Jump to content

Pell Grant: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Undid revision 381634519 by 98.64.78.113 (talk) It triples the length of the article -- WP:UNDUE weight given
Undid revision 381689524 by SarekOfVulcan (talk)The concept of a grant is simple, the proceding section concerns fraud of the grant
Line 28: Line 28:


Federal Pell Grants are direct grants awarded through participating institutions to students with financial need who have not received their first bachelor's degree or who are enrolled in certain postbaccalaureate programs that lead to teacher certification or licensure. Participating institutions either credit the Federal Pell Grant funds to the student's school account, pay the student directly (usually by check) or combine these methods. Students must be paid at least once per term (semester, trimester, or quarter); schools that do not use formally defined terms must pay the student at least twice per academic year.
Federal Pell Grants are direct grants awarded through participating institutions to students with financial need who have not received their first bachelor's degree or who are enrolled in certain postbaccalaureate programs that lead to teacher certification or licensure. Participating institutions either credit the Federal Pell Grant funds to the student's school account, pay the student directly (usually by check) or combine these methods. Students must be paid at least once per term (semester, trimester, or quarter); schools that do not use formally defined terms must pay the student at least twice per academic year.

==Pell Grant For-Profit fraud controversy ==
For-Profit institutions were randomly sampled by the GAO in mid 2010; Out of the 15 sampled, all of the institutions were found to have been engaging in deceptive practices promising unrealistically high pay for graduating students and 4 were engaging in outright fraud, as per a GAO report released on the August 4, 2010 Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing. Examples of misconduct include: Offering commissions to admissions officers, employing deceptive marketing tactics refusing to disclose total tuition cost to prospective students before signing a binding agreement, lying about accreditation, encouraging outright fraud by enticing students to take out student loans even when the applicant had $250,000 in savings, promising extravagant, unlikely high pay to students, failing to disclose graduation rate, and offering tuition cost equivalent to 9 months of credit hours per year, when total program length was 12 months.

The 4 For-Profit colleges found to be engaging in fradulent practices were: 1.) Westech, California, encouraging undercover applicant with falsified $250,000 in savings to falsely increase the number of dependents in the household in order to qualify for a Pell Grant, as well as take out the maximum amount in student loans; 2.) Medvance Institute in Miami, Florida, financial aid representative telling applicant not to report $250,000 in savings, comparing student loans to a car payment in that, "no one will come after you if you don’t pay.”, when a student loan default may remain in the debtor's credit history, prevent them from taking out a car-loan, mortgage or rent, and may have their pay garnished up to 15%, until the student loan is paid in full; In addition, another admissions officer at the Kaplan College in Pembroke Pines, Florida, <ref>http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2010-08-05/news/fl-kaplan-for-profit-investigation-20100805_1_kaplan-college-for-profit-enrollment</ref> alluded to fraudulent behaviour stating to the applicant when inquiring about the repayment of loans, "You gotta look at it... I owe $85,000 to the University of Florida. Will I pay it back? Probably not... I look at life as tomorrow’s never promised... .Education is an investment, you’re going to get paid back ten-fold, no matter what."; 3.) Anthem Institute in Springfield, Pennsylvania, financial aid representative editing applicant's FAFSA form by omitting $250,000 in savings; 4.) Westwood College in Dallas, Texas, admissions representative telling applicant to falsely add dependents to qualify for Pell Grants, ensuring the applicant that the dependents would not be verified through previous income tax returns nor Social Security numbers, and financial aid representative encouraging applicant not to report the $250,000 in savings, stating that "it was not the government’s business how much money the undercover applicant had in a bank account.", when the Department of Education requires students to report such assets, along with income, to determine how much and what type of financial aid will be awarded.

It was found that 14 out of 15 times, the tuition at a For-Profit sample was more expensive than its Public counterpart, and 11 out of 15 times, it was more expensive than the Private institution. Examples of the disparity in full tuition per program include: $14,000 for a certificate at the For-Profit, when the same diploma cost $500 at the Public college; $38,000 for an Associate's at the For-Profit, when the comparable program at the Public college cost $5,000; $61,000 for a Bachelor's at the For-Profit, compared to $36,000 for the same degree at the Public college. <ref>http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10948t.pdf</ref> The institutions identified in the Committee hearing in respect to the GAO report numeration were: [[Image:GAO_8.4.2010_for_profit_figures.png|thumb|right|Tuition cost comparison between For-Profit, Public and Private colleges for equivalent programs.]]

1.)University of Phoenix - Phoenix, Arizona <ref>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-04/for-profit-colleges-boiler-room-recruiting-described-at-senate-hearing.html</ref>

2.)Everest Institute - Mesa, Arizona <ref>Bloomberg August 4, 2010 article</ref>

3.)Westech College - Victorville, Moreno Valley, California <ref>http://www.pe.com/localnews/sbcounty/stories/PE_News_Local_D_college07.2cf999f.html</ref>

4.)Kaplan - Riverside, California <ref>https://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.7040/pub_detail.asp</ref>

5.)Potomac College - Washington D.C.

6.)Bennett College - Washington D.C.

7.)Medvance Institute - Miami, Florida <ref>The Quick and the ED August 4, 2010 article</ref>

8.)Kaplan - Pembroke Pines, Florida <ref>Sun-Sentinel August 5, 2010 local article</ref>

9.)College of Office Technology - Chicago, Illinois <ref>There is only one main campus in Illinois, in Chicago: http://www.cot.edu/</ref>

10.)Argosy University - Chicago, Schaumburg, Illinois <ref>These are the only two main campuses in Illinois, headquarters in Chicago, Illinois, and Schaumburg, Illinois: http://www.argosy.edu/locations/</ref>

11.)University of Phoenix - Philadelphia, Pennsylvania <ref>Bloomberg August 4, 2010 article</ref>

12.)Anthem Institute - Springfield, Pennsylvania <ref>The Quick and the ED August 4, 2010 article</ref>

13.)Westwood College - Dallas, Texas <ref>The Quick and the ED August 4, 2010 article</ref>

14.)Everest Institute - Dallas, Texas <ref>http://www.liquida.com/page/9509207/</ref>

15.)ATI Career Training - Dallas, Texas <ref>Liquida August 4, 2010 article</ref>

Students at For-Profit institutions represent only 9% of all college students, but receive roughly 25% of all Federal Pell Grants and loans, and are responsible for 44% of all student loan defaults.<ref>http://www.pewtrusts.org/news_room_detail.aspx?id=56473</ref><ref>http://www.trends-collegeboard.com/student_aid/pdf/2009_Trends_Student_Aid.pdf</ref> University of Phoenix tops this list with Pell Grant revenue of $656.9 million with second and third place held by Everest Colleges at $256.6 million and Kaplan College at $202.1 million for the 2008-2009 fiscal year, respectively.<ref name=Chronicle of Higher Education>[http://chronicle.com/article/Data-Points-For-Profit/63388 For-Profit Colleges Capitalize on Pell Grant Revenue], ''The Chronicle of Higher Education'', January 4, 2010.</ref> In 2003, a [[Government Accountability Office]] report estimated that overpayments of Pell Grants were running at about 3% annually, amounting to around $300 million per year.<ref>
{{cite web
|url= http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03821.pdf
|title= TAXPAYER INFORMATION: Increased Sharing and Verifying of Information Could Improve Education's Award Decisions
|date= July 2003
|publisher= [[Government Accountability Office]]
}}</ref> Some of the universities that are top recipients of Pell Grants have low graduation rates, leaving students degreeless, and graduating alumni finding it excessively difficult, and at times resorting to extreme measures to find work <ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/06/degreed-and-jobless-for-p_n_673053.html</ref><ref>http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/295688</ref> with their degrees, leading some former students to accuse recruiters of being "duplicitous", and bringing into serious question the effectiveness of awarding Pell Grants and other Title IV funds to For-Profit colleges.<ref>http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-05-05/for-profit-n-j-college-halts-recruiting-of-homeless-update1-.html</ref><ref name=Higher Ed Watch>[http://higheredwatch.newamerica.net/blogs/2007/02/u_of_phoenix Fed Up at the University of Phoenix], ''Higher Ed Watch'', February 27, 2007.</ref> University of Phoenix's graduation rate is 15%.<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/11/education/11phoenix.html</ref> Strayer University, which reports its loan repayment rate to be 55.4%, only has a repayment rate of roughly 25%, according to data released by the Department of Education on August 13, 2010.<ref>http://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2009/ge-cumulative-rates.xls</ref> The low repayment rate makes Strayer ineligible for receiving further Title IV funds in accordance with new "Gainful employment" regulations brought forth by the Department of Education, which are to take effect on July 2011.<ref>http://www.insidehighered.com/content/download/357892/4393975/file/Gainful%20Employment%20NPRM.pdf</ref> If passed, the minimum loan repayment requirement for any institution receiving Title IV funds, subject to suspension and expulsion if not compliant, will be 45%.<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/14/education/14college.html</ref>

For-Profits top the Department of Education's list for the 2005-2007 cohort default rates, with campuses at ATI and Kaplan reporting default rates far above 20%: Most of the For-Profits' expansion has been in the states of California, Arizona, Texas and Florida, the metro areas of Los Angeles, Phoenix, Dallas and Miami-West Palm Beach being epicenters of their growth <ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/us/05fraud.html</ref><ref>http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-04/for-profit-colleges-boiler-room-recruiting-described-at-senate-hearing.html</ref><ref>http://www.texastribune.org/texas-education/higher-education/private-for-profit-colleges-under-the-microscope/</ref><ref>http://californiawatch.org/watchblog/whistleblower-lawsuit-against-profit-education-company-unsealed</ref>: For comparison, in Miami, FL, Everest Institute reports a default rate for two of its campuses to be 18.1% and 20%; Miami Dade College, the district's community college, which serves as a primary channel for local beginning students, reports a default rate of roughly 10%; Florida International University, a public university serving the Miami metropolitan area, reports approximately 5%.<ref>http://www2.ed.gov/offices/OSFAP/defaultmanagement/peps300.zip</ref>

[[Image:CSPAN_3_8.4.2010_UoP_internal_chart.png|thumb|right|Internal executive University of Phoenix chart, encouraging deception, manipulation and predatory tactics: "Creating Urgency: Getting Them To Apply NOW <br />
Remember, ...<br />
Students don't buy benefits<br />
They buy to ease or avoid pain<br />
Finding and Burrowing into that pain moves the sale to a CLOSE<br />
Also, the close of the sale is really just a beginning"]] In an August 4, 2010 Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing, Gregory Kutz of the GAO stated that the fraudulent practices may be widespread in the For-Profit industry, noting a University of Phoenix executive chart that encouraged deceptive practices.<ref>http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/294901-1</ref> [[Image:Senate_Committee_on_Health%2C_Education%2C_Labor_and_Pensions_Pruyn_attachment_8.4.2010.png|thumb|left|Internal Westwood College E-mail, dated March 24, 2008, employing commissions and rewards system for applications and enrollments to admissions officers.]] Joshua Pruyn, a former admissions representative, disclosed to the committee hearing several internal E-mails distributed among admissions officers that encouraged applications and enrollments, through the use of a commissions reward system, during March 2008.<ref>help.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Pruyn%20Attachments.pdf</ref> Chairman of the committee Senator Thomas Harkin noted the conflict of interest due to the ACCSC, a national accrediting agency that accredits many For-Profit colleges nationwide, <ref>http://www.accsc.org/Content/CommissionActions/documents/STBCListAugust2010.pdf</ref> receiving compensation directly from the institutions which it awards accreditation. The Inspector General issued an assessment in late 2009 recommending the limiting and possible suspension or expulsion of the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools due to conflicts in the manner in which the accrediting agency reviews credit hours and program length for online-colleges, specifically American InterContinental University, a For-Profit college.<ref>http://chronicle.com/article/Inspector-Generals-Warning-to/63206/</ref> The NCA HLC accredits the University of Phoenix and Everest in Phoenix, Arizona. The Department of Education Inspector General is currently reviewing the GAO's documents and report on For-Profit Colleges dated August 4, 2010.


==References==
==References==

Revision as of 18:57, 29 August 2010

Claiborne Pell
Claiborne Pell

The Pell Grant program is a type of post-secondary, educational federal grant program sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education. It is named after U.S. Senator Claiborne Pell of Rhode Island[1] and originally known as the Basic Educational Opportunity Grant program. Grants, which do not require repayment, are awarded based on a "financial need" formula determined by the U.S. Congress using criteria submitted through the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA).

The Pell Grant is covered by legislation titled the Higher Education Act of 1965, Title IV, Part A, Subpart 1; 20 U.S.C. 1070a.

Because Pell Grants are targeted toward students from poor families, receipt of them is often used by researchers as a proxy for low-income student attendance and to indicate the economic diversity of the student body.

Amount of grant

Federal budget legislation passed in early 2006 cut the federal financial aid budget by $12.5 billion. While the maximum Pell Grant legislative limit was raised to $5,800 through 2011, maximum Pell Grant awards were not funded at this level.

For 2006-07, the maximum Pell Grant available to students was $4,050. For 2007-08 the maximum Pell Grant award was $4,310. For 2008-09, the maximum Pell grant was $4,731. For 2009-10, the maximum Pell Grant was $5,350, with an added option for receiving an additional disbursement ($2,675) in the summer. For 2010-11, the maximum is $5,550. After this it will tie future increases in the Pell Grant maximum value to annual increases in the consumer price index.

Due to rapid increases in tuition and fees, Pell Grants do not cover as many credit hours as they used to. Twenty years ago, a grant covered 60% of a student's cost of attendance while in 2006 the maximum grant covered about 31% of the cost of attendance.[2]

Pell Grant recipients

To qualify for a Pell Grant, a student must demonstrate financial need. The amount of the award is based on the Expected Family Contribution, derived from the information on the FAFSA. In the 2005-06 school year, students with family incomes of less than $20,000 accounted for 57% of Pell Grant recipients. 35% of these recipients attended public two-year colleges, and 42% attended public four-year colleges.[3]

The National Postsecondary Student Aid Study found that during the 1999-2000 school year, students from families making less than $41,000 accounted for 90% of Pell Grant recipients.[4]

Students may not receive Federal Pell Grant funds from more than one school at a time.

Financial need is determined by the U.S. Department of Education using a standard formula, established by Congress, to evaluate the financial information reported on the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) and to determine the family EFC. The fundamental elements in this standard formula are the student's income (and assets if the student is independent), the parents' income and assets (if the student is dependent), the family's household size, and the number of family members (excluding parents) attending postsecondary institutions. The EFC is the sum of: (1) a percentage of net income (remaining income after subtracting allowances for basic living expenses and taxes) and (2) a percentage of net assets (assets remaining after subtracting an asset protection allowance). Different assessment rates and allowances are used for dependent students, independent students without dependents, and independent students with dependents. After filing a FAFSA, the student receives a Student Aid Report (SAR), or the institution receives an Institutional Student Information Record (ISIR), which notifies the student if he or she is eligible for a Federal Pell Grant and provides the student's EFC.

FSA Handbook Federal Pell Grant Program

Federal Pell Grants are direct grants awarded through participating institutions to students with financial need who have not received their first bachelor's degree or who are enrolled in certain postbaccalaureate programs that lead to teacher certification or licensure. Participating institutions either credit the Federal Pell Grant funds to the student's school account, pay the student directly (usually by check) or combine these methods. Students must be paid at least once per term (semester, trimester, or quarter); schools that do not use formally defined terms must pay the student at least twice per academic year.

Pell Grant For-Profit fraud controversy

For-Profit institutions were randomly sampled by the GAO in mid 2010; Out of the 15 sampled, all of the institutions were found to have been engaging in deceptive practices promising unrealistically high pay for graduating students and 4 were engaging in outright fraud, as per a GAO report released on the August 4, 2010 Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing. Examples of misconduct include: Offering commissions to admissions officers, employing deceptive marketing tactics refusing to disclose total tuition cost to prospective students before signing a binding agreement, lying about accreditation, encouraging outright fraud by enticing students to take out student loans even when the applicant had $250,000 in savings, promising extravagant, unlikely high pay to students, failing to disclose graduation rate, and offering tuition cost equivalent to 9 months of credit hours per year, when total program length was 12 months.

The 4 For-Profit colleges found to be engaging in fradulent practices were: 1.) Westech, California, encouraging undercover applicant with falsified $250,000 in savings to falsely increase the number of dependents in the household in order to qualify for a Pell Grant, as well as take out the maximum amount in student loans; 2.) Medvance Institute in Miami, Florida, financial aid representative telling applicant not to report $250,000 in savings, comparing student loans to a car payment in that, "no one will come after you if you don’t pay.”, when a student loan default may remain in the debtor's credit history, prevent them from taking out a car-loan, mortgage or rent, and may have their pay garnished up to 15%, until the student loan is paid in full; In addition, another admissions officer at the Kaplan College in Pembroke Pines, Florida, [5] alluded to fraudulent behaviour stating to the applicant when inquiring about the repayment of loans, "You gotta look at it... I owe $85,000 to the University of Florida. Will I pay it back? Probably not... I look at life as tomorrow’s never promised... .Education is an investment, you’re going to get paid back ten-fold, no matter what."; 3.) Anthem Institute in Springfield, Pennsylvania, financial aid representative editing applicant's FAFSA form by omitting $250,000 in savings; 4.) Westwood College in Dallas, Texas, admissions representative telling applicant to falsely add dependents to qualify for Pell Grants, ensuring the applicant that the dependents would not be verified through previous income tax returns nor Social Security numbers, and financial aid representative encouraging applicant not to report the $250,000 in savings, stating that "it was not the government’s business how much money the undercover applicant had in a bank account.", when the Department of Education requires students to report such assets, along with income, to determine how much and what type of financial aid will be awarded.

It was found that 14 out of 15 times, the tuition at a For-Profit sample was more expensive than its Public counterpart, and 11 out of 15 times, it was more expensive than the Private institution. Examples of the disparity in full tuition per program include: $14,000 for a certificate at the For-Profit, when the same diploma cost $500 at the Public college; $38,000 for an Associate's at the For-Profit, when the comparable program at the Public college cost $5,000; $61,000 for a Bachelor's at the For-Profit, compared to $36,000 for the same degree at the Public college. [6] The institutions identified in the Committee hearing in respect to the GAO report numeration were:

Tuition cost comparison between For-Profit, Public and Private colleges for equivalent programs.

1.)University of Phoenix - Phoenix, Arizona [7]

2.)Everest Institute - Mesa, Arizona [8]

3.)Westech College - Victorville, Moreno Valley, California [9]

4.)Kaplan - Riverside, California [10]

5.)Potomac College - Washington D.C.

6.)Bennett College - Washington D.C.

7.)Medvance Institute - Miami, Florida [11]

8.)Kaplan - Pembroke Pines, Florida [12]

9.)College of Office Technology - Chicago, Illinois [13]

10.)Argosy University - Chicago, Schaumburg, Illinois [14]

11.)University of Phoenix - Philadelphia, Pennsylvania [15]

12.)Anthem Institute - Springfield, Pennsylvania [16]

13.)Westwood College - Dallas, Texas [17]

14.)Everest Institute - Dallas, Texas [18]

15.)ATI Career Training - Dallas, Texas [19]

Students at For-Profit institutions represent only 9% of all college students, but receive roughly 25% of all Federal Pell Grants and loans, and are responsible for 44% of all student loan defaults.[20][21] University of Phoenix tops this list with Pell Grant revenue of $656.9 million with second and third place held by Everest Colleges at $256.6 million and Kaplan College at $202.1 million for the 2008-2009 fiscal year, respectively.Cite error: The <ref> tag has too many names (see the help page). In 2003, a Government Accountability Office report estimated that overpayments of Pell Grants were running at about 3% annually, amounting to around $300 million per year.[22] Some of the universities that are top recipients of Pell Grants have low graduation rates, leaving students degreeless, and graduating alumni finding it excessively difficult, and at times resorting to extreme measures to find work [23][24] with their degrees, leading some former students to accuse recruiters of being "duplicitous", and bringing into serious question the effectiveness of awarding Pell Grants and other Title IV funds to For-Profit colleges.[25]Cite error: The <ref> tag has too many names (see the help page). University of Phoenix's graduation rate is 15%.[26] Strayer University, which reports its loan repayment rate to be 55.4%, only has a repayment rate of roughly 25%, according to data released by the Department of Education on August 13, 2010.[27] The low repayment rate makes Strayer ineligible for receiving further Title IV funds in accordance with new "Gainful employment" regulations brought forth by the Department of Education, which are to take effect on July 2011.[28] If passed, the minimum loan repayment requirement for any institution receiving Title IV funds, subject to suspension and expulsion if not compliant, will be 45%.[29]

For-Profits top the Department of Education's list for the 2005-2007 cohort default rates, with campuses at ATI and Kaplan reporting default rates far above 20%: Most of the For-Profits' expansion has been in the states of California, Arizona, Texas and Florida, the metro areas of Los Angeles, Phoenix, Dallas and Miami-West Palm Beach being epicenters of their growth [30][31][32][33]: For comparison, in Miami, FL, Everest Institute reports a default rate for two of its campuses to be 18.1% and 20%; Miami Dade College, the district's community college, which serves as a primary channel for local beginning students, reports a default rate of roughly 10%; Florida International University, a public university serving the Miami metropolitan area, reports approximately 5%.[34]

File:CSPAN 3 8.4.2010 UoP internal chart.png
Internal executive University of Phoenix chart, encouraging deception, manipulation and predatory tactics: "Creating Urgency: Getting Them To Apply NOW
Remember, ...
Students don't buy benefits
They buy to ease or avoid pain
Finding and Burrowing into that pain moves the sale to a CLOSE
Also, the close of the sale is really just a beginning"

In an August 4, 2010 Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing, Gregory Kutz of the GAO stated that the fraudulent practices may be widespread in the For-Profit industry, noting a University of Phoenix executive chart that encouraged deceptive practices.[35]

File:Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Pruyn attachment 8.4.2010.png
Internal Westwood College E-mail, dated March 24, 2008, employing commissions and rewards system for applications and enrollments to admissions officers.

Joshua Pruyn, a former admissions representative, disclosed to the committee hearing several internal E-mails distributed among admissions officers that encouraged applications and enrollments, through the use of a commissions reward system, during March 2008.[36] Chairman of the committee Senator Thomas Harkin noted the conflict of interest due to the ACCSC, a national accrediting agency that accredits many For-Profit colleges nationwide, [37] receiving compensation directly from the institutions which it awards accreditation. The Inspector General issued an assessment in late 2009 recommending the limiting and possible suspension or expulsion of the Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools due to conflicts in the manner in which the accrediting agency reviews credit hours and program length for online-colleges, specifically American InterContinental University, a For-Profit college.[38] The NCA HLC accredits the University of Phoenix and Everest in Phoenix, Arizona. The Department of Education Inspector General is currently reviewing the GAO's documents and report on For-Profit Colleges dated August 4, 2010.

References

  1. ^ Origin of name "Pell"
  2. ^ Anderson, Nick (October 8, 2009). "Obama Aims to Boost Pell Grant Funding by $40 Billion". The Washington Post. Retrieved May 22, 2010.
  3. ^ 2005-06 Family income statistics
  4. ^ 1999-2000 Family income statistics
  5. ^ http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2010-08-05/news/fl-kaplan-for-profit-investigation-20100805_1_kaplan-college-for-profit-enrollment
  6. ^ http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10948t.pdf
  7. ^ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-04/for-profit-colleges-boiler-room-recruiting-described-at-senate-hearing.html
  8. ^ Bloomberg August 4, 2010 article
  9. ^ http://www.pe.com/localnews/sbcounty/stories/PE_News_Local_D_college07.2cf999f.html
  10. ^ https://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.7040/pub_detail.asp
  11. ^ The Quick and the ED August 4, 2010 article
  12. ^ Sun-Sentinel August 5, 2010 local article
  13. ^ There is only one main campus in Illinois, in Chicago: http://www.cot.edu/
  14. ^ These are the only two main campuses in Illinois, headquarters in Chicago, Illinois, and Schaumburg, Illinois: http://www.argosy.edu/locations/
  15. ^ Bloomberg August 4, 2010 article
  16. ^ The Quick and the ED August 4, 2010 article
  17. ^ The Quick and the ED August 4, 2010 article
  18. ^ http://www.liquida.com/page/9509207/
  19. ^ Liquida August 4, 2010 article
  20. ^ http://www.pewtrusts.org/news_room_detail.aspx?id=56473
  21. ^ http://www.trends-collegeboard.com/student_aid/pdf/2009_Trends_Student_Aid.pdf
  22. ^ "TAXPAYER INFORMATION: Increased Sharing and Verifying of Information Could Improve Education's Award Decisions" (PDF). Government Accountability Office. July 2003.
  23. ^ http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/06/degreed-and-jobless-for-p_n_673053.html
  24. ^ http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/295688
  25. ^ http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-05-05/for-profit-n-j-college-halts-recruiting-of-homeless-update1-.html
  26. ^ http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/11/education/11phoenix.html
  27. ^ http://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2009/ge-cumulative-rates.xls
  28. ^ http://www.insidehighered.com/content/download/357892/4393975/file/Gainful%20Employment%20NPRM.pdf
  29. ^ http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/14/education/14college.html
  30. ^ http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/us/05fraud.html
  31. ^ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-08-04/for-profit-colleges-boiler-room-recruiting-described-at-senate-hearing.html
  32. ^ http://www.texastribune.org/texas-education/higher-education/private-for-profit-colleges-under-the-microscope/
  33. ^ http://californiawatch.org/watchblog/whistleblower-lawsuit-against-profit-education-company-unsealed
  34. ^ http://www2.ed.gov/offices/OSFAP/defaultmanagement/peps300.zip
  35. ^ http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/294901-1
  36. ^ help.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Pruyn%20Attachments.pdf
  37. ^ http://www.accsc.org/Content/CommissionActions/documents/STBCListAugust2010.pdf
  38. ^ http://chronicle.com/article/Inspector-Generals-Warning-to/63206/
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pell_Grant&oldid=381739887"