( en | de | ru )

 

  2. user
  3. @prophe
  4. Donald_Trump

bookmarks  28

  •  

    A federal appeals court rejected the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s investigative fishing trip into the records of a leading accrediting agency for for-profit colleges, saying the bureau failed to explain what sort of illegal conduct it was looking into. The decision by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington is a rebuke to the CFPB and its director Richard Cordray, who demanded the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools turn over documents and make an executive available to testify about the group’s possible involvement in “unlawful acts and practices in connection with accrediting for-profit colleges.” The Obama administration mounted fierce legal attacks on for-profit colleges, accusing them of peddling shoddy degrees financed by federal student loans and forcing Corinthian Colleges and ITT Technical Institute to close their doors. This appears to be the first time in decades that a federal appeals court rejected an agency's civil investigative demand or administrative subpoena, said Allyson Baker, a partner in Venable's Washington office who represented ACICS. “They didn’t think the CFPB met the requirements of the statute, which requires notice,” said Baker, herself a former CFPB enforcement attorney. ACICS refused to comply with the civil investigative demand in 2015, sending the question to a federal district court. That court last year said the CFPB, which is charged with enforcing consumer financial laws, didn’t have authority to question a school accrediting agency. The CFPB “plowed head long into fields not clearly ceded to it by Congress,” the district court said. The D.C. Circuit affirmed today, in an opinion by Judge David Sentelle, on narrower grounds. The agency “wholly fails” to state what sort of unlawful conduct it is investigating, the appeals court said. The CFPB never explained what “unlawful acts and practices” it suspected and merely repeated the same language in court filings. Without specifics, the court said it can’t determine whether the demand
    6 years ago by @prophe
     
      Lawfor-profitUSADonald_TrumpObamalosecourt
      copydelete
       
       
    •  

      The Trump administration is delaying implementation of one of the signature policies of the Obama-era crackdown on for-profit colleges. The Department of Education announced Monday night it was targeting the Obama administration rule aimed at holding career-training programs accountable for getting students decent jobs and earnings. To be in compliance with the regulations, career-training programs, which are largely at for-profit colleges, need to graduate students whose loan payments don’t exceed 20% of their discretionary income or 8% of their total earnings. Programs that don’t fit this criteria for multiple years could lose access to federal financial aid. Career-training schools will now have until July 1 to file appeals to the program debt-to-earnings ratios published by the Department earlier this year, as part of the enforcement of the gainful employment (GE) rule. Originally, their appeals were due Friday, March 10. The schools will also now have until July 1 to publish disclosures about their debt-to-earnings ratio that are required by the new law. Before this decision, the programs had until April 3 to post those disclosures. The gainful employment rules were a long fought victory for the Obama administration in its quest to crack down on for-profit colleges, which officials and advocates have accused of loading students up with high debt loads for questionable outcomes. The for-profit college industry fought the regulations in court and the Obama administration ultimately prevailed. But the Trump administration’s embrace of an increased role for the private sector in education has had supporters of efforts to crack down on for-profit colleges worried that the new rules could be in jeopardy — and investors betting on for-profit schools. The delay is the first signal that that speculation may be correct. “This is a sign that does nothing to dispel concerns that this administration will be sufficiently aggressive in protecting students,” said Ben Miller, the senior director of postsecondary educati
      6 years ago by @prophe
       
        for-profitMar2017USADonald_TrumpObamadelayedEnglish
        copydelete
         
         
      •  

        Dive Brief: Career training programs will have until July 1 to appeal the U.S. Department of Education for reconsideration of compliance under current gainful employment and revenue reporting guidance enacted by the Obama administration, a signal that the Trump administration is holding to promises of massive deregulation in the federal education agency. The extended review period will allow schools the chance to prove they were unfairly assessed in previous years, under rules requiring that graduates' loan payments do not exceed 20% of their discretionary income or 8% of total earnings, metrics that many for-profit college advocates say was an unfair rule designed to disrupt for-profit impact in higher education. For-profit leaders applauded the extension, but opponents say the delays will allow more students to potentially be defrauded by predatory recruitment schemes and false information about postgraduate outcomes. Dive Insight: The extended review of the gainful employment policies will have impact throughout the higher education sector, as community colleges and schools which disproportionately serve poorer students will now have time to provide more context about graduation rates and employment outcomes which previously may not have been possible due to time constraints. Additionally, the extension signals the first sign of regulatory repeals for higher education, one of the only signature details of President Trump's higher education platform during the campaign season, and a recurring theme shared by Congressional higher education leaders. For most institutions, this is a positive sign towards reducing costs and manpower committed to compliance efforts, but for smaller institutions with missions to serve underrepresented populations, it may be a lifeline.
        6 years ago by @prophe
         
          for-profitMar2017Donald_TrumpObamadelayedDepartment_of_EducationEnglishgainful_employment
          copydelete
           
           
        •  

          Students who were scammed by a for-profit college back in the '80s could get their money back under the Trump administration. The Wilfred American Education Corp. used to run beauty and secretarial schools that primarily attracted low-income students, usually women. In 1988, Wilfred had 58 schools and more than 11,000 students, making it one of the largest for-profit college chains in the country. Many of those students used federal loans to pay for their education. But in 1991, Wilfred was found guilty of fraud in two different federal court cases. By law, the Department of Education should have canceled the student loans after the school was shut down. That didn't happen. Seven former Wilfred students sued President Obama's Education Department, demanding their student debt be canceled and the loan payments they made over the years be reimbursed. They were among 60,000 people who took out government-backed loans to go to Wilfred. That lawsuit was originally dismissed on a technicality. The decision was overturned when a judge said the Education Department was required to tell students if they're eligible to cancel a loan. Now, four people familiar with the case told Bloomberg the federal government is considering a deal. It would allow students to petition to cancel their debt and get refunds on past payments. The outlet notes a lawyer for the students said in a March 9 filing that they "have made substantial progress toward a final settlement," but no official agreement has been submitted to the court yet.
          6 years ago by @prophe
           
            for-profitMar2017USADonald_TrumpDepartment_of_EducationEnglish
            copydelete
             
             
          •  

            The Trump administration has taken its first shot at rules designed to protect students from expensive, low-quality colleges and career training programs. Less than a month after Betsy DeVos was sworn in as its top official, the U.S. Department of Education announced Monday evening that it would delay until July 1 an effort to crack down on career training programs that load students up with unpayable debt. The biggest winners: the more than 800 higher educational programs that claim to lead to “gainful employment” but flunked the department’s January excessive debt test—mostly for-profit art and cosmetology schools. These programs can now continue to recruit applicants (at least until July 1) without having to warn them about alumni’s oppressively high debt loads. The schools can also take this extra time to seek data showing that their graduates’ student loan bills are actually below the official “excessive debt” cutoff. That means bills must be no more than 12% of the average student’s gross earnings, as reported to the Social Security Administration, and no more than 30% of their discretionary income. That means, for example, that students considering entering, say, the Art Institute of Pittsburgh’s two-year Associate’s program in graphic design won’t necessarily be warned that the typical graduate of the program has taken on about $40,000 in debt, but finds a job paying only about $22,000 a year. The monthly financial reality for such graduates is grim. Their before-tax monthly salary works out to about $1,900. The monthly payments on a standard 10-year student loan repayment plan top $400 – or more than 20% of their gross earnings. The department said it would use the extra time to “further review the [Gainful Employment] regulations and their implementation.” The action puts the brakes on one of many last-minute moves by the Obama administration. In January, the Department of Education issued an analysis of the earnings and student debt levels of more than 8,600 higher education programs that offer pr
            6 years ago by @prophe
             
              for-profitMar2017USADonald_TrumpObamadelayedDepartment_of_Educationgainful_employment
              copydelete
               
               
            •  

              For-profit college investors bid up stock prices in anticipation of a lenient Trump administration. Were they wrong? For-profit colleges were supposed to thrive under a Trump administration staffed by officials known to be friendly to the industry. President Donald Trump and Republican allies in Congress had made broad promises either to revisit or to repeal federal rules governing the schools. That gave hope to for-profit colleges and their investors, driving up their stock prices. Meanwhile, consumer protection advocates worried about a resurgent for-profit college sector unburdened by Obama-era rules. A legal filing from last week suggests perhaps those assumptions were premature. In late March, the Trump administration offered a forceful defense of the so-called gainful employment rule, the 2015 regulation that threatens to shut off the spigot of normally free-flowing federal funds that sustain career programs if the typical graduate's annual loan payments exceed 20 percent of her discretionary income or 8 percent of total earnings. It also called on suspect career programs to warn prospective students if they risked running afoul of the guidelines. Colleges mostly opposed the rule. “The regulations are intended to protect students and taxpayers by providing warnings about programs with relatively high loan debt compared to the earnings their students could hope to achieve after graduating from those programs,” Justice Department attorneys wrote in their brief on behalf of Education Secretary Betsy DeVos. Students benefit from the warnings, Trump administration lawyers wrote, “because it could prevent them from taking on debt that they will not be able to repay, and they could more reasonably evaluate whether they would prefer to enroll in programs that have been more successful in enabling their students to find employment that would allow them to repay their loans.” Taxpayers would benefit, too, they wrote, because of the likely corresponding fall in defaults on federal student loans. “The public intere
              6 years ago by @prophe
               
                for-profitUSADonald_TrumpdefendObamaDepartment_of_Educationgainful_employment
                copydelete
                 
                 
              •  

                A new report from the American Enterprise Institute argues that state and local funding of public colleges stacks the deck against for-profit institutions under the gainful-employment rule, an Obama administration regulation that measures the ability of graduates of vocational programs to repay their student loans. The rule covers nondegree programs at nonprofit colleges -- mostly community colleges -- and all for-profit programs. Roughly three-quarters of for-profit programs pass the rule, the report said, compared to a relatively small number of nonprofits that are covered under gainful employment. Direct public funding drives much of that disparity, according to the report's authors. "Higher tuition at for-profits means students take on more debt, while public institutions have the luxury of charging lower tuition due to their direct appropriations," the report said. "Therefore, even if a for-profit institution and a public institution have similar overall expenditures (costs) and graduate earnings (returns on investment), the for-profit institution will be more likely to fail the gainful-employment rule, since more of its costs are reflected in student debt." Congressional Republicans and the Trump administration have said they will seek to roll back gainful employment and other Obama-era regulations aimed at for-profits. But such nixing of the rules likely will take time. And this week the U.S. Education Department defended gainful employment in federal court.
                6 years ago by @prophe
                 
                  for-profitprivateDonald_TrumpObamaDepartment_of_Educationgainful_employment
                  copydelete
                   
                   
                •  

                  Senate Democrats want Education Secretary Betsy DeVos to explain why she’s delaying the implementation of an Obama-era rule aimed at ensuring career-training programs, specifically those at for-profit colleges, actually prepare students for good-paying jobs. In a letter to DeVos this week, Sens. Dick Durbin (Ill.), Patty Murray (Wash.) and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.) called the department’s gainful employment rule a critical protection for both students and taxpayers. On Jan. 9, the department released final debt-to-earning rates for career training programs required by the rule finalized under Obama in October 2014. Under the rule, the estimated annual loan payment of a typical graduate would have to be at or below 20 percent of his or her discretionary income or 8 percent of his or her total earnings to be considered a program that leads to gainful employment. Programs that exceed these levels would be at risk of losing their ability to participate in taxpayer-funded federal student aid programs. Late last week the department gave schools more time to appeal their ratings, which are generated using earnings data from the Social Security Administration and debt information from the department’s records and the school. Final appeals, originally due March 10, are now due July 1. But Democrats argue the rule was generous to begin with, giving schools three opportunities to appeal their rates. “According to a Department spokesperson, the delay was also due to ‘a question about whether schools can provide data to a third party,’” the senators wrote. “It is unclear how this question could not have been solved through follow-up guidance rather than a delay.” DeVos is also giving Gainful Employment Programs until July 1 to switch to a new format in meeting the requirement to disclose information about their programs, including graduation rates, tuition and fee amounts, typical student debt upon graduation and what a graduate is likely to earn. The senators asked DeVos how long
                  6 years ago by @prophe
                   
                    for-profitMar2017USADonald_TrumpObamadelayedDepartment_of_EducationEnglishgainful_employment
                    copydelete
                     
                     
                  •  

                    Laureate Education just became the first IPO of a company that's legally allowed to sacrifice profit in exchange for purpose, though the for-profit education industry has had a hard time finding any purpose at all. On February 1, Douglas Becker made history when he rang the opening bell of the Nasdaq. His company, Laureate Education, Inc.—the world’s largest for-profit college network, with more than 1 million students enrolled at over 200 campuses in 28 countries—had just launched an initial public offering. IPO filings happen every day, but this is the first public benefit corporation to ever be publicly traded. Laureate is listed on the exchange as LAUR and raised $490 million by offering 35 million shares at a price of $14, slightly lower than expectations. Benefit corporations are distinct from a traditional corporation. Rather than a singular focus on creating financial value, a benefit corporation is explicitly mandated to pursue positive social and environmental impact along
                    6 years ago by @prophe
                     
                      for-profitUSADonald_TrumpgrowthFeb2017English
                      copydelete
                       
                       
                    •  

                      6 years ago by @prophe
                       
                        for-profitJan2017USADonald_TrumpEnglishaccountability
                        copydelete
                         
                         
                      •  

                        It may be too late for shuttered Corinthian Colleges, ITT Technical Institute or even Trump University, but Wall Street is betting the potential rollback of Obama-era initiatives to hold for-profit colleges accountable may lead to a resurgence of the beleaguered industry. Rebounding from what some analysts saw as an existential threat during the Obama administration, for-profit college stocks are up sharply since Donald Trump's November election amid renewed investor optimism — and growing concern from education watchdogs. "The perception of investors has been that the prior administration was really out to get the sector," said Trace Urdan, a research analyst at Credit Suisse. "Trump helps make these companies more investable because there is less concern that the government is trying to drive them out of business." Less than 100 days into Trump's presidency, the Department of Education under Secretary Betsy DeVos has delayed implementation of gainful employment rules, withdrawn key federal student loan servicing reforms, and signaled a less onerous regulatory environment for the essentially taxpayer-financed career education sector. While good news for investors, the policy shift may mean "buyer beware" for students such as Gilbert Caro, of Chicago, who amassed nearly $100,000 in debt while working toward a master's in business administration at DeVry University, only to end up working as a prison guard near Joliet. Caro is among the tens of thousands of for-profit college graduates alleging they were misled and seeking relief from their federal student loans. "The initial signs are troubling," said Pauline Abernathy, executive vice president of the Institute for College Access and Success, a nonprofit research and advocacy organization focused on alleviating student debt. The for-profit college industry, which saw enrollment peak during the depths of the Great Recession, became the focus of an Obama administration crackdown in 2011, taking on everything from inflated job placement claims to predatory fin
                        6 years ago by @prophe
                         
                          for-profitDonald_TrumpDeVryObamaCorinthian_CollegesPhoenix_UniversityDepartment_of_Education
                          copydelete
                           
                           
                        •  

                          Student debt is a personal challenge for more than 44 million Americans, but a lucrative business opportunity to the firms that manage the more than $1 trillion now outstanding. With a delinquency rate currently exceeding 11 percent, some see student loans as a major risk to the U.S. economy, one rivaling the mortgage loan market that crashed in 2007. There has also been widespread concern about the effects of college debt on the lives of individual students “what authorities describe as systematic mistreatment of borrowers.” Because these loans are guaranteed or are made directly by the federal government, the U.S. Department of Education is responsible for managing this complex system and balancing the competing interests of the various stakeholders. Last week, Education Secretary Elizabeth DeVos took action to reverse the course she inherited from the prior administration. In 2015, President Obama announced his Student Aid Bill of Rights, which aimed both to create a more efficient loan management system and to “reduce student loan defaults and encourage borrower success.” In recognizing the needs of borrowers, it sought to more fairly balance the interests of individual borrowers with those of the federal government and those doing business managing the debt under government contract. Two policy directives from the Obama administration’s Department of Education, which Bloomberg News described as directing the Federal Student Aid office to “do more to help borrowers manage, or even discharge, their debt,” were cancelled. The Obama administration sought to balance the interests of those taking out student loans and the business interests of the private firms contracted to service and collect these debts. Ideally, by taking borrowers’ interests into account, the amount of unpaid debt would be decreased, as would the cost to the federal government, and the harmful effect of predatory practices could be lessened. In her memo to the FSA, Secretary DeVos showed that efficient repayment was the singular goal of her
                          6 years ago by @prophe
                           
                            USADonald_TrumpObamaApr2017Student_loanstudent_debtDepartment_of_EducationEnglish
                            copydelete
                             
                             
                          •  

                            It might just be career government lawyers doing their jobs, and doing them well, until the Trump Administration can catch up and work its malevolence, but in court papers filed today, the Trump Justice Department defended the Obama Administration’s gainful employment rule, a measure aimed at curbing predatory abuses by for-profit colleges. The rule penalizes expensive career college programs that, year after year, leave graduates with debts that, based on their earnings, they cannot afford to repay. “The public interest is served by allowing the Department to go forward with implementing the GE regulations,” Justice Department lawyers wrote on behalf of their client, Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, who is being sued by an association of cosmetology schools. The association’s somewhat risque argument is that many hairdressers and other beauty professionals do not report all their tip income to the IRS, and thus their graduates actually are doing better than the gainful employment calculations give them credit for. Revised under pressure from industry lobbyists, the Obama Administration’s rule is not very strong, but it does endanger some of the worst-of-the-worst college programs. The operators of those programs, who have been raking in billions in taxpayer money, want to make sure they can still act with impunity, even though their abuses have ruined the lives of countless veterans, single moms, and other students. There are good cosmetology schools, as well as other types of career schools. The gainful employment rule aims to channel resources and students to those quality, affordable schools, and away from the kind of for-profit colleges that law enforcement agencies are investigating or prosecuting for fraud. But given: that Donald Trump was previously the proprietor of his own predatory for-profit real estate “university”; that Trump crony Newt Gingrich and congressional Republicans have aggressively advocated for the for-profit college industry; that DeVos has been invested in for-profit education
                            6 years ago by @prophe
                             
                              for-profitMar2017USAprivateDonald_TrumpdefendObamaDepartment_of_EducationEnglish
                              copydelete
                               
                               
                            •  

                              President Donald Trump´s threat to deport millions of illegal immigrants – half of them Mexicans – has triggered an unprecedented campaign by the Mexican government and universities. A raft of measures announced in recent weeks seek to reincorporate returning migrants into the country´s education system and labour force while defending those who wish to remain in the United States. Trump has vowed to deport as many as three million illegal immigrants, with those with criminal records at the front of the queue. However, there is growing fear among the hundreds of thousands of university students and workers who are beneficiaries of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals or DACA programme – which grants temporary legal status to certain immigrants who arrived as minors – following the detention of several DACA holders in recent weeks. A recent series of menacing tweets by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement, suggesting that even DACA holders could be subject to deportation, has sparked further alarm. Mexicans represent roughly 5.8 million of the estimated 11 million illegal immigrants in the United States. They include an estimated 400,000 Mexicans known as Dreamers, for the proposed federal Dream Act that sought to provide legal status for young immigrants. Many have little or no support system in Mexico and some don´t even speak Spanish. In response, the Mexican government is seeking to ease the repatriation process for hundreds of thousands of migrants, particularly students. New legislation On 17 March, the Mexican Congress approved new legislation that streamlines the application process to schools and universities for returning migrants. The changes to the federal Education Law empower private colleges to revalidate transcripts from other Mexican or foreign institutions. Even more significant, students who studied abroad no longer need to present an apostille – a diplomatic notarised seal – along with their transcripts, a process that can take weeks and cost hundreds of dollars. The feder
                              6 years ago by @prophe
                               
                                returnMar2017Donald_TrumpMexicoEnglish
                                copydelete
                                 
                                 
                              •  

                                President Donald Trump’s administration has begun relaxing restrictions on for-profit colleges, and traders in shares of companies like Strayer Education Inc. (STRA) and Capella Education Co. (CPLA) have taken note. For-profit college stocks soared in the week after the Department of Education announced a delay in the implementation of a regulation finalized in October 2014 by former President Barack Obama. Shares of Strayer Education, a holding company for Strayer University, climbed 2.5 percent in the week following the March 6 announcement, hitting a high of $81.40 shortly after Monday market open, while Capella Education, the parent of Capella University, grew 1.8 percent over the same period, surpassing $78 Monday morning. Grand Canyon Education Inc. (LOPE), the parent of Grand Canyon University, rose 3.5 percent over the past week to an all-time high of $67.49, and Laureate Education Inc. (LAUR), which counts Walden University as one of its for-profit institutions and was formerly known as Sylvan Learning Systems, saw its shares rise 0.6 percent to nearly $13 Monday. DeVry Education Group Inc. (DV), known for its DeVry University, saw a more modest 0.4 percent rise over the past week. The Department of Education initially required for-profit colleges, along with some nonprofit and public schools, to report data on the success of their job training programs by April 3, but under new Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, the date was pushed to July 1. The rule, which was originally slated for implementation on July 1, 2015, would cut back on federal funding for institutions whose programs did not lead to "gainful employment"— meaning graduates’ annual loan payments exceeded 20 percent of their income. For-profit colleges, whose attendees tend to be disproportionately female, minority and low-income, have long faced criticism for their role in the student debt crisis. Data released from the Department of Education in September linked more than 35 percent of student debt defaults in 2013 to the institutions, des
                                6 years ago by @prophe
                                 
                                  for-profitMar2017USADonald_TrumpObamadelayedEnglish
                                  copydelete
                                   
                                   
                                •  

                                  Buoyed by the ascendancy of Donald Trump, America’s predatory for-profit colleges are renewing their multi-front fight to destroy a key measure to hold them accountable: the gainful employment rule. The new battle plan includes pushes in Congress and before the Betsy DeVos Department of Education, plus two new lawsuits aimed at the regulation, including one, in Arizona, that has not been previously reported. It looks like this harmful effort is rapidly gaining traction. It took the Obama administration nearly eight years of battling well-paid for-profit college lobbyists and lawyers to finally enact and implement this regulation, which has a simple, common sense premise: Career training programs that, year-after-year, leave graduates mired in overwhelming debt should lose eligibility for taxpayer-funded student grants and loans. Career education should make people financially better off, not worse off, and the rule aims to channel money away from programs that do harm — and channel it toward those honest, effective colleges that are genuinely helping students build careers. For decades, many for-profit colleges, through a toxic mix of high prices, low quality, and weak job placement, have promised more than they could deliver, and yet have been getting billions annually in federal aid, much of it spent on advertising and profits, rather than education. Many veterans, single moms, displaced factory workers and miners, and others struggling to build a better future have been deceived and abused by unscrupulous college owners, whose offices are in Wall Street suites as well as strip malls. The final gainful employment rule does not demand much; only the worst programs flunk its test comparing graduate earnings with debt levels. The first round of results, reported in January, showed that 98 percent of the flunking programs were at for-profit colleges. The for-profit colleges have never stopped trying to overturn the rule, even after federal courts decisively rejected two separate industry lawsuits. Now, however,
                                  6 years ago by @prophe
                                   
                                    for-profitMar2017USADonald_TrumpObamaEnglish
                                    copydelete
                                     
                                     
                                  •  

                                    Alums of a disgraced for-profit college chain have spent years trying to cancel their federal student loans. For three years in federal court, the Obama Department of Education told them to keep on paying. Improbably, the Trump administration is poised to say differently. Under a preliminary accord, the federal government would invite tens of thousands of former students, who more than 20 years ago attended beauty and secretarial schools owned by defunct Wilfred American Education Corp., to petition the Education Department to cancel their unpaid debt and receive refunds on past payments, according to four people familiar with the case, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were discussing confidential settlement negotiations. The applications are almost certain to be approved, these people said, and the government would foot the bill. The deal-which is not complete and may change-would resolve a 2014 class-action lawsuit against the Education Department brought by seven former Wilfred students who claimed the feds for decades had been wrongfully collecting on debt that students needn't repay. Federal law allows borrowers to cancel their loans when their schools violate certain rules, and Wilfred routinely flouted the law by falsely certifying that its students were eligible for government loans, according to the complaint. The lawsuit claimed the department knew the loans were eligible to be forgiven, yet it made no effort to inform debtors of this right. If finalized, the settlement would represent one of the largest debt-forgiveness schemes undertaken by the Education Department. That it didn't happen under Obama, who championed student debt relief measures, and instead could happen under Trump, who in November agreed to pay $25 million to settle several lawsuits tied to his own foray into for-profit education, could upend expectations that a Trump-overseen Education Department would favor the interests of for-profit schools over those of allegedly defrauded students. Jim Margolin, a spokesman f
                                    6 years ago by @prophe
                                     
                                      Mar2017USADonald_TrumpObamaEnglish
                                      copydelete
                                       
                                       
                                    •  

                                      As the Trump administration tries to roll back education regulations, one city is attempting to stay a move ahead by fortifying its own protections for some college students. The Milwaukee Common Council unanimously passed legislation last week to prohibit financial assistance to for-profit institutions unless they meet federal financial aid regulations. The legislation, which updates a previous rule, means the city won’t provide monetary aid to for-profits or to related development projects if the involved colleges fail to meet federal financial aid regulations that were in force on Jan. 1, 2017, before Trump's inauguration. “Considering the leadership change at the federal level and who is now over the Education Department and her relationship with private for-profit colleges, it was thought that the federal guidelines could change, and our ordinance was predicated on what the federal guidelines were at that time,” said Alderwoman Milele Coggs, who sponsored the legislation. “So if those guidelines change, it doesn’t affect the standard we set as a city for education.” Coggs said Milwaukee has a right to be concerned about the types of education institutions that want to do business there. The original ordinance was put into effect following the 2009 arrival of Everest College, which received development money from the city. “We had major reservations about them coming in here, and we put them through the paces and [made them] jump through a series of hoops to demonstrate they could be successful in serving students,” said David Dies, executive secretary of the Wisconsin Educational Approval Board, the state’s for-profit oversight agency. Coggs said she and other residents in the city also had reservations about Everest. But the institution eventually opened its doors with the help of $11 million in bonds from the city’s redevelopment authority, she said. It wasn’t too long after Everest opened that the EAB noticed problems. “They only operated here about 18 months, and early on we started sensing issues based
                                      6 years ago by @prophe
                                       
                                        for-profitUSADonald_TrumpApr2017regulateMilwaukee
                                        copydelete
                                         
                                         
                                      •  

                                        "For-profit colleges have faced federal and state investigations in recent years for their aggressive recruiting tactics –– accusations that come as no surprise to author Tressie McMillan Cottom," NPR reports. "Cottom worked as an enrollment officer at two different for-profit colleges, but quit because she felt uncomfortable selling students an education they couldn't afford. Her new book, Lower Ed, argues that for-profit colleges exploit racial, gender and economic inequality. Cottom tells Fresh Air's Terry Gross that for-profit institutions tend to focus their recruiting on students who qualify for the maximum amount of student aid. 'That happens to be the poorest among us,' she says. 'And because of how our society is set up, the poorest among us tend to be women and people of color.' Though for-profit colleges hold out the promise of a better future, Cottom notes that the credentials they offer tend to be 30 to 40 percent more expensive than the same credentials from a nonprofit public institution. What's more, she says, students at for-profit institutions often drop out before completing their degree, which means many students are left mired in debt and with credits that are not easily transferable. 'The system that we've come to rely on to increase access to higher education to the most vulnerable among us really only compounds their poverty and their risk factors,' Cottom says. 'That's the exact opposite of what higher education is supposed to do.'" NASFAA's "Headlines" section highlights media coverage of financial aid to help members stay up to date with the latest news. Inclusion in Today's News does not imply endorsement of the material or guarantee the accuracy of information presented.
                                        6 years ago by @prophe
                                         
                                          for-profitMar2017USADonald_TrumpDepartment_of_EducationEnglish
                                          copydelete
                                           
                                           
                                        •  

                                          The Trump administration’s plan to cut billions of dollars in research spending by eliminating indirect cost reimbursements would devastate university science, especially at public institutions, experts warned. [This is an article from The Chronicle of Higher Education, America’s leading higher education publication. It is presented here under an agreement with University World News.] The US secretary for health and human services, Tom Price, told Congress this week that the idea is to save taxpayers money while giving them the same amount of research activity. Indirect cost payments are funds spent on "something other than the research that’s being done," Dr Price told a House of Representatives subcommittee on health appropriations on Wednesday. But university representatives made clear on Thursday that it simply does not work that way. Indirect costs reflect the legitimate expenses of providing scientists with labs and complying with a host of essential services that somehow will still need to be paid, the representatives said. Under current law, a researcher who receives a federal grant to conduct research cannot simply be billed by his or her university for those costs, said Tobin L Smith, vice president for policy at the Association of American Universities, which represents major research institutions. And universities absolutely won't force students to cover the difference, Smith said. "The reality is we don't have other revenue sources to pay for those things, because let's face it, we are not going to rob tuition to pay for those costs," he said. "It just is not going to happen." It's not clear what universities would do if Congress actually accepted the administration's proposal to end indirect cost payments, said David Kennedy, director of costing policy and studies at the Council on Governmental Relations, another association of research universities and affiliated medical centres. State institutions probably would suffer first and hardest, Kennedy said, because they would have virtually no ab
                                          6 years ago by @prophe
                                           
                                            Mar2017USAresearch_grantDonald_TrumpEnglish
                                            copydelete
                                             
                                             

                                          publications  

                                            No matching posts.
                                          • ⟨⟨
                                          • ⟨
                                          • ⟩
                                          • ⟩⟩