Stephanie Saul reports in the New York Times that a major for-profit “college” is expected to pay $90 million in fines for illegal recruiting practices. The corporation is partly owned by Goldman Sachs. As the story reports, the chain has collected more than $11 billion in federal aid for students (who get a lousy education: my view). These for-profit colleges make huge profits and deliver a poor education, leaving students with big debts. I will vote for any candidates who promises to cut off federal aid to for-profit colleges and universities. They always escape unscathed, because they hire the best lobbyists from both parties.
The nation’s second-largest for-profit college operator, Education Management Corporation, is expected to agree to pay nearly $90 million to settle a case accusing it of compensating employees based on how many students they enrolled, encouraging hyperaggressive boiler room tactics to increase revenue.
The civil settlement, the largest ever involving false claims made to the Department of Education, is expected to be announced in Washington on Monday. The case against the school was initially brought by whistle-blowers and joined by the Department of Justice and several states in August 2011.
Education Management could not be reached for comment.
The settlement would resolve accusations against the company under the consumer protection laws of 39 states and the District of Columbia. Two whistle-blowers, former Education Management employees whose complaints initiated the suit, are also set to receive some of the proceeds.
Students waited at an Everest campus in Industry, Calif., last week, hoping to get their transcripts and find out whether their loans could be forgiven.For-Profit Colleges Face a Loan Revolt by Thousands Claiming TrickeryMAY 3, 2015
New Federal Standard for Aid to For-Profit Colleges Draws CriticismOCT. 30, 2014
Education Management Corporation Accused of Widespread FraudAUG. 8, 2011
It was not known whether Education Management, which is based in Pittsburgh, would acknowledge wrongdoing. The company operates online and at brick-and-mortar locations in 32 states and Canada under the names the Art Institute, Argosy University, Brown Mackie College and South University.
The company was accused of violating a federal ban on per capita incentive compensation at institutions that participate in federal student financial aid programs. The ban was designed to prevent the enrollment of unqualified students.
About 90 percent of the tuition money the company collected at the four school systems — or $11 billion between July 2003 and June 2011 — came from federal aid, including subsidized loans and Pell grants to help low-income students obtain college educations, according to the accusations. The case said the revenue had been the result of the fraud.
Had the suit gone to trial, a verdict against the company could have reached into the billions. The government was believed to have accepted a lower settlement because of the financial difficulties of Education Management, part of which is owned by Goldman Sachs.
The case cast a pall over the for-profit college industry and was among the factors leading to declining enrollment at for-profit colleges. Since the lawsuit’s announcement, the company’s price per share has dropped to 8 cents from about $22.

Good for the justice department. But it’s not just for-profit companies recruiting students without imparting any value. Non-profits and many other educational institutions profit from federal largesse (high salaries come from these subsidies too). The best solution is to make students take more risk and actually calculate the ROI before they head off to college. Maybe we will get more welders and “less” philosophers that way too!
LikeLike
Good point. Although Goldman Sachs is “a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money (http://tinyurl.com/27lk7o6)”, let’s also keep in mind that the NFL is 501(c) organization. Better not to paint with a broad brush.
LikeLike
$90 million “fee” for $11 billion captured — not bad …
LikeLike
Exactly: as with the fines for criminal behavior on Wall Street, for the companies, these fines represent the cost of doing business. For the public, it’s just more Rube Bait.
LikeLike
these are the colleges the 1% want for the masses…next up, degrees in mowing lawns…
LikeLike
A $90 million dollar fine?
Whoop-dee-doo . . .
It means nothing. Who cares!
How much of those fines are going back into the pockets of the consumers who were victimized by these monsters?
Who cares if the fines go to the federal government, which is merely just another plutocratic institution that does not deserve the money either . . . .
Punishing Dracula to pay Creature from the Black Lagoon is not justice. .
BTW, readers, Obama just appointed a former CEO of – you guessed it – Walmart to join his commission on early childhood education. What a depraved and horrible virus he is . . . .
LikeLike
Obama gave us another EAGLE.
LikeLike
???
What does that mean, Yvonne?
LikeLike
$90 million in fines vs $11 billion in revenues. I think the judge and the prosecutors all have dyslexia and reversed the numbers. The fine should have been $11 billion and a decade in a maximum security prison for all the reformist crooks so they could rub shoulders ( or some other part of their bodies) with hard core members of the Mexican drug cartels serving time in U.S. prisons.
LikeLike
Disgusting.
LikeLike
This is the only kind of fraud I can think of where “ability to repay” is a consideration, and, the victims see nothing.
If they can’t afford to pay, WHY ARE THEY STILL ALLOWED TO OPERATE?!?
This sounds more like the cost of doing business. If it had gone to trial and would have gotten way more (even if they declare bankruptcy) – considering how small (relatively) 95 mil is to the both the size of the fraud, the impact, and in the scheme of the trillion dollar budget, wouldn’t driving them out of business be a way better outcome than collecting merely “what they can afford” and letting them continue to operate with a few new operating provisos?
People that are capable of seeing Uncle Sam as a cow to be milked via people’s willingness to take on uncollateralized debt with the debtor having no options to discharge it, deserve prison and to lose their business.
I don’t hear justice in this, just cash registers.
LikeLike
Given the Clinton’s ties to for-profit colleges and universities, I don’t see Hillary cutting off federal aid to them.
“Clinton’s husband served for five years as honorary chancellor of Laureate International Universities, a for-profit chain. The group paid former President Bill Clinton about $16 million before he stepped down in April.
Clinton herself was paid $225,000 for speaking at a 2014 event sponsored by Academic Partnerships, a for-profit education company that helps public and private not-for-profit universities move degree programs online, the Miami Herald reported. Her campaign did not return a request for comment.”
http://www.ibtimes.com/2016-candidates-linked-profit-colleges-amid-calls-more-affordable-higher-education-2087035
LikeLike
Students are getting a little bit back … http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2015/11/16/nc-students-to-benefit-from-102-million-multistate-settlement-with-for-profit-schools-chain/
LikeLike
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education.
LikeLike
“Bailed or Jailed?”
Wall Street pays a fine
And Main Street goes to jail
With power on your line
You’ll always make the bail
LikeLike
It’s a shame that people even have to look to for-profit schools. Shouldn’t the promise of higher education be available for everyone? There shouldn’t be an alternative. There should just be access to a solid education. That’s exactly what we’re trying to achieve with GATE: igg.me/at/GATE-System.
LikeLike