwealth government, which is addressed by adding a levy to that student’s income tax until the loan amount has been repaid. Neither Torrens nor Think have any responsibility in connection with the repayment of these loans by students and, generally, this assistance is not available to international students. Both Torrens and Think are registered for the purposes of these plans (a precondition to their students being eligible to receive such loans).
The Company operates a post-secondary educational institution in New Zealand, Media Design School Limited (“MDS”). MDS is a Private Training Establishment, a private organization offering education or training. It is a globally renowned and specialist provider of design and creative technology education with qualifications ranging from diplomas to postgraduate degrees. MDS also has access to New Zealand Government student finance where study loans are offered to students who are New Zealand citizens or ordinarily resident in New Zealand, subject to certain conditions.