dahneshaulis@gmail.com
Since its inception in 2005, Ashford University has been an
overly priced, low value educational institution with questionable ethics and poor
student outcomes. As a result, servicemembers
and veterans have filed a disproportionate number of complaints about the
school through the Department of Defense, Department of Veterans Affairs, and the
non-profit Veterans Education Success.[i][ii][iii]
Ashford and its parent company Bridgepoint Education (BPI) have
also been the subjects of investigations,[iv]
lawsuits, and legal and out-of-court settlements for a continuing series of unethical
and illegal business practices: taking
advantage of wounded service members[v],
falsifying student retention data,[vi]
robocalling prospective students,[vii]
and deceiving students about private
loans.[viii] All of these practices violated elements of
the Department of Defense’s Memoranda of Understanding (“DOD MOU”) signed by one
or more Bridgepoint executives in 2011 and 2014.[ix]
Recently, Ashford University and Bridgepoint have also been
under scrutiny by VA for making false statements about the location of the
school’s main business location. While
this may not be a violation of the DOD MOU, it does exemplify the company’s
repeated unscrupulous behavior[x]
VA’s GI Bill Comparison Tool states that Ashford University
has a 16 percent graduation rate and 23
percent student loan repayment rate.
The page carries a warning because of its problems with GI Bill
certification in California, and its current lawsuit as a defendant against the
State of California. [xi]
According to authors from the US Treasury and Stanford
University, Ashford University also carries a 47 percent 5-year cohort default rate (CDR). [xii]
Despite its horrendous record, Ashford University has
received hundreds of millions of dollars in DOD TA money and Department of
Veterans Affairs GI Bill funds.
According to the Center for Investigative Reporting, almost all of
Bridgepoint’s money comes from federal government programs, which also includes
Pell Grants and federal student loans in addition to TA and GI Bill funds.[xiii]
2017 State of
California Lawsuit
In its recent 40-page civil complaint against Bridgepoint
Education and Ashford University, the Attorney General of California stated
that the company and its university systematically deceived consumers,
including veterans, through:
(1) a high pressure sales culture,
(2) false or misleading statements concerning financial aid
and costs of attendance,
(3) misrepresentations regarding transferability of credits,
and
(4) misrepresentations regarding employment prospects.[xiv]
[xv]
While all of these items are pertinent to service members
and veterans, items 3 and 4 appear most applicable to stipulations in Ashford
University’s DOD MOU.[xvi]
In Ashford University’s Memorandum of Understanding with the
Department of Defense, the school agreed
to provide specific consumer information to servicemembers, including
information about financial aid and transferability of credits. Judging from the State of California’s civil
complaint, there is no indication that Ashford was providing this information.
To the contrary, Bridgepoint and Ashford employees
systematically deceived consumers about financial aid and transferability of
credits:
False or Misleading
Statements Concerning Financial Aid and Costs of Attendance (pp. 11-16 in the State
of California’s Civil Complaint)
“In its efforts to lure in prospective students, Ashford
systematically made false or misleading statements about students’ ability to
obtain federal financial aid and the school’s costs of attendance.”
“For example, Admissions Counselors commonly told consumers
that federal financial aid would cover all their costs of attending Ashford
University, or that they would receive certain kinds of federal financial aid,
when the Counselors either had no basis, for making those promises.”
“At the same time, Ashford misrepresented to consumers that
it could not be determine final financial aid awards until after enrollment,
and then it failed to issue the final awards until it was too late for students
to withdraw without liability. This led
many to incur unexpected debts for tuition and fees they owed due to a
shortfall in their final award.”
“In another repeated tactic, Admissions Counselors enticed
consumers by telling them that they could use federal financial aid for
non-educational expenses, even though federal law prohibits this conduct.”
“Admissions Counselors also made numerous other
representations concerning various aspects of financial aid eligibility, a
complex topic on which they were unprepared to provide guidance, as well as the
costs of attending Ashford.”
“Unlike other schools, Ashford does not send financial aid
award letters until after a student enrolls, giving Admissions Counselors ample
opportunity to make false forecasts about financial aid in their sales pitches
to consumers.”
“In one common form of representation, Ashford told
prospective students who had not yet filled out a FAFSA or received a financial
aid award letter that they would not have to pay any “out of pocket costs.”
“For many consumers, these kinds of misrepresentations made
Ashford University seem more affordable than it actually was….Students ended up
owing Ashford unanticipated out-of-pocket balances, or had to take out more
loans than they expected.
“Ashford also told students and prospective students that
final determinations about financial aid could not be made until after the
student enrolled, and it required students to enroll without first receiving a
financial aid award letter. Ashford then
waited until students were well into their coursework to send the financial aid
award letters. In reality, it was
possible for Ashford to make final determinations prior to enrollment, just as
many other colleges and universities do. Waiting to process financial aid until
after an enrollment allowed Ashford to prevent prospective students’ financial
concerns from getting in the way of Admissions Counselor’s quests to close
their sales.”
Elements of the MOU pertaining to financial aid (pp. 4-5):
f. Before enrolling a Service member, provide each
prospective military student with specific information to locate, explain, and
properly use the following ED and CFPB tools:
(1) The College
Scorecard which is a planning tool and resource to assist prospective
students and their families as they evaluate options in selecting a school and
is located at:
http://collegecost.ed.gov/scorecard/.
(2) The College Navigator which is a consumer
tool that provides school information to include tuition and fees, retention
and graduation rates, use of financial aid, student loan default rates and
features a cost calculator and school comparison tool. The College Navigator is located at:
http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/.
(3) The Financial Aid Shopping Sheet which is a
model aid award letter designed to simplify the information that prospective
students receive about costs and financial aid so they can easily compare
institutions and make informed decisions about where to attend school. The
Shopping Sheet can be accessed at:
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/guid/aid-offer/index.html.
(4) The “Paying for College” webpage which can be
used by prospective students to enter the names of up to three schools and
receive detailed financial information on each one and to enter actual
financial aid award information. The
tool can be accessed at: http://www.consumerfinance.gov/paying-for-college/.
g. Designate a point of contact or office for academic and
financial advising, including access to disability counseling, to assist
Service members with completion of studies and with job search activities.
(1) The designated
person or office will serve as a point of contact for Service members seeking
information about available, appropriate academic counseling, financial aid
counseling, and student support services at the educational institution; (2) The point of contact will have a basic
understanding of the military tuition assistance program, ED Title IV funding,
education benefits offered by the VA, and familiarity with institutional
services available to assist Service members.
h. Before offering,
recommending, arranging, signing-up, dispersing, or enrolling Service members
for private student loans, provide
Service members access to an institutional financial aid advisor who will make
available appropriate loan counseling, including, but not limited to:
(1) Providing a clear
and complete explanation of available financial aid, including Title IV of the
Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended.
(2) Describing the
differences between private and federal student loans to include terms, conditions,
repayment and forgiveness options.
(3) Disclosing the
educational institution’s student loan Cohort Default Rate (CDR), the
percentage of its students who borrow, and how its CDR compares to the national
average. If the educational
institution’s CDR is greater than the national average CDR, it must disclose
that information and provide the student with loan repayment data.
Misrepresentations
Regarding Transferability of Credits (pp. 16-23 in the State of California’s Civil
Complaint)
“Ashford falsely told consumers that their prior credits
would transfer into Ashford University.”
“Ashford also systematically misrepresented the extent to
which Ashford University credits can transfer to other universities. Ashford’s
Admissions Counselors routinely enticed prospective students with the promise
that Ashford University offers them the flexibility to study online at a pace
convenient to them, earning credits that they can later apply to other, less
flexible, schools that the student was considering.”
“Ashford’s sales teams also told consumers that because
Ashford University was regionally accredited, its credits were certain or
likely to transfer to other schools….In other instances, Admissions Counselors
have stated that Ashford University are accepted at specific schools, such as
University of Southern California, UCLA, UC Berkeley, UC San Diego, and
Harvard.”
“Ashford also made misrepresentations regarding the transfer
of credits from ongoing and future casework. Ashford University student and Army Reserve veteran P.M. was deceived
by false promises that credits he earned at a community college while attending
Ashford University would transfer to Ashford….As P.M. approached graduation at
Ashford, he was alarmed to discover that Ashford had capped the amount of
credits he could transfer….because Ashford broke its promise to accept all of
the community college credits, P.M. had to spend additional time in school at
Ashford University to make up for lost credits under the lower housing
allowance. As a result he also fell behind in his rent, had to take another job
to keep up with the bills, and his credit score suffered. Second, because GI
Bill benefits are not unlimited, he wasted some of his veterans’ benefits by
spending them on coursework he was unable to put toward a degree.”
This violates the following provision of the Ashford
University’s DOD MOU:
“(1) Disclose its transfer credit policies and articulated
credit transfer agreements before a Service member’s enrollment. Disclosure will explain acceptance of credits
in transfer is determined by the educational institution to which the student
wishes to transfer and refrain from making unsubstantiated representations to
students about acceptance of credits in transfer by another institution.” (p.7)
Misleading and Deceptive Use of "Military Friendly" and "Best For Vets" Logos
Ashford University continues to use logos that are deceptive. Promotional materials show that Ashford University claims to be "Military Friendly" and "Best For Vets." But these designations are no longer valid.
[xv] Bridgepoint Education is also presumably under
investigation by the State Attorneys General in New York and North
Carolina. This is in addition to the
company’s settlement with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
